in search for qualified engineers: construction of the best engineering traits (bet) inventory

8/14/2019 In Search for Qualified Engineers: Construction of the Best Engineering Traits (BET) Inventory

1/53


2/53

Best Engineering Traits

In Search for Qualified Engineers: Construction of the Best Engineering Traits

The role of engineers has much relevance in contributing to the growth

and development of nations. The engineers are responsible for the development

of big infrastructures such as buildings, roads, and machineries. Although

engineering is a vast field, this study focused on measuring the constructs for

civil engineers. Civil engineers can address problems related to housing,

infrastructure, flooding, water crisis, pollution, urban traffic, and disaster

mitigation. The most common specialization in the field of civil engineering are

structural engineering, construction technology and management, hydraulics andwater resources engineering, transportation engineering, and geotechnical

engineering. In order to succeed in the field of civil engineering one needs to

have a sufficient background in mathematics, physical and natural sciences.

There is a great call to produce more graduates who are technically inclined and

equipped with right abilities. Scinta (2006) reported that the Bureau of Labor

Statistics predicts the need for science and engineering graduates will grow by

26% of 1.25 million by 2012. The number of graduates in these fields, however,

has remained relatively flat for two decades. A synthesis of the Commission on

Higher Educations (CHED) national survey on graduates from across the

Philippines indicated that engineers are the highest paid and the most

employable. Jonquieres (2006) reported that skills of the graduates from Asia do

not match the needs of the world industry. A Duke University study has found that

the degrees taken by many of the almost 1M new engineering graduates in

China and India in 2004 were much less demanding than in the US and some

2


3/53


graduates were qualified to be a little more than technicians. In proportion to its

population, the US actually conferred 55 per cent more computer science, IT and

engineering degrees than China and almost four times more than India. Given

this demand on engineers, the skills necessary to be a qualified engineer needs

to be monitored.

There is a need to construct a battery of measures that can validly screen

in students who are qualified to be engineers. The assessment should start at the

level of tertiary education to filter in the students who are qualified to take the

course and raise the level of probability of their success in the field. Screeningqualified engineers through paper and pencil tests is not new. In the Philippines,

the Philippine Regulation Commission (PRC) screens engineers qualified to

practice the profession by passing the licensure examination. All technical

institutes in India administer the Graduate Aptitude Test in Engineering (GATE),

an exam for admission and benchmark test for engineering graduates. Many

countries perform the screening of students who are most qualified but in the

Philippines, qualified engineers are all based on the admission exams of different

universities which cannot be benchmarked from each other because of the lack

of standard-based measures especially in the field of engineering. The purpose

of this study is to construct a battery of measures to screen in students who are

qualified to be future engineers. The series of test in the battery will include

measures of attitude, achievement and aptitude. These battery of tests can serve

as standardized admission tests and screening for qualified students who can

take the engineering course.

3


4/53


The Civil Engineering Curriculum

Civil Engineering is comprised of different specializations that include

structural engineering, construction technology and management, hydraulics and

water resources engineering, transportation engineering, and geotechnical

engineering.

Structural Engineering . This field provides technical support in the

infrastructure development. There is opportunity for students to be trained in the

planning, analysis, design, construction, inspection, rehabilitation, and

preservation of structures which includes residential and office buildings, bridges,and a large variety of structures using various materials such as steel, concrete,

and timber, taking into consideration technical, economic, environmental, and

social aspects (DLSU-Manila Webpage, 2006).

Construction Technology and Management . This field prepares students

for the effective planning and implementation of construction projects by giving

them basic knowledge of construction materials and technology, and project

management concepts. Project management includes topics in plans and

specifications, cost engineering, accounting, and organization. The program also

envisions that some graduates may immediately join their family construction

business or may ultimately put up their own firms. Subjects that deal with

estimating, bidding, marketing, business organization, economics, and strategy

are tackled to prepare them for this prospect (DLSU-Manila Webpage, 2006).

