Skip to main content

College Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale

CCSS

OVERVIEW
Overview
Listed below is general information about the instrument.
Summary
Original author(s)

  • Uzuntiryaki, E., & Aydin, Y.C.
Original publication

  • Uzuntiryaki, E., & Aydin, Y.C. (2009). Development and validation of chemistry self-efficacy scale for college students. Research in Science Education, 39(4), 539-551.
Year original instrument was published 2009
Inventory
Number of items 21
Number of versions/translations 2
Cited implementations 3
Language
  • English
Country Turkey, South Africa, United States
Format
  • Response Scale
Intended population(s)
  • Students
  • Undergraduate
Domain
  • Affective
Topic
  • Self-Efficacy
Evidence
The CHIRAL team carefully combs through every reference that cites this instrument and pulls all evidence that relates to the instruments’ validity and reliability. These data are presented in the following table that simply notes the presence or absence of evidence related to that concept, but does not indicate the quality of that evidence. Similarly, if evidence is lacking, that does not necessarily mean the instrument is “less valid,” just that it wasn’t presented in literature. Learn more about this process by viewing the CHIRAL Process and consult the instrument’s Review (next tab), if available, for better insights into the usability of this instrument.

Information in the table is given in four different categories:
  1. General - information about how each article used the instrument:
    • Original development paper - indicates whether in which paper(s) the instrument was developed initially
    • Uses the instrument in data collection - indicates whether an article administered the instrument and collected responses
    • Modified version of existing instrument - indicates whether an article has modified a prior version of this instrument
    • Evaluation of existing instrument - indicates whether an article explicitly provides evidence that attempt to evaluate the performance of the instrument; lack of a checkmark here implies an article that administered the instrument but did not evaluate the instrument itself
  2. Reliability - information about the evidence presented to establish reliability of data generated by the instrument; please see the Glossary for term definitions
  3. Validity - information about the evidence presented to establish reliability of data generated by the instrument; please see the Glossary for term definitions
  4. Other Information - information that may or may not directly relate to the evidence for validity and reliability, but are commonly reported when evaluating instruments; please see the Glossary for term definitions
Publications: 1 2 3

General
Original development paper ✔
Uses the instrument in data collection ✔ ✔
Modified version of existing instrument
Evaluation of existing instrument ✔ ✔ ✔

Reliability
Test-retest reliability
Internal consistency
Coefficient (Cronbach's) alpha ✔ ✔ ✔
McDonald's Omega
Inter-rater reliability
Person separation
Generalizability coefficients
Other reliability evidence

Vailidity
Expert judgment ✔
Response process
Factor analysis, IRT, Rasch analysis ✔ ✔
Differential item function
Evidence based on relationships to other variables ✔ ✔
Evidence based on consequences of testing
Other validity evidence

Other information
Difficulty
Discrimination
Evidence based on fairness
Other general evidence
Review
DISCLAIMER: The evidence supporting the validity and reliability of the data summarized below is for use of this assessment instrument within the reported settings and populations. The continued collection and evaluation of validity and reliability evidence, in both similar and dissimilar contexts, is encouraged and will support the chemistry education community’s ongoing understanding of this instrument and its limitations.
This review was generated by a CHIRAL review panel. Each CHIRAL review panel consists of multiple experts who first individually review the citations of the assessment instrument listed on this page for evidence in support of the validity and reliability of the data generated by the instrument. Panels then meet to discuss the evidence and summarize their opinions in the review posted in this tab. These reviews summarize only the evidence that was discussed during the panel which may not represent all evidence available in the published literature or that which appears on the Evidence tab.
If you feel that evidence is missing from this review, or that something was documented in error, please use the CHIRAL Feedback page.

