Construction of Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale in the Digital Age of High School Students: Application of the Graded Response Model
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The objectives of this research were to 1) construct a career decision-making self-efficacy scale for high school students in the digital age with two different test lengths: 25 items and 35 items, and 2) compare the psychometric properties of the scales using the graded response model. The sample consisted of 572 high school students from Princess Chulabhorn Science High School Buriram and Phetchaburi, selected through cluster random sampling. The research instruments were the 25-item and 35-item versions of the Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale in the digital age. Data were analyzed using frequency, percentage, mean, and the graded response model via the MULTILOG 7.03 program. The findings were as follows:
1. The Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale, based on the framework of Taylor & Betz, comprised five factors and ten indicators: (1) accurate self-appraisal, (2) gathering occupational information, (3) goal selection, (4) planning for the future, and (5) problem-solving. These factors were measured using both the 25-item and 35-item versions of the scale.
2. Regarding psychometric properties, the 25-item version yielded a higher mean slope parameter ( = 2.088) and average threshold parameters (
1= –2.944,
2 = –1.526,
3 = 0.171,
4= 1.787). The test information function (TIF) was 35.021 at
= 0.0, and the reliability was 0.9655. In contrast, the 35-item version had a lower mean slope parameter (
= 1.655) and threshold parameters (
1 = –2.921,
2 = –4.733,
3 = –0.020,
4= 1.526). The TIF was 32.492 at
= –1.4, and the reliability was 0.9650. In conclusion, the 25-item version demonstrated superior psychometric qualities—including higher slope parameters, threshold values, test information, and reliability—compared to the 35-item version.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The content and information contained in the published article in the Journal of Educational Measurement Mahasarakham University represent the opinions and responsibilities of the authors directly. The editorial board of the journal is not necessarily in agreement with or responsible for any of the content.
The articles, data, content, images, etc. that have been published in the Journal of Educational Measurement Mahasarakham University are copyrighted by the journal. If any individual or organization wishes to reproduce or perform any actions involving the entirety or any part of the content, they must obtain written permission from the Journal of Educational Measurement Mahasarakham University.
References
Am, M. A., Setiawati, F. A., Hadi, S., & Istiyono, E. (2023). Psychometric properties career of commitment instrument using classical test theory and graded response model. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 5(2), 26-40.
Betz, N. E., Klein, K. L., & Taylor, K. M. (1996). Evaluation of a short form of the Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 4(1), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/106907279600400103
Cahyawulan, W., & Yundianto, D. (2022). Career Decision Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form with Indonesian University Graduates: A Rasch Model Approach. Indonesian Journal of Learning Education and Counseling, 4(2), 113-124. https://doi.org/10.31960/ijolec.v4i2.1527
Herwin, H., Nurhayati, R., Lidyasari, A. T., & da Costa, A. (2023). Graded Response Models on the Curiosity Measurement of Elementary School Students. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 9(1), 53-62. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.9.1.53
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79–122. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1994.1027
Liu, F., Zhang, Z., Lin, B., Ping, Z., & Mei, Y. (2022). Assessing the psychometric properties of the Chinese return-to-work self-efficacy questionnaire using Rasch model analysis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 20(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-022-01929-7
Miguel, J. P., Silva, J. T., & Prieto, G. (2013). Career Decision Self-Efficacy Scale — Short Form: A Rasch analysis of the Portuguese version. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 82(2), 116–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2012.12.001
Molek-Winiarska, D., & Zięba, A. (2019). The use of the graded response model (GRM) in the process of the assessment of the psychological content of work among employees. Argumenta Oeconomica, 42(1), 295–316. https://doi.org/10.15611/aoe.2019.1.12
Montgomery, A. P., Campbell, C. M., Azuero, A., Swiger, P. A., & Patrician, P. A. (2023). Using item response theory to develop a shortened practice environment scale of the nursing work index. Research in Nursing & Health, 46(4), 400-410. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.22324
Nilsson, J. E., Schmidt, C. K., & Meek, W. D. (2002). Reliability Generalization: An Examination of the Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62(4), 647-658. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164402062004007
Reise, S., & Yu, J. (1990). Parameter recovery in the graded response model using MULTILOG. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27(2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1990.tb00738.x
Taylor, M. K., & Betz N. E. (1983). Applications of Self-Efficacy Theory to the Understanding and Treatment of Career Indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22(1), 63 - 81. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(83)90006-4
Winingsih, E., Hambali, I., & Hidayah, N. (2023). Psychological measurement of the validity and reliability of the short form career decision self-efficacy scale. Journal for Re Attach Therapy and Developmental Diversities, 6(5), 449-456. https://www.jrtdd.com/index.php/journal/article/view/588/419
Yamane, T. (1973). Statistics: An introductory analysis (3rd ed.). Harper & Row.
Yaşar, M. (2019). Development of a "Perceived Stress Scale" based on classical test theory and graded response model. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 6(4), 522–538. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.626053
Department of Employment. (2016). Handbook of preparing before to labour market. Department of Employment. https://www.doe.go.th/vgnew (in Thai)
Excellence in Science Education Bureau. (2024). Educational achievement of Princess Chulabhorn Science school. http://www.eseb.obec.go.th/?page_id=2260 (in Thai)
Future Tales LAB, National Innovation Agency, and Innovation Foresight Institute. (2021). Future of Work. Tonklar publication. https://ifi.nia.or.th/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/NIA-x-FTL-2021- Future-of-Work.pdf (in Thai)
Kanjanawasee, S. (2013). Classical test theory (7th ed.). Chulalongkorn University Press. (in Thai)
Kanjanawasee, S. (2020). Modern test theories (5th ed.). Chulalongkorn University Press. (in Thai)
Kassakul. B. (2020). A construction of employability skills scale for lower secondary school students [Master’s thesis]. Srinakharinwirot University. http://ir-ithesis.swu.ac.th/dspace/bitstream/123456789/1297/1/gs601130127.pdf (in Thai)
Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (2023). Ministry of digital economy and society action plan for fiscal year 2023 (6-month revised plan). https://www.mdes.go.th/law/download/6980 (in Thai)
Office of the Basic Education Commission. (2012). Guidelines for organizing guidance activities according to the Basic Education Core Curriculum, B.E. 200. Agricultural Co-operative Federation of Thailand, Ltd. http://www.esbuy.net/site/download-file.php?doc_id=4518 (in Thai)
Rungrotrangsan, K. (2017). A development of the sportsmanship scale of athletes in the institute of physical education [Doctoral dissertation]. Prince of Songkla University. https://kb.psu.ac.th/psukb/handle/2016/11747 (in Thai)
Suwannual, P., Sopa, S., Suwannachan, P. C., & Katapanyo, P. N. (2022). How to deal with generation Y workers not changing work. Journal of MCU Nakhondhat, 9(9), 228–241. https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JMND/article/view/263887 (in Thai)
Thirakanan. S. (2008). Construction of measurement instruments for social science research: A guideline to practice (2nd ed.). Chulalongkorn University Press. (in Thai)
Thirakanan. S. (2014). Research methodology in social science: A guideline to practice (12th ed.). Chulalongkorn University Press. (in Thai)