Hydraulics and Water Resources Engineering . This field responds to the

needs of the country in solving water resources related problems such as water

4


5/53


6/53


civil engineers. The Civil Engineering programs in most Universities are designed

to prepare the student for a productive career in government or the private

sector, as well as for advanced graduate study. Most of the curriculum builds a

sound foundation in basic sciences and mathematics, followed by courses in

engineering science and design that provide a solid base for life-long

professional learning. Engineering courses and laboratories provide an

opportunity for students to experience those principles and standard practices

that they will encounter in their careers. There is a pattern in the curriculum

oriented to develop a student's ability to think logically and to apply theknowledge gained to the design and synthesis of complex civil engineering

projects. Most programs provide an integration of design experience from the

freshman year to the senior year. The senior courses provide a comprehensive

design experience for students that encompasses ethical, societal, economic and

safety issues. Engineering design, team problem solving and communication

skills are emphasized throughout the curriculum. Civil engineering principles and

practices are covered in courses dealing with fluid, solid, and soil mechanics;

design of highways and other transportation facilities, including traffic control

systems; design and construction of all types of structures; water resources

(hydraulics and hydrology); and environmental studies, with emphasis on water

supplies/treatment/distribution, wastewater collection/treatment/disposal, and

solid/hazardous waste management.

In the freshman and sophomore years, all civil engineering majors take an

engineering and technology overview course, as well as courses in engineering

6


7/53


graphics and surveying. They also complete classes in calculus, chemistry,

physics, English composition, public speaking, and electives in humanities and

social sciences. During the junior and senior years, requirements focus primarily

on civil engineering courses, with supplemental work in industrial and systems,

chemical, mechanical, and electrical and computer engineering. Some of the

required major courses include Water and Wastewater Treatment, Fluid

Mechanics, Hydraulics, Structural Theory, Steel Design, Concrete Design, Soils,

and Transportation.

In some universities, students may can take tracks environmental,structural, geotechnical, transportation, or water resources engineering with the

proper selection of electives.

Civil Engineering Tests

One of the widely known engineering test for students is the Graduate

Aptitude Test in Engineering (GATE) in India. The GATE is held every year

across the country in over 100 cities. At present nearly 60,000 students take

GATE every year. Candidates can choose a single paper of 3 hours duration to

appear in GATE from different mathematics, science and technical disciplines.

The GATE score of a candidate is a statistical performance index in the range 0

to 1000. It reflects the ability of a candidate, irrespective of the paper or year in

which he/she has qualified. Candidates with same GATE score from different

disciplines and/or years can be considered to be of equal ability (Vyom

Technosoft, 2006).

7


8/53


The available standardized tests that measure whether a student is fit to

take an engineering course are interest, vocational and aptitude tests. The most

common measures are mechanical ability tests. These tests are particularly

effective in requiring machinery, construction and certain engineering positions.

Some standardized tests are Bennett Mechanical Comprehension Test (Bennet,

1980). The BMCT consists of 68 items, each which require the application of a

physical law or a mechanical operation. One study using the BMCT and several

other instruments determined that the BMCT was best single predictor of job

performance for a group of employees manufacturing electrochemicalcomponents (Muchinsky, 1993).

A study by Ajobeje (2005) investigated the extent to which cognitive entry

characteristics and continuous assessment measured or predicted students

academic performance among Polytechnic Engineering Students. In

particular, the study determined the relationship between WASC, PCEE, and

semester Examination scores, and determined the contribution of year CPA and

second year GGPA of the polytechnic engineering technology student. The score

of cognitive entry characteristics, continuous assessment results and the results

of the academic performance of the subject were assessed using correlation

analysis, regression analysis and analysis variances. The results of the analysis

revealed that both cognitive entry characteristics and continuous assessment

results seem to have predictive strength on the academic performance of the

subject. Continuous assessment shows higher predictive strength than cognitive

entry characteristics.

8


9/53


Skills Necessary to be a Civil Engineer

The study by Newport and Elms (1997) defined an effective engineer and

investigated engineers in the workplace to determine what qualities make an

engineer more effective than others. The data was gathered using questionnaires

designed to measure the predominance of the qualities in engineering

individuals. Qualities associated with mental agility, enterprise and interpersonal

capability correlated most significantly with effectiveness. Effectiveness did not

correlate with achievement in the tertiary education. The results showed that

many of the qualities associated with effective engineer behavior are learnableand can be taught within an education program.

