Validity and reliability of the Chinese critical thinking disposition inventory

Abstract

目的: 此项研究汇聚两岸四地的护理教育者 ,尝试从概念等值的层面 ,透过本土化的诠译过程 ,制定批判性思维能力的测量表 (CTDI CV)。 方法: 研究分两阶段进行。第一阶段以 8个焦点小组及专家小组收集意见 ,确定CTDI CV的内容效度。第二阶段是问卷调查 ,目的是测试不同地区的学生对各项目用词的理解 ,强化问卷的信效度 ,及测量CTDI CV所反映学生整体的批判性思维能力。问卷调查分两期在中国不同地区进行测试。首轮 4 6 0名学生参与问卷测试 ,次轮共 182 9人。 结果: CTDI CV保留CCTDI所测量的批判性思维的七方面特质 ,其特点有三 :①问卷所选用的词汇 ,是通过焦点小组讨论而采纳的 ,以确保学生能理解语意。②其中 16项目加入情境化描述 ,或在用词上顾及中华文化重谦厚的价值 ,使学生更能掌握各项目所测量的要点。③CTDI CV简化了CCTDI的计算得分程序 ,但分值与CCTDI相等。CTDI CV的内容效度(CVI) =0 .89。α值 0 .90 ,特质的α值为 0 .5 4～ 0 .77,显示颇高的内部一致性。批判性思维能力总分是 2 87.89,为正性的表现。除寻找真相 ( 37.6 6 )和系统化能力 ( 38.15 )稍低 ,其他五方面的批判性思维特质均高于 4 0分 ,呈正性的表现。 结论: CTDI CV有助学生反思个人批判性思维的表现 ,教师也可在设计教学课程时能跟据学生的表现加强某方面的学习, 使学生充分地发挥批判性思维。 Objective: Aim In collaborating nurse educators from different Chinese communities, this study aimed to test the validity and reliability of a Chinese version of critical thinking disposition inventory (CTDI CV), which has conceptual equivalence with the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI), and at the same time is culturally sensitive to be applied in Chinese speaking students. Method: The study comprised two phases. The first phase was focus group interviews and expert panel review for establishing the content validity of CTDI CV. The second phase was questionnaire survey, for testing CTDI CV’s comprehensibility and reliability, and establishing the normative index of disposition toward critical thinking of nursing students in different Chinese communities. Two rounds of questionnaires were conducted. The first round involved 460 students from five Chinese cities. And the second round had 1829 students from six Chinese cities. Results: CTDI CV is adopted from CCTDI, which conceptualizes the constituents of CT disposition in seven aspects. They are truth seeking, open mindedness, inquisitiveness, analyticity, systematicity, critical thinking self confidence, and cognitive maturity. CTDI CV has three major modifications. First, the item wordings were selected from the focus interview verbatim transcriptions. This is to ensure that the language used is comprehensible by students at high school level. Second, 16 items were contextualized by adding a hypothetical situation or by accommodating the Chinese cultural norms that takes modesty as a virtue in the item descriptions. Third, CTDI CV simplifies the scoring formula of CCTDI, but retaining the same subscale and total scoring points. The overall CVI was 0.89 , with the subscale CVI ranging from 0.6 to 1. The overall alpha was 0.90. Subscale alphas ranged between 0.54 and 0.77. These readings show satisfactory content validity and internal consistency. The total CTDI CV score was 287.89, and five subscale scores were >40. The Chinese students showed overall positive critical thinking disposition except in the aspects of truth seeking and systematicity. Conclusion: CTDI CV is instrumental to help students reflect on their own critical thinking capabilities. The results are indicative for teachers to design learning activities for enhancing students’ critical thinking, and to evaluate the effect of such teaching activities.