Students' attitudes toward computers: Validation of a computer attitude scale for 16–19 education

Pergamon

Pll: ~ I 3 1 f ~ 9 6 ) N 0 3 S - 8

ComputersEduc. Vol.28, No. I, pp. 35-41, 1997 O 199"/ElsevierScienceI..td Printed in Great Britain.All rights rem'v~ 0360-1315/9"/$17.00÷0.00

STUDENTS' ATTITUDES TOWARD COMPUTERS: VALIDATION OF A COMPUTER ATTITUDE SCALE FOR 16-19 EDUCATION NEIL SELWYN School of Education, University of Wales, Cardiff, 21 Scnghennydd Road, Cardiff CF2 4YG, Wales [e-marl: SelwynNC @Cardiff.ac.uk]

(Receiwd 7 August 1996;~ l x e d 31 October1996) Abstract--There is a strong need for both oO..~_em~tand resesfcbera to be aware of students' attitudes toward using and interacting with computers in 16--19 education (i.e. yea,- levels 12-14)mhat as yet little wm-k has been carried out in this area. This article tlkn~---furedescribes the development ofen instrument for meamuring the attitudes toward computers of students aged 16-19 yems. Initial item selection produced a pilot scale consisting of 49 items which was administered to 266 students. Subsequent factor analysis mvenled four structurally independent altitude consumcts and justified mention of 21 of the original items. The revised scale was then edministm'ed to 87 Year 12-14 students for formal validation. The full instrument was found to have both a high internal reliability coefficient (0.90) and test-retest reliability (0.93), and significant construct validity (P<0.001). @ 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

INTRODUCTION

As in all sectors of education, developments over the last decade have necessitated a massive increase in post-compulsory students' use of computers. Employers increasingly expect school leavers to be "IT literate" and the likely continuation of this trend means that there will be fewer and fewer jobs for students with poor technical ability [1]. Post-compulsory institutions are therefore feeling the need to constantly develop and evaluate their IT provision in order to remain attractive to both students and employers. A fundamental outcome measure of students' computer use is their attitude toward using the technology. Consideration of user attitude is an integral part of educational computer use as attitudes influence not only students' initial acceptance of IT, but their future behaviour regarding computers. Merely providing access to hardware and software does not guarantee effective integration of IT into an educational setting without also the learners' inclination to use the technology. As Woodmw [2] argues, awareness of students' attitudes toward computers therefore constitutes "a central criterion in the evaluation of computer courses and in the development of computer based curricula" (p. 165). Despite the importance of measuring students' attitudes towards computers, the plethora of research into attitudes towards IT in education has often been implemented in an unstructured, haphazard nature. As Kay [3] points out, many scales lack any theoretical justification for the constructs used, thus questioning the validity of what they pro'putt to measure. Additionally, with IT being such a rapidly changing area of education, many attitude scales still being used are considerably dated. For example, instruments often contain items concerning the novelty of IT or attitudes toward programming; items no longer as relevant to today's cohort of students who have grown up in a computer-saturated society. However central to this paper is the fact that, despite the numerous studies covering students' computer-related attitudes in primary, secondary and higher education, the area of 16-19 education (i.e. Years 12-14) has been overlooked; as it has been in most areas of educational computing research. Yet there is now a need to view post-16 education in the U.K. as a different context to secondary education. Upon entering post-compulsory education and therefore no longer directed by the National Curriculum, students from the ages of 16-19 find themselves free to choose whether or not to continue to use IT. Thus the attitudes that students have entering post-compulsory education will have a very strong influence on their future pattcm of IT use both in education and employment. With this in mind, the purpose of this present article was to develop and validate a theoretically sound measure of students' attitudes towards computers--specifically operationalized within the context of Year levels 12-14. 35