Kubler and Forkes (2002) in their study came up with a profile for

engineers who are suited for employment. Creating profiles for employability

indicate the skills that typically can be developed through the study of different

subjects. The researchers came up with a long list of skills expected of an

engineering student anchored on the employers needs that include brain power,

generic competencies, personal capabilities, subject specific knowledge and

technical ability.

On the other hand the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

(2000) also came up with a list of skills to benchmark engineers. They have

included understanding based on mathematics, science and technology,

integrated with business and management which can be acquired through

education and professional formation. It was further stated that engineers must

be able to exercise original thought, have good professional judgment and be

9


10/53


able to take responsibility for the direction of important tasks. The taxonomy in

the study includes intellectual abilities, practical skills, and general transfer skills.

The study by Magno (2003) recognizes that skills necessary to be good

engineers are structured on the relationship between technical attitude and

achievement on mathematics and science. In order to succeed in an engineering

course the student needs to have technical inclinations that can be measured

through an attitude test. In the study attitude towards technical education is

measure through task value and expectancy. Task Value includes attainment

value, intrinsic value, and utility value (Meece et al. 1982) and expectancies arethe perceived probability for success (Meece et al. 1982). The results of the

study showed a relationship between science achievement and task value but

not on Mathematics. This supports the claims that engineering skills can be

developed through an educational program and predicting the structure may not

yet be evident without taking the actual engineering course.

Subtests of the Best Engineering Traits (BET) Inventory

Practical Inclination. One of the many skills that are important for

engineers to acquire is practical inclination. This includes the disposition to use a

wide range of tools, techniques and equipments; use of laboratory and workshop

equipment to generate valuable data and materials, and; develop, promote and

apply safe systems of work. Sternberg (2003) defines practical inclination as an

intelligent factor which consist of subfactors on verbal, quantitative and figural:

10


11/53


PracticalVerbal: Everyday reasoning. Students are presented with a set

of everyday problems in the life of an adolescent and have to select the

option that best solves each problem.

PracticalQuantitative: Everyday math. Students are presented with

scenarios requiring the use of math in everyday life (e.g., buying tickets for

a ballgame) and have to solve math problems based on the scenarios.

PracticalFigural: Route planning. Students are presented with a map of

an area (e.g., an entertainment park) and have to answer questions about

navigating effectively through the area depicted by the map.Sternberg, Castejn, Hautamki, and Grigorenko (2001) defined practical

intelligence as adaptation to, shaping of, and selection of real-world

environments. People high in practical intelligence are strong in using,

implementing, and applying ideas and products. Laypersons have long

recognized a distinction between academic intelligence (book smarts) and

practical intelligence (street smarts). This distinction is represented in everyday

parlance by expressions such as learning the ropes and getting your feet wet.

This distinction also figures prominently in the implicit theories of intelligence held

by both laypeople and researchers. Sternberg, Conway, Ketron, and Bernstein

(1981) asked samples of laypeople in a supermarket, a library, and a train

station, as well as samples of academic researchers who study intelligence, to

provide and rate the importance of characteristics of intelligent individuals. Factor

analyses of the ratings supported a distinction between academic and practical

aspects of intelligence for laypeople and experts alike.

11


12/53


13/53


Intellectual Independence. Intellectual independence can be defined as

the ability of a learner to make knowledge claims independent of the traditional

authorities of the teacher and textbook (Oliver & Nichols, 2001). Intellectual

independence is that singular feature that makes science uniquely science. Only

when humankind became aware that knowledge could be created as a result of

the examination of empirical evidence, independent of the traditional authority of

gods, muses, or kings, did science come to exist. In using intellectual

independence in teaching, the main point for the teacher to keep constantly in

mind is that his student is an investigator, seeking by means of his own efforts tofind out what is truth-not a mere imitator or verifier of the results obtained by

others. The conclusions reached must be deductions from the evidence

observed, not statements memorized from a text or learned from a teacher. The

laws and principles derived must be inferences warranted by the conclusions

from the evidence.

In describing an intellectual independent student, they should learn to trust

his own powers and grow strong in the assurance of first-hand knowledge. He

tests and observes for himself, and receives nothing upon mere authority. No

other exercise so develops the freedom and confidence of independent thinking

(Poteat, 1999). Poteat (1999) dissuaded teaching that would encourage students

to accept assertions "upon mere authority."

