1. Have been studied throughout a number of contexts (e.g., clinical, secondary and post-secondary education; Gould, 2006; Karabenik, 2004 & 2003; Deane, Wilson, & Ciarrochi, 2001; Karabenik & Knapp, 1991; Fischer & Turner, 1970). no general measure of help- seeking in a college contextCurrently, however, there is no general measure of help- seeking in a college context. generalized setting.The objective of the item development process was to modify current measures used in academic and clinical settings to a more generalized setting. Throughout the item development process… Members on the development panel noticed how some items may elicit different responses depending on the context to which students think the items refer (e.g., academic, personal/psychological). As such, it was deemed necessary to pilot items on students in a way that will help us to understand how items might be interpreted. E ngaging in R igorous I nstrument D evelopment to I ncrease V alidity of A ssessment R esults C ivic L earning P rogram in J udicial A ffairs Multi-staged Instrument Development Process (DeVellis, 2003) Optimize Scale Length Evaluate Items Pilot Expert Review Determine Format of Measure Develop Item Pool Identify & Define Construct Construct-of-Interest Help-SeekingGeneral Help-Seeking Concurrent Think-Aloud (Ericsson & Simon, 1980 & 1993) Instrument Development Panel Method Participants Participants (N= 3) used in this exercise where volunteers from a residence life program. The sample consisted of two (2) females and one (1) male. Procedures Three (3) think-aloud moderators were used for the exercise (two female and one male). All three were members of the assessment committee. Members were trained on the think- aloud process and materials. A mock think-aloud was conducted between the lead moderator and another moderator to make sure everyone had the same conceptualization of the process. Data collection concurrent verbal report (think-aloud) method A concurrent verbal report (think-aloud) method was chosen for the purposes of this exercise. Moderators met with students one-on-one. Interviews lasted, on average, for about one half hour. Afterwards, moderators reconvened to debrief and provide general impressions of students’ responses. Judicial Affairs Assessment Committee Consultant from the Center for Assessment & Research Studies Figure 1. Conceptual map of think-aloud analysis for the Getting Help from Others Questionnaire Analysis Each statement made by respondent were analyzed. Initial codes were developed using impressions drawn from a review of the data, as well as observers’ field notes. Coding is meant to be mutually exclusive; each statement can receive only one code. An analytic coding approach was used (Richards & Morse, 2006). Codes served as keywords. Each time a statement with “depends” for, example, was encountered, that statement was highlighted. Discussion In many ways, students interpreted these items in the way the developers intended.the test developers wanted students to consider campus resource in a broad sense and not in a narrow sense (e.g., faculty members). As shown in Figure 1, participants had a wide range of conceptualizations about “campus resource” (e.g., student assistant, roommate). In many ways, students interpreted these items in the way the developers intended. That is, the test developers wanted students to consider campus resource in a broad sense and not in a narrow sense (e.g., faculty members). Participants’ interpretation of “problem”, on the other hand, presented a challenge. How a respondent might answer items that include the word “problem” depends on the context. Whenever an item was vague, that is, whenever the student said “it depends” on the context, he or she would use the middle category. Had we not conducted the think-aloud, we might have interpreted middle category responses as an ambivalent response (middle-of- the road) Whenever an item was vague, that is, whenever the student said “it depends” on the context, he or she would use the middle category. It’s almost as if the student used this category as the default when he or she didn’t understand the item fully. Had we not conducted the think-aloud, we might have interpreted middle category responses as an ambivalent response (middle-of- the road) and not as an “I don’t understand” or “it depends” proxy. feedback from expert reviewers. Revisions to the instrument were made based on these results and feedback from expert reviewers. Sample Item Pool 32 item-instrument Help-seeking tendencies… Jilliam N. Joe | Wendy M. Young | Mary M. Johnston Help-Seeking Threat 1 Help-Seeking Threat 1 : To an individual with a high level of help-seeking threat, the cost to seeking help is depreciation in self-esteem. “Because seeking help implies inadequacy, it is more inconsistent, and therefore more threatening, to individuals with high self-esteem than to individuals with low self- esteem” (Karabenick & Knapp, 1991, p.222). Help-Seeking Avoidance 1 Help-Seeking Avoidance 1 : An individual with a high level of help-seeking avoidance will choose to not seek help even in the face of failure. Instrumental Help-Seeking 1 : Instrumental Help-Seeking 1 : An individual who engages in instrumental help-seeking does so when necessary and in order to gain the least amount of assistance possible in order to problem-solve (e.g., asks for a hint). Executive Help-Seeking 1 : Executive Help-Seeking 1 : An individual who engages in executive help-seeking, on the other hand, does so in order to minimize the cost (effort) of completing the task on his own (e.g., asks for direct answers). Informal vs. Formal Help-Seeking 1 Informal vs. Formal Help-Seeking 1 : Help-seeking tendencies are directed toward either informal or formal sources. That is, an individual will seek help from different sources – sources that are formal (e.g. instructor) or informal (e.g. peer). Confidence Confidence (Perception of Help-Source) 2 : Help source perception is the degree to which an individual has confidence in the help source. Recognition of Need for Help 2 Recognition of Need for Help 2 : Help-seeking recognition is the acknowledgement of the need for professional help in the face of a problem (personal or emotional). HSTWhen I need help, I don’t care that others know. HSA task I would rather do worse on a task I couldn’t finish, than ask for help. HSII seek out help in order to more fully understand a problem. 1 Karabenick, S.A. (2003). Seeking help in large college classes: A person-centered approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 37-58. Karabenick, S.A. (2004). Perceived goal achievement structure and college student help seeking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 569-581. 2 Fischer, E.H. & Turner, J. L. (1970). Orientations to seeking professional help: Development and research utility of an attitude scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35(1), 79-90. When an “off-the shelf” instrument just can’t measure up… HSEWhen I ask for help my primary reason is to reduce the amount of effort I have to put forth on my own. HSSinf I typically seek out help from my friends rather than professionals on campus. HSSfor If I seek help, I prefer to ask professionals on campus rather than another student. HSP I believe that professionals on campus are too busy to help when I have a problem. HSR I generally don’t know I need help for a problem until someone points it out to me. 123456 7 Not at all Completely true true of meof me DeVellis, R.F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications, 2nd ed. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Student Development Objective As a function of the Civic Learning Program, students will be more likely to increase attitudes toward help-seeking and increase help-seeking behavior. HSAIf I can’t fully resolve a problem on my own, I would rather make a “best” guess than ask someone for assistance.