36

NElLSELWYN THEORETICAL MODEL

The scale was formulated within both the framework for assessing attitudes towards computers set out by Kay [3] and Davis' [4] Technology Acceptance Model. Kay's [3] structure of computer attitude draws on both the tripaNite model of attitude [5] and Ajzan's [6] theory of Planned Behaviour. From this approach Kay identifies four distinct conslructs on which to base assessment of computer attitudes: affect (feelings towards computers); co&nition (perceptions and information regarding computers); conatlon or behaviouml (hehavioural intentions and actions with respect to computers), end perceived behavioural control (perceived ease, or difficulty, of using computm's). Davis' [4] model, itself based on Fishhein and Ajzen's [7] attitude paradigm, also identifies perceived usefulness (the degree to which an individual believes using computers will enhance their job performance) as a salient influence on attitudes toward using, or be~nning to use, IT. Grounding the scale within this framework at altitude constructs ensures a comprehensive measure of smdants' attitudes toward computers and satisfies Carmines and Zeller's [8] initial condition of nomolngical validity when developing an attitude measure. SELECTION OF THE ITEMS

Following l.lk,~rt's [9] example, a pool of items was created by both writing new items and adapting items from available scales: i.e. Rchertson et ai. [10]; Jones and Clarke [11]; Francis [12]; Kay [3]; Igburia and Chakraba~ [13]; Popovich et ai. [14]; Loyd and Gessard [15], and Drarabrot et a/. [16]. In this way 49 items were selected: covering subjects' affective responses toward using computers; cognitive attitudes toward using computers both in college and in work; perceived usefulness; perceived control and bchavioural attitudes toward using computers both in college and in work. These 49 items were then presented, accompanied by a five-point Likert response scale to a sample of 266 students aged 16-19 for initial item analysis. Factor analysis was then used on the data for item analysis. A principal components factor analysis with vurimax rotation was performed on the 49 attitude items, suggesting four intergetuble factors. All retained ileans loaded greater than 4-0.40 on the relevant factor, fulfilling Hair et a/.'s [17] criterion of a significant item, and loaded less than 0.30 on non-relevant factors. "I'nus item analysis reduced the original 49 items to 21 items with four independent and distinct underlying constructs. The retained items and construct representations are shown in Table 1. A factor analysis was then conducted on the retained 21 items, the results of which are reported in Table 2. RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY The revised scale was piloted with 87 16-19 students. 54% of the sample were female (n=47) and 46% male (n=40). Within the sample 55% (n=48) were following A-level courses (the more academic qualification taken by 16-19 students in the U.K.) and 45% (n=39) were following GNVQ courses (the vocational qualifications that 16-19 students can choose to take in the U.K.). Completed scales were received from all participants. As before, the items were presented on a 5-point Lihert scale (labelled Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree) and with items from each construct alternately presented to prevent any "clustering" effect. Ten of the ilmns were negatively worded to provide a check against respondents giving positive or negative response sets. For the purpose of analysis the scoring for these items was reversed. Data were then computer analysed using SPSS 6.0 to assess the reSability and validity of the scale. INTERNAL CONSISTENCY A Cronbach's coefficient a was calculated for each of the four sub-scales and the overall scale as a whole. As Table 3 shows, the a coefficients for all sub-scales were significantly high; suggesting that the internal consistency of the constructs and overall scale is satisfactory. TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY The coefficient of stability, or ~st-retest reliabil/ty, was calculam/by re-administering the scale to the m'iginal sample after a period of two weeks had passed since the initial piloting. As Table 4 shows, rewst

Smdenm' attitudes towards computers

37

Table 1. Retained items on the scale

AFFI AFF2 AF'F3 AFF4 AFF5 AFF6

A l b a i v e Component (Six items) ff given the oppmmnity to me a computer I am afraid that I might d e m a p it in mine way* I hesitate to use a computer for fear of making mistakes I can't c(mect* I don't feel sl,~-~'~c-'usiveabout using a computer Computers make me feel unmmfortable* Using a compotor does not scare m e at all I hesitate to use a computer in case I look stupid*

USEI USE2 USE3 USE4 USE5

Peredved Usefulnem Component (live items) Computers help me mpnise my work better Computers make it possible to work nmsc productively Computers can allow me to do mare interesting and imasinative work Most things that a compum" can be used for I can do just as well myself* Computers can enhance the presentation of my work to a degree which justifies the extra effort