Assertiveness. Paterson (2000) defined assertiveness as the ability to

express ones needs, wants, and feelings directly and honestly and to see the

needs of others as equally important. Social or generalized assertiveness is the

13


14/53


15/53


white-collar workers. The author collected respondents' answers to a

questionnaire consisting of 33 items involving assertiveness related to modes of

expression typical of the Japanese people. Several modes of expression

considered specific to the Japanese people-styles of group-oriented behavior,

younger people's courtesy toward older people, and the deference of the

individual to group consensus-were also found among the Malaysian and the

Filipino respondents. These behaviors were in contrast to those observed among

the U.S. respondents.

Engineering AptitudeAptitude is variously defined as innate learning ability, the specific ability

needed to facilitate learning a job, aptness, suitability, readiness, tendency, or

natural or acquired disposition or capacity for a particular activity. Aptitude

assessments are used to predict success or failure in an undertaking. For

vocational/career guidance and planning they are used to measure different

aptitudes such as general learning ability, numerical ability, verbal ability, spatial

perception, and clerical perception. Objective aptitude tests are based on timed

sub-tests. Engineers need to have aptitude on mechanical, structural spatial,

logic and abstract reasoning.

Mechanical . Measures the ability to understand the underlying principles

behind machines. High scores in this test indicate proficiency in engineering and

mechanical work. This is concerned with reasoning through mechanical problems

in a logical way. It measures the ability to perceive and understand the

relationship of physical forces and mechanical elements in practical situations.

15


16/53


This type of aptitude is important in jobs and training programs that require the

understanding and application of mechanical principles. The individual who

scores high in mechanical comprehension tend to learn easily the principles of

the operation and repair of complex devices (Bennet, 1980).

Structural Visualization . Space relations involves the ability to visualize

and think in three dimensions or picture mentally the shape, the size and

positions of objects when shown only a picture or pattern. The cognitive tests

used to measure Spatial Visualization Ability include mental rotation tasks and

cognitive tests like the VZ-1 (Form Board), VZ-2 (Paper Folding), and VZ-3(Surface Development) tests (Downing, Moore, & Brown, 2005). Over the years,

structural visualization has proven to be the most consistent aptitude found

among engineers. Virtually all engineering specialties draw upon this core

aptitude. People with structural visualization can envision how pieces of a 3D

puzzle fit together or how something drawn as a blueprint will look when it's

finished. Structural visualization is not in your hand's ability to fit the pieces

together, but rather in your mind's ability to visualize objects from different

perspectives, rotate them in your mind, and envision how the pieces fit together.

This aptitude also provides the ability to classify pieces and understand how they

relate to the whole, which is useful in many engineering tasks (Alonso & Norman,

1998).

Logic . Involves the evaluation of arguments where individuals are tasked

to advance an account of valid and fallacious inference, and to allow one to

distinguish logical from flawed arguments (Hodges, 2001). Logic measures the

16


17/53


ability to make deductions that lead rationally to a certain probability or

conclusion. Includes verbal evaluation, interpreting data and diagramatic series

(Scriven, 1976).

Abstract Reasoning . The ability to reason with visual configurations. The

questions in this assessment contain patterns and series, which have to be

completed. They are a non-verbal measure of reasoning ability and as such are

regarded by many occupational psychologists as a good measure of raw

intelligence. This aptitude is all about understanding processes and how they

work - a critical skill needed by engineers. Analytical reasoning allows individualsto organize concepts, arrange ideas in a logical sequence, and classify things. It

also helps you organize information to solve word problems in math, set up a

science experiment, and plan work (Anastasi & Urbina, 2001)

Engineering Achievement

Engineering skills are emphasized not only among students taking this

course but to lower years. Dr Ioannis Miaoulis, director of the National Center for

Technological Literacy indicates that States should incorporate engineering

questions into their science assessments. Miaoulis is on a mission to see that all

students are required to take technology and engineering courses (Mohr, 2006).

Related to this is the new blueprint outlining the content that students will

encounter on the science version of the National Assessment of Educational

Progress (NAEP). The said blueprint places too little emphasis on applying

science to technology, engineering, and real-world problem-solving, and a

number of critics contend (Cavanagh, 2005).

