A multifactor perspective on writing self-efficacy was examined in 2 studies. Three factors were proposed—self-efficacy for writing ideation, writing conventions, and writing self-regulation—and a scale constructed to reflect these factors. In Study 1, middle school students (N = 697) completed the Self-Efficacy for Writing Scale (SEWS), along with associated measures. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) showed SEWS data fit the proposed 3-factor model well. In Study 2, a second CFA of data from 563 students from 2 high schools likewise showed good model fit. Scores based on the 3 writing self-efficacy factors were examined in relation to students' liking writing, self-reported writing grades, and statewide writing assessment (SWA) scores. Results showed writing ideation and self-regulation self-efficacy to be significantly more strongly related to liking writing than conventions self-efficacy but less related than conventions self-efficacy to SWA scores. All 3 writing self-efficacy dimensions showed moderate positive correlations with self-reported writing performance. Further analyses showed higher levels for all 3 dimensions of writing self-efficacy for students in more advanced English/language arts classes. Overall, results from the studies were interpreted as supporting multifactor models of writing self-efficacy and the utility of closer ties between self-efficacy measures and domains being assessed.

No abstract

The purpose of this explanatory mixed methods study was to examine the perceived value of mixed methods research for graduate students. The quantitative phase was an experiment examining the effect of a passage's methodology on students' perceived value. Results indicated students scored the mixed methods passage as more valuable than those who scored the quantitative or qualitative passage. The qualitative phase involved focus groups to better understand students' perceptions of the perceived value of mixed methods. Findings suggested graduate students view mixed methods passages as having rigorous methods, a newer history, and providing a deeper meaning of the phenomenon. This study adds to the literature base by revealing what value graduate students assign to quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research.

No abstract

The goals for this qualitative study were to examine principals’ perceptions regarding their own supervision and evaluation. Two research questions guided the qualitative inquiry: (1) What are the greatest strengths of your own supervision and evaluation? and (2) What recommendations would you give to superintendents to improve your own supervision and evaluation? The study used an online tool to gather perceptions from principals regarding their own evaluation and supervision. Participants solicited included 275 principals from elementary, middle, or high schools, in a mountain west state. Out of the participants solicited, 95 principals agreed to participate (35% response rate). The emerging themes for the first research question were (1) trust and communication and (2) goal setting. The emerging themes for the second research question were (1) regular observations with feedback and (2) components to improve supervision and evaluation. Results from this study provided implications for those who supervise principals, as well as for those who train superintendents.