Richardson John T E, Gamborg Gunner, Hammerberg Gitten
Institute of Educational Technology, The Open University, UK.
Scand J Occup Ther. 2005;12(3):110-7. doi: 10.1080/11038120510030898.
Students in the fourth semester of basic training programmes in occupational therapy at seven different institutions of higher education in Denmark were surveyed using the Course Experience Questionnaire [CEQ] and the Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory [RASI]. The CEQ proved to be a reasonably robust in this setting: most of the scales demonstrated satisfactory reliability, and a factor analysis confirmed its intended constituent structure. The CEQ also discriminated among students at the seven institutions in their patterns of scores. The RASI proved to be less satisfactory: many subscales did not demonstrate satisfactory reliability and its intended constituent structure was only partly confirmed by factor analysis. Moreover, the RASI failed to discriminate clearly among students at the seven institutions. The scores on the CEQ produced by students at four of the institutions raised concerns relating to the clarity of academic goals and standards, the teaching performance of staff, and the academic workload imposed on students. Nevertheless, students at five institutions produced relatively high ratings of their general satisfaction with their programmes, and students at all seven schools produced high ratings of the appropriateness of their assessments and the acquisition of generic skills.
我们使用课程体验问卷（CEQ）和修订后的学习方法量表（RASI），对丹麦七所不同高等教育机构职业治疗基础培训项目第四学期的学生进行了调查。在这种情况下，CEQ被证明具有相当的稳健性：大多数量表显示出令人满意的信度，并且因子分析证实了其预期的构成结构。CEQ也在七所机构的学生得分模式上有所区分。RASI则不太令人满意：许多子量表没有显示出令人满意的信度，其预期的构成结构仅部分得到因子分析的证实。此外，RASI未能在七所机构的学生之间进行清晰区分。四所机构的学生在CEQ上的得分引发了对学术目标和标准的清晰度、教职员工的教学表现以及学生所承担的学术工作量的担忧。尽管如此，五所机构的学生对其课程的总体满意度相对较高，并且所有七所学校的学生对其评估的适当性和通用技能的获得给予了高度评价。