17


18/53


The report by Downie, Lucena, Moskal, and Parkhurst (2006) offers and

tests an approach to conceptualizing the global competency of engineers. It

begins by showing that the often-stated goal of working effectively with different

cultures is fundamentally about learning to work effectively with people who

define problems differently. The paper offers a minimum learning criterion for

global competency and three learning outcomes whose achievement can help

engineering students fulfill that criterion. It uses the criterion to establish a

typology of established methods to support global learning for engineering

students. It introduces the course, Engineering Cultures, as an example of anintegrated classroom experience designed to enable larger numbers of

engineering students to take the critical first step toward global competency, and

it offers a test application of the learning criterion and outcomes by using them to

organize summative assessments of student learning in the course.

Honawar (2005) reported that US national businessman and political

leaders are worried about the US schools' ability to stimulate student's interest in

math and science which is the area of weakness that they say has led to the

growing influence of Asian countries in the field of engineering and technology.

Among the most common examples of the deficiency in education attainment are

the results of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study that has

for years found American high schoolers performing at levels lower than those of

their peers in other developed countries. Some observers of international

education say that comparing the US with foreign countries based on such test

results may not always lead to accurate assumptions.

18


19/53


Shuster (2005) reported that high school students from the United States

scored below international averages on a comprehensive test of applied

mathematics and problem solving administered in 2003. The test, given to

students 15 years of age in 40 countries, was administered by the Organisation

for Economic Co-operation and Development, an intergovernmental group

representing 30 highly industrialized countries. The US students achieved an

overall score of 483, the international average being 500. To account for possible

statistical errors, each country received two rankings, and the United States

place 25th and 28th. The test - the Program for International Student Assessment- had two main parts, mathematics literacy and problem solving.

Method

Construction of the Attitude Scale

Search for Content Domain . A review of literature was conducted to

determine what specific personality and interests dominate most engineering

students and engineers. Four clusters were identified based on the framework

produced by Elton (1971) which is based on Hollands Theory. The arrived areas

are assertiveness, analytical interest, practical inclination, and intellectual

independence. A survey was conducted to determine how these four areas are

manifested among engineering students (see Appendix A). The survey was

sampled out among 50 respondents through convenience sampling.

Item Writing . The items were written based on the definition of the four

concepts and the data that was generated from the survey. Various definitions of

19


20/53


the constructs were arrived at from previous studies and they were compared.

The definition that suits the qualities of engineers in their profession are chosen

as a guide in writing the items. The data strands from the survey were clustered

in their commonalities and the ones that are fitted for every area (assertiveness,

analytical interest, practical inclination, and intellectual independence). Most of

the responses are geared towards these areas because each question into the

survey are open-ended inquiring about each area. There were 60 items

constructed for each area with a total of 240 items.

Item Review . The 240 items were placed in a checklist and categorizedaccording to each area. For each area the definition was provided in order to

guide the item reviewer whether the items are within its limits. Each item is then

judged whether it is accepted, rejected, or needs revision. The items were given

to three experts in the field of testing, measurement and evaluation. The first two

experts reviewed the items independently and gave their comments. After the

revising the items according to the comments of the first two reviewers, the third

reviewer decided which comment was acceptable in constructing the pool of

items. It was further recommended to reverse some of the items for correction

purposes.

After the item review, the pre-test form was assembled to contain the 240

items (see Appendix B). The items that were rejected during the review were

replaced with better items. Table 1 shows the table of specifications for the pre-

test form.

20


21/53


Table 1

Table of Specifications

Area Positive items Negative Items Total

Practical Inclination 30 30 60Analytical Interest 46 14 60Intellectual Independence 43 17 60Assertiveness 44 16 60Total 163 77 60

Scaling Technique . The scaling technique used is a 4-point likert scale

(strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree). The likert scale is selected

because the items reflect attitude and predisposes the individual to manifest thecharacteristics. The neutral scale was not included so that the students will really

have to make a stand for each item and minimize them from playing safe, thus

avoiding the tendency to choose the midpoint.

Pilot Testing . The final form with 240 items was laid-out in a booklet form

with a separate answer sheet. The cover of the booklet gives an elaborate

description on what the test is all about and how to answer with a brief

description. The positive and negative items were arranged interchangeable so

that the respondents would not fake good the answers. The test is self-

administered and was given to 45 engineering students in a university who are in

their second to third year of study. The respondents were given the instruments

and they answered for about 30 to 40 minutes.

