A Spanish Version of the Achievement Task Value Scale for University Students: Internal, Convergent, and Criterion Validity and Reliability in Argentinian Students

Abstract

Objective: An Achievement Task Value Scale Spanish Language Adjusted Version, assessing task value items corresponding to importance, utility, interest and cost, was evaluated regarding its psychometric properties, in a sample of Argentine students. Method: In order to assess internal structure, exploratory and confirmatory strategies have been used. Besides, scale convergence was assessed by relating them with a one-dimensional task value scale. Evidences of criterion validity were supported by relating scales with enjoyment, achievement goals, and attention. Finally, internal consistency was estimated using Cronbach's Alpha and Omega coefficients. Conclusions: Results allow to state that this version of the instrument makes it possible to assess, in a reliable and valid way, three components of task value: utility, interest, and cost. Keywords AbstractObjetivo: se evaluó una versión ajustada al idioma español de la Achievement Task Value Scale, la cual evalúa los ítems valorativos de tareas que corresponden a importancia, utilidad, interés y costo, con respecto a sus propiedades psicomé-tricas en una muestra de estudiantes argentinos. Método: para evaluar la estructura interna se utilizaron estrategias exploratorias y de confirmación. Además, la convergencia de la escala se evaluó relacionándola con una escala valorativa unidimensional de tareas. Las evidencias de la validez de criterio se sustentaron relacionando las escalas con disfrute, metas de progreso y atención. Finalmente, la consistencia interna se estimó utilizando los coeficientes Alpha y Omega de Cronbach. Conclusiones: los resultados permiten afirmar que esta versión del instrumento hace posible evaluar de manera confiable y válida tres componentes valorativos de la tarea: utilidad, interés y costo.Palabras clave: metas de progreso, atención, disfrute, teoría de valor-expectativa, escala, valor de la tarea.Uma versão em espanhol da Achievement Task Value Scale for University Students: confiabilidade e validade interna, convergente e de critério em estudantes argentinos ResumoObjetivo: foi avaliada uma versão adaptada a espanhol da Achievement Task Value Scale, a qual avalia os itens valorativos de tarefas que correspondem a importância, utilidade, interesse e custo, a respeito de suas propriedades psicométri-cas numa amostra de estudantes argentinos. Método: para avaliar a estrutura interna, foram utilizadas estratégias exploratórias e de confirmação. Além disso, a convergência da escala foi avaliada relacionando-a com uma escala valorativa unidimensional de tarefas. As evidências da validade de critério foram apoiadas relacionando as escalas com deleite, metas de progresso e atenção. Finalmente, a consistência interna foi estimada utilizando os coeficientes Alpha e Ômega de Cronbach. Conclusões: os resultados permitem afirmar que essa versão do instrumento torna possível avaliar, de maneira confiável e válida, três componentes valorativos da tarefa: utilidade, interesse e custo.Palavras-chave: metas de progresso, atenção, deleite, teoria...

Development of Two Scales Measuring Task Value of Peer Feedback Provision and Reception for Pre-Service Teachers

“…Unidimensional, multidimensional, and hierarchical structures were revealed in prior studies (Artino & McCoach, 2008;Eccles & Wigfield, 1995;Lou et al, 2012;Part et al, 2020). While unidimensional scales did not separate different components of task value (e.g., Artino & McCoach, 2008), multidimensional scales consisted of highly correlated and less distinguishable components (Eccles & Wigfield, 1995;Lou et al, 2012;Sánchez-Rosas et al, 2017). Therefore, hierarchical models that include both a general task value factor and specific components need to be evaluated while developing task value scales (Part et al, 2020).…”

“…Concerning the internal structure, the hypothesis was that the scales would consist of three correlated factors: attainment, intrinsic, and utility values. Although this hypothesis was constructed considering the theoretical framework, rival hypotheses and models were also analyzed because some prior scale development studies failed to find the three components of task value (e.g., Artino & McCoach, 2008; Sánchez-Rosas et al, 2017), preferred to investigate task value as a unidimensional global construct (e.g., Dietrich et al, 2017; Flake et al, 2015; Pintrich et al, 1993), and suggested the existence of both a general and specific factors (Part et al, 2020). Regarding the relations of task value to other variables, this study examined the correlations between students’ task values and a general motivation item (i.e., willingness to participate in PFP and PFR activities).…”

Untitled

“…Among these constructs are task value (Eccles, 2005), achievement goals (Elliot & Murayama, 2008) and enjoyment (Pekrun, 2006). Considering that there are validated instruments for the evaluation of these constructs in Argentine university students, evidence could be provided of the relationship between the measurements made by the scales of this study and those made by the instruments that assess task value (Sánchez-Rosas, Lou, Lin, & Larroza, 2017), achievement goals (Sánchez-Rosas, 2015a) and enjoyment (Sánchez-Rosas, 2015b).…”

The 3 × 2 Achievement Goal Questionnaire- Argentine (3 × 2 AGQ-AR): Adaptation, Factor Structure and Internal Consistency

“…The data from Elliot et al (2011) and others (Brondino et al, 2014;Diseth, 2015;Lüftenegger et al, 2016;Yang et al, 2016) provide evidence of structural and predictive validity for the 3 × 2 Achievement Goal Questionnaire. Having this adapted instrument would allow to deepen the investigations that, from the 2 × 2 model, analyzed the relationship of achievement goals with self-regulated learning strategies, motivation, achievement emotions and academic performance (Sánchez-Rosas, 2015;Sánchez-Rosas, Aguirre, Bovina-Martijena, & Galarza, 2019;Sánchez-Rosas & Furlan, 2017;Sánchez-Rosas, Lou, Lin, & Larroza, 2017;Sánchez-Rosas & Pérez, 2015), discriminating the differential effects of the task-based and self-based goals.…”