Panel Review: College Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale (CCSS)

(Post last updated June 23, 2022)

Review panel summary

The College Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale (CCSS) is a 21-item, Likert-scale instrument designed to measure university students’ self-efficacy beliefs regarding their ability to perform activities/tasks required in their chemistry courses. The instrument comprises three subscales - self-efficacy for cognitive skills, self-efficacy for psychomotor skills, and self-efficacy for everyday applications. It has been evaluated with students enrolled in first-year undergraduate chemistry courses in Turkey [1], South Africa [2], and the United States [3]. Originally developed for the assessment of students enrolled at an English-speaking university in Turkey, test content validity was provided by experts in chemistry, chemistry education, educational measurement, and English language for appropriateness and clarity of items [1]. The developers provide evidence of internal structure validity through exploratory factor analysis [1]; the three-factor structure has been replicated in a second context, though some items were removed from this analysis [2]. In multiple studies, evidence based on relations to other variables is provided by the relation between CCSS scores and subscale scores and course performance, which is supported by theory and prior research [1-3]. In one context, chemistry majors were observed to have higher CCSS scores than non-majors [1]; therefore, the CCSS may be able to differentiate between major and non-major students, though this has not been demonstrated beyond the development context. In multiple studies, coefficient alpha has been used to estimate single administration reliability for the CCSS subscales [1-3].

Recommendations for use

Based on evidence of validity and reliability, the CCSS can be used to measure chemistry-specific self-efficacy for students in first-year undergraduate chemistry courses. The CCSS can be interpreted as simultaneously measuring three dimensions/facets of chemistry self-efficacy. It should be administered intact, as a 21-item instrument, as there is no evidence that the data generated by administering subscales separately can be validly interpreted.

Details from panel review

The CCSS developers and users have presented evidence of validity and reliability of data generated using the instrument in first-year undergraduate chemistry settings in multiple countries. While the developers subjected the instrument to expert review, they (and the reviewers) suggest further validation, particularly for student populations from English-speaking countries [1]. Additionally, some items were modified based on expert feedback, and these items were not reviewed again (i.e., no evidence of test content validity for these modified items) [1].

Some evidence of internal structure validity lacked detail. For example, while the instrument was developed to measure four dimensions of college chemistry self-efficacy, the developers used exploratory factor analysis (as opposed to confirmatory factor analysis) to investigate factor structure [1]. Two of the four hypothesized factors collapsed into a single factor (self-efficacy for cognitive skills). The developers describe this as reasonable and supported by theory. The factor structure was replicated with a second sample [1]. In a second study [2], authors again used exploratory factor analysis, despite the evidence for a factor structure presented by the developers. In that study [2], the three-factor structure mirrored that suggested by developers but was composed of only 12 of the original 21 items; it is unclear when and why 9 items were removed from the factor analysis.

Coefficient alpha was reported as an estimate of single administration reliability in all three studies; alpha values were ≥ 0.82 in [1], ≥ 0.68 in [2], and ≥ 0.74 in [3]. In one study [3], though the researchers did administer the full CCSS, they did not provide an alpha value (nor any other analysis, evidence of validity and reliability) for one of the subscales (self-efficacy for psychomotor skills) because it was deemed irrelevant in their context, as the course was separate from the lab component.

References
[1] Uzuntiryaki, E., & Çapa Aydın, Y. (2009). Development and validation of chemistry self-efficacy scale for college students. Research in Science Education, 39(4), 539-551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9093-x

[2] Ramnarain, U., & Ramaila, S. (2018). The relationship between chemistry self-efficacy of South African first year university students and their academic performance. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 60-67. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00110J

[3] Graham, K. J., Bohn-Gettler, C. M., & Raigoza, A. F. (2019). Metacognitive training in chemistry tutor sessions increases first year students’ self-efficacy. Journal of chemical education, 96(8), 1539-1547. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00170

Versions
Listed below are all versions and modifications that were based on this instrument or this instrument were based on.
Instrument has been modified in:
Name Authors
College Chemistry Self-Efficacy Scale – Cognitive Skills Scale

  • Ferrell, B., & Barbera, J.
Science Learning Self-Efficacy

  • Lin, T.-J., & Tsai, C.-C.
Citations
Listed below are all literature that develop, implement, modify, or reference the instrument.

  1. Uzuntiryaki, E., & Aydin, Y.C. (2009). Development and validation of chemistry self-efficacy scale for college students. Research in Science Education, 39(4), 539-551.

  2. Ramnarain, U., & Ramaila, S. (2018). The relationship between chemistry self-efficacy of South African first year university students and their academic performance. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 60-67.

  3. Graham, K.J., Bohn-Gettler, C.M., & Raigoza, A.F. (2019). Metacognitive Training in Chemistry Tutor Sessions Increases First Year Students' Self-Efficacy. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(8), 1539-1547.