On the Reliability and Factorial Validity of the Assessment Scale for Creative Collaboration

Abstract

Creativity, a primary objective across academic disciplines, has received considerable attention over the past few decades. While much focus has been put on the measurement of individual creativity, a notable research gap remains regarding social collaborative creativity that occurs in blended learning settings. This work offers an initial validation of the psychometric properties of a self-reported instrument, the Assessment Scale for Creative Collaboration (ASCC) that can measure learner perceptions of creative collaboration in a team within a computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) context. In this study, 236 undergraduate and graduate students rated the key variables of creative collaboration. Exploratory factor analysis resulted in a three-factor scale (21 items) measuring 'Synergistic Social Collaboration', 'Distributed Creativity' and 'Learning Regulation and Achievement'. Cronbach's alphas indicated good internal consistency for the subscales. An instrument with psychometric properties for the assessment of creative collaboration is much-needed for the growing community of researchers and practitioners looking into creativity in education. It is also critical in advanced technical subjects, such as Design, HCI and Engineering, where collaboration is essential in developing innovative products.

The development of environmental science agency for primary school students through an environmental entrepreneurship intervention programme

“…The questionnaire consists of 19 items, measured on a Likert scale (from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree). Based on validation procedures (Mavri et al, 2019) applied prior to the research, the questionnaire includes five subscales (factors) as follows: (a) environmental knowledge, (b) cultural heritage knowledge, (c) cultural heritage roles, (d) environmental agency and (e) cultural heritage agency, addressing the three components as stated and analysed by Ballard et al (2017).…”