CONI CON2 CON3 CON4 CON5 CON6

Perceived Ceatml Component (Six Items) I could wobably teach myself most of the things I need to Imow about computers I can make the computer do what I want it to If I Let problems using the computer. I can usually solve them one way or the other I am not in complete conuol when I use a computer* I aned an exlan-lencod pemon nosrby when I use a computeet I do not need someone to tell me the heat way to use a computer

BBI-Ii Bill2 BFd'I3 BBH4

Behavklm'al Component (four items) I would avoid taking u job if I knew it involved working with computere* I avoid coming into contact with computers in college/schonl*? I only use computers at collegeJsdmol whan told to*? I will use computers regularly fluonghont college/school?

*Items for which scoring is reversed. ~ h a n p wording of item depending on the population (i.e. school or college based students).

coefficients for all scales were high, with an overall Pearson's test-retest coefficient of r=0.93 (P<0.001). Table 2. Rotated factor Ioedings and eigeavaluas far four factms Item AFFI AFF2 AFF3 APF4 AFF5 APF6 BEH1 BP.H2 BEID BEH4 COHI CON2 CON3 CON4 CON5 CON6 USEI USF.2 USE3 USE4 USE5 Eipnvelan % of Variance

Factor !

Faaor 2

FLoor 3

0.65 0.78 0.80 0.74 0.79 0.70 0.45*

0.60 0.71 0.36 0.45

0.40* 0.59 0.53 0.50 0.58 0AI 0.44

0.5 ! *

7.77 37.0

Factor 4

0.67 0.73 0.69 0.52 0.46 2.49 11.9

1.94 9.2

1.4.1 6.7

*The thn~ non-4t~ctive ite~msIcodi~ betv~an 0.40-0.5 ! on Factor ! have not heea included u items in that comptmant as (i) they load highest on other factors and (fi) have a smaller iosdinli on Factor i than the relevant items which have Icodinp between 0.65-0.80.

38

NElL SELWYN Table3. Means, standard deviations and reliability coefficients for the scale Construct

Items

Mean

SD

a*

6

1.66

0.22

0.93

5

1.41

0.42

0.82

6

2.38

0.24

0.88

4

1.49

0.36

0.79

21

1.64

0.59

0.90

Affect attitudes toward computers Perceived usefoiness of computetl Perceived control of computms Behavioural attitudes toward computem Overall scale

*All significant at P<0.001 level. CRITERION

VALIDITY

As Francis [12] has previously pointed out, the question of assessing the validity of a computer attitude scale is problematic. However, the concurrent validity of the scale can be calculated by relating the scores on the scale to an independent criterion measure.As Bear et al. [18] argue, in the case of attitudes toward computers the subject's previous computer experience and usage predictably influences how students and teachers score on attitude scales, and can therefore be used as an independent criterion measure. Therefore, "if [a computer attitude scale] is a valid index of attitude, low-level positive correlations with experience and usage should be observed" [18, p. 212]. To this end the pilot scale was administered with a short scale asking subjects to rate how often they used a PC in home or school for a range of computing activities (Word-processing, Database/ Spreadsheet, Email/Intemet, Drawing/Design, CD Roms, Programming, Games/Simulations and Music). Frequency of use was measured on a 6-point Liken scale ("everyday", "every 2-3 days", "weekly", "monthly", "less often" and "never"--scored 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and 0 respectively). In this way subjects' computer usage could be calculated on a scale with a range of 0 to 40. Spemman's rank-order correlations were performed on the attitude and usage data obtained from the pilot sample. As Table 5 shows, significant correlations (P<0.001) were found between computer usage and all four subscales, as well as the overall scale (r, ffi0.74, P<0.001)mfulfilling Bear's [18] criterion of a low-level, positive correlation and therefore providing a measure of construct validity for the scale. Table 4. Test-retest coaelafions for the five sub-scales and overall attitude scale Construct

Items

r*

6 5 6 4

0.94 0.94 0.95 0.88

21

0.93

Affective attitudes toward computers Perceived usefulness of computers Perceived control of computers Bchavioural attitudes toward computers Overall scale

*All conelations significant at P<0.001 level.

