Development and Preliminary Validation of the Moral Reasoning Questionnaire for Secondary School Students

Abstract

Moral reasoning is a key element of the Singapore Ministry of Education’s Character and Citizenship Education curriculum, and educators in Singapore are currently encouraged to facilitate growth in students’ moral reasoning based on the Stages of Moral Development established by Lawrence Kohlberg. To monitor students’ progress in this area, however, a validated test of moral reasoning is needed. A review of existing moral reasoning assessments indicated that none provide a practical means by which large numbers of students in Singapore classrooms can be assessed in this area. In this study, the Moral Reasoning Questionnaire (MRQ) was developed and validated to assess moral reasoning development in Singapore secondary classrooms. The MRQ presents moral dilemmas that integrate prosocial, anti-social, and social pressure elements within situations that would be familiar to Singapore secondary (grades 7–12, aged between 12 and 18) students. Evidence supported the reliability and validity of the MRQ. The MRQ could be applicable as a practical means to assess moral reasoning on a broad-scale basis.

Measuring Learner Satisfaction of an Adaptive Learning System

“…Confirmatory factor models within this study were evaluated on the basis of recommendations by [ 52 , 56 , 57 ]. As the sample presented modest non-normalities, the maximum likelihood with Satorra–Bentler scaled chi-squared statistic for model fit that adjusts the chi-squared statistic and standard errors for data non-normality was used for more precise goodness-of-fit statistics [ 49 , 58 ].…”

Supporting Student Learning Needs in Tertiary Education: Institutional Support Structures Based on the Institutional Support Questionnaire

“…This model was then subjected to a hierarchical CFA to assess model fit and confirm the factorial structure of the instrument. As with the partitioned sample for EFA, the CFA sample was slightly nonnormal, and hence, the maximum likelihood with Satorra–Bentler (MLSB) scaled chi-square statistics for model fit that adjusted the chi-square statistic and standard errors for data nonnormality was used for more precise goodness-of-fit statistics [ 25 , 26 , 27 ].…”

“…As the validation was based on classical test theory and hence sample dependent, it would be most appropriate to examine the generalisability of the ISQ in tertiary education institutions that place a high value on teaching and have diverse student populations, as with the case institution. To further minimise sample dependency and provide a basis for exploring the additivity of scores, a Rasch analysis could be undertaken subsequently [ 26 ]. Nonetheless, the ISQ (along with the LNQ) presents a reference for tertiary education institutions to develop a comprehensive questionnaire that evaluates both students’ learning needs and their perceptions of how the institution may be meeting their needs.…”

Validation of the Moral Reasoning Questionnaire against Rasch Measurement Theory

“…Responses to the MRQ are scored based on the scoring matrix presented in Table 1. This scoring matrix had been applied during the preliminary validation and there was no evidence to suggest, based on the CTT factor analytic approach, that it was inappropriate (Lim & Chapman, 2021c) (see Appendix B for results).…”

“…In light of this, the Moral Reasoning Questionnaire (MRQ) was developed upon an operational definition of moral reasoning proffered by Lim & Chapman (2021a) for use in Singapore schools on a large-scale basis for students aged between 12 and 18 (between grade 7 and 12), after an extensive review of established instruments found concerns with content appropriateness and group administrability (Lim & Chapman, 2021b). Based on critical stages recommended by the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council on Measurement in Education [AERA, APA & NCME], 2014), the MRQ was preliminarily validated in part on a classic test theory (CTT) factor analytic approach to establish its factorial structure, and the analyses found both quantitative and qualitative support for validity evidence and the reliability of the MRQ (Lim & Chapman, 2021c); quantitative support was established via the factor analytic approach (i.e., exploratory factor analysis followed by confirmatory factor analysis) and parallel analysis, while qualitative support was established via evidence from: (1) content appropriateness where an expert panel critique the initial item pool, and (2) response processes, where the items were validated through engaging five students, within the age range by which the MRQ was intended, in cognitive interviews (Willis, 2017).…”