Search

The purpose of this paper was to develop and validate a new theoretically based scale to measure students’ learning of systems thinking in relation to the affective domain in the context of systems engineering education. Two variant questionnaires are reported here, one using only questions constructed using positive grammar and the other using a mix of positive and negative constructs, each applied to a different sample. The first group of 186 participants completed the positive version of the questionnaire, and, the second group of 163 completed the mixed version. Construct validity was examined through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). EFA was conducted to find the factors underlying each questionnaire. CFA was conducted to confirm the better questionnaire version and to confirm the factors which underlie both versions. The results indicate that a three factor, 16 item, scale with a mix of positive and negative wording is the better instrument with which to measure students’ engagement with systems thinking. The results also indicate that the three factor, 16 item construct is a better representative of both versions of the questionnaire, whether the questionnaire has only positive questions or a mix of positive and negative questions. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This paper describes the results obtained for the affective engagement of students with systems thinking (ST). In prior work, the authors have developed and validated a questionnaire instrument for measuring affective engagement of undergraduate engineering students with ST. This paper presents results obtained when the questionnaire was used with undergraduate students. Two surveys with different versions of the questionnaire, one using positive grammar questions only and the other using a mix of positive and negative constructs, were used to measure the students’ engagement with ST and its relationship with gender, age, and work experience. Each questionnaire version was applied to a different sample, the first, 186 participants, completed the positive grammar version, and, the second group of 163 completed the mixed version. The results show that participants in both studies valued ST in each of the three dimensions of the ST construct. Statistical tests confirmed no significant gender differences in either study. Student engagement with the practical dimension of ST was shown to vary, with statistical significance, with groups of age, years of work experience, and country of the university. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]