Table 5. Spearman's rank older correlations between computer attitude and usage Consmsct

Items

v.*

6 5 6 4

0.41 0.72 0.64 0.61

21

0.74

Affective attitudes toward computers Perceived usefulness of computers Pesceived control of computen Behavioural attitudes toward computers Overall scale

*All correlations significant at P<0.001 level.

Students' attitudes towards computers

39

A D M I N I S T R A T I O N AND S C O R I N G The final scale can be administered in 5 minutes. The scale should be presented as a list of the 21 items, alternately displayed so that no two items from the same construct appear adjacently, alongside a 5-point Likert scale (worded "Strongly Agree", " A g r e e " , "Neutral", "Disagree" and "Strongly Disagree"). Students are advised that the scale is a survey, not a test, and that there are no correct or incorrect answers. They are asked to indicate whether they agree or disagree with each statement and to answer as honestly as possible. Scores can be obtained by allocating numerical values to responses: "Strongly Agree" is scored 4, " A g r e e " is scored 3; "Neutral" is scored 2; "Disagree" is scored 1 and "Strongly Disagree" is scored 0. Scoring is reversed for those items identified in Table I. Scores from items on each subscale can be summed to provide individual scores on each attitude construct. The 21 individual scores can also be collectively summed to provide a total score representing the individual's overall attitude toward computers (ranging from 0 to 84). As a normative guide to interpretation, the scores obtained with a sample of 288 Year 12-14 U.K. students gave cut-off scores: at the 25th percentile of 35; at the 50th percentile of 42; and at the ?Sth percentile of 51 (with an overall range of scores from 9 to 71). Thus a score below the 25th percentile (35) can be interpreted as a relatively negative attitude toward computers, whereas a score above the 75th percentile (5 I) can be interpreted as a relatively positive attitude toward computers. CONCLUSION Within the theoretical framework laid out by Kay [3] and Davis [4], a scale to measure the attitudes of students aged between 16-19 towards computers has been developed. The scale consists of four factor analytically distinct sub-scales with high internal consistency, stability and validity. It is hoped that the scale will be of use to educators and researchers in the 16-19 educational setting. Those teaching in postcompulsory education can use the scale to identify the disposition of students aged 16-19 towards computers before using IT with t h e m - - t h u s suggesting appropriate and suitable strategies for curricular integration. The scale would also be of use as a post-course outcome measure of the effectiveness of computer instruction. Researchers can use the scale as a comparative measure of attitudes toward IT In different sectors of 16-19 education, as well as revealing the extent of inequalities in attitude between students according to gender, race and socio-economic status. Achnowledgement---I wish to acknowledge the financial contribution made by the Economic & Social Research Council towards

the research upon which this paper is based. Research Studentship R00429534299. REFERENCES

