Construct validity of the QCGE-SAS is supported by significant correlations between its subscales and pre-validated related scales¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Correlations of the BE, SE and CE subscales with matched scales (TWE, FAT cohesion, MSUS meaningful cognitive engagement) supported convergent validity, and the four QCGE-SAS subscales were interrelated. → Loris T. Jeitziner 2025

Evidence¶

Loris T. Jeitziner 2025¶

Loris T. Jeitziner, Lisa Paneth, Oliver Rack, Susanne Bleisch, Carmen Zahn. (2025). Measuring the quality of collaborative group engagement: Development and validation of the QCGE self-assessment scale (QCGE-SAS). Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-025-09445-8

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Construct validity analysis was conducted on a subsample (N = 112) using Kendall's tau correlations (Fig. 2) between the QCGE-SAS subscales and the TWE, FAT cohesion, MSUS meaningful cognitive engagement, and the self-reported learning outcome. The article reports "significant correlations with related scales"; no correlation coefficient values were available in the supplied text.

"Construct and criterion validity were supported by significant correlations with related scales and with self-reported and objective learning outcomes."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Behavioural, cognitive and conceptual-to-consequential subscales of the QCGE-SAS show acceptable reliability, while the social engagement subscale shows unacceptable internal consistency — related
• Criterion validity testing related QCGE-SAS subscale correlations and a regression on objectively graded group products for a laboratory subsample — related
• A confirmatory factor analysis supports a four-factor structure of collaborative group engagement (behavioural, social, cognitive, conceptual-to-consequential) for the QCGE self-assessment scale — related