1. Harrison, C., Hay, D., Pierson, A. and Burton, J.. Computer literacy skills among school students and employees in industry. Journal of ComputerAssiated Leamin&, 1992, 8, 194-205. 2. Wondrow,J., A comparison of four computer attitude scales. Journal of Educational Computin&Research, 199I, 7, 165-187. 3. Kay, R., An exploration of theoretical and practical foundations for assessing attitudes toward computers: the Computer Attitude Measure (CAM). Computers in Human Behavior, 1993, 9, 371-386. 4. Davis, E, User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perceptions and behavioural impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Smdias, 1993, 38, 475-487. 5. Breckler. S. J., Empirical validation of affect, behavionr and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and ,~¢ial Psychology, 1984, 4'/, !191-1205. 6. Ajzon, I., Attitudes, Personalityand khaviour. OU Press, Milton Keyues, 1988. 7. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I., Belief,Attitude, Intentionand Behavior. An Introductionto Theor."and Research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1975. 8. Carmines, E. G. and Zeller, It. A., Reliabilityand Validity. Sage, Beverley Hills, 1990. 9. Likeft, R., A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Reprinted in Attitude Measurcmem, ed. G. Summers, 1970. RendMcNally, Chicago, 1932. 10. Rohemoa, S., Calder, J., Fun8, P., Jones, A. and O'Shea, T., Computer attitudes in an English secondary school. Computers & Education, 1995, 24, 73-81. I I. Jones, T., and Clarke. V., A computer scale for secondary students. Computers & Education, 1994, 22, 315-318. 12. Francis, L.o Measmin8 attitudes toward computers among undergraduate college students: the affective domain. Computers & Education, 1995, 20, 251-255. 13. 18baria, M. and ChakrabaNi.A., Computer anxiety and attitudes towards computer use. Behaviour & Information Technolog); 1990, 9. 229-241. 14. Popovich, P., Hyde, K., Zakrajsek, 1". and Blumer, C., The development of the attitude towards computer usage scale. Educational and PsycholosicalMeasurcmtnt, 1987, 47, 261-269. ~li- l-l}

40

~

SF~WYN

15. Loyd, B. and O~msrd, C., ~ md smmmt of comlmm" ezpmimu~ of Ir,schm in staff dm~,lopm~t izrolpmns:~ ~ comimmz ~_-__,~__sad pm~qztmm of lira uwfidmm of compum~. AEDS Jom,ma/, 15MI6,18, 302-311. 16. Dmmlx~ P. H., Wstlk~m-Msi~ M. A., SHlinlkM. S., MmlmH, R. S. azl Gsrver, J., C c m k ~ of mx d ~ in auimdu rewinds and involvmn~ with conqmmL Jmmm/ol Vocatiom/~/m~omr, 1~.5, 27, 71-86. 17. l-hdr, J. K, Andzrsoa, P.. ~ , Tmtlmm.P.. L. utd Blmck,W. C., M~dvuiam Dam A m z ~ . 4th ~ln. Pmntice~-Hall,Fmfllowood O.iifs, NJ., 1995. 18. Bau'. O. O., giclmd. H. C. m i Lmmmer, P., Attitudm towmd compums: vzlidmioa of st coaqmm" attitude scale. J ~ m a i ~ CmnpWfq Rzmarck. 1987, 3, 207-218.

Appendixopposite

Students' attitudestowsrds computers

4 3.

APPENDIX

(

16-19 COMPUTER ATTITUDE SCALE

1

Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with each statement. Try not to think about your answer for too long. This is a survey NOT a test, so there are no 'right' or 'wrong' answers - just answer as honestly as you can. P/soso tick one answer for each statement.

If given the o p ~ n l t y to wle a computer I mm Ifndd thst I mioht damxoe I in some wily. OompulUm Imlp me to mIiamm my wodc IWIK I oould pmba/ly Nloh mywlf r o u t of the things I nood to know obout

oompuum I would Ivoid hddng I job If I IoNm It InVOIVqKIwoddnli with compulem I I N ~ I ~ to u u i omz~lm' In ~

I look idupid

Computem csn e n h m m the pmmNdxiton of my wodc to o degree which J u d b s the e~m effort I I m not in compie~ conlnd when I use n c o ~ I don't feel appmlwnxive about using • computer I can moke the computor do whM I want It to do

I nwd in OXl~

INlrlon mlld~/i~Nm I ulo I ~

Most things that I computer can Im ueed for I can do Jult ns w d myulf I avoid comino Into cont~t with compulml In echool/collqje If I got ptomaine ueln9 Iho oompuW, I can tmually zolvo Ihmn one way or tim other I~ to use a computer for fear of maddngm i N ~ N I can't correct Camputm~ can allow me to do more Intenmtlng ond Im~lnatlve work I will tmo ~

rqulorly throughout school/collie

I do not nmtd Imlflmbody to toll mmtho bOllt w l y to UllOa computer Computers molto me feel umamnfmtol~ Computers make It possible to work morn produ~lvely