Data Analysis . Item Analysis was conducted using Item Response Theory

(IRT) Rasch Analysis. Before proceeding with the Rasch analysis, the

dimensionality of the items were evaluated because unidimensionality is

considered the most critical and basic assumption of Rasch models. An

21


22/53


23/53


Proposed Construction of the Achievement Test

Search for Content Domain. The different sequence of subjects that are

taken by freshmen civil engineering students were gathered from different

universities locally and abroad. The purpose of integrating the subjects is to

come up with the common subjects taken by civil engineering freshmen students

that will cover the items in the achievement test part of the battery.

Item Writing . The items were written by different experts in the field of

mathematics, sciences, and English. The areas that cover the items are algebra

trigonometry, geometry, differential and integrated calculus, physics, chemistryand communications. The items were distributed in the revised blooms taxonomy

and the appropriate time frame for each subject area was determined together

with the percentage for each of the cognitive skills in blooms taxonomy. Table 2

shows the table of specifications of the items. A total of 200 items was formed.

The number of items for each area and skill was determined by dividing the

allotted time with total time and multiplied by the percentage and the total number

of items.

Table 2


Areas Hoursa

week

Recall5%

Understanding15%

Application25%

Analysis20%

Evaluation20%

Creating15%

Total

Algebra 180 1 3 5 4 4 3 18Trigonometry 180 1 3 5 4 4 3 18Geometry 360 2 5 9 7 7 5 36DifferentialCalculus

180 1 3 5 4 4 3 18

Integral Calculus 180 1 3 5 4 4 3 18Mensuration 180 1 3 5 4 4 3 18Physics 180 1 3 5 4 4 3 18Chemistry 360 2 5 9 7 7 5 36

23


24/53


25/53


area and skill was determined by dividing the allotted time with total time and

multiplied by the percentage and the total number of items.

Table 2


Areas Units Recall5%

Understanding15%

Application25%

Analysis20%

Evaluation20%

Creating15%

Total

Mechanical 5 1 4 6 5 5 4 25StructuralVisualization

5 1 4 6 5 5 4 25

Logic 5 1 4 6 5 5 4 25AbstractReasoning

5 1 4 6 5 5 4 25

TOTAL 20 5 15 25 20 20 15 100

Item Review . The items will be reviewed by experts in engineering,

education and cognitive psychology, as well as experts in the construction of

aptitude tests. During the review, the table of specifications will be shown and the

corresponding items. The reviewers will judge whether the items are

representative of the subject area and if the items really measure the cognitive

skill placed.

Pilot Testing . The instrument will be administered to 200 civil engineering

freshmen students together with the achievement test constructed from high and

low end universities. During the administration the instruction sand time allotment

will be followed based on the manual that will be constructed.

Data Analysis for the achivement and aptitude tests . To describe the

distribution of the scores, the mean, standard deviation, kurtosis, and skewness

will be obtained. The reliability of the items were evaluated using the Kuder

Richardson #20.

25


26/53


27/53


Results and Discussion

Attitude Scale

The attitude scale of the BET Inventory has four hypothesized factors

(practical inclination, analytical interest, intellectual independence and

assertiveness). The hypothesized factors are analyzed by describing itsdistribution, analyzed for reliability using the cronbachs alpha, correlating the

scores for convergent validity, determined the dimensions using joining tree

clustering and principal components analysis and if the data set fits a four factor

dimension using confirmatory factor analysis. The items that are acceptable are

determined if the data fits the Rasch Model.

The distribution of the scores for each factor is presented in Table 1.

Table 1

Score Distribution of the BET

N M SE SD Skewness KurtosisPractical Inclination 45 2.28 0.02 0.15 -0.57 0.86Analytical Interest 45 3.00 0.04 0.25 -0.68 0.96IntellectualIndependence 45 2.22 0.02 0.16 -0.20 1.34Assertiveness 45 2.45 0.02 0.15 -0.64 2.20

The highest possible score that can be obtained in the attitude scale in the

BET is 4.00 and the lowest is 1.00. Analytical interest was rated highly among the

respondents than the other factors. The variances showed by the standard

27


28/53


deviation and standard errors are low indicating low dispersion of the scores. All

the scores tend to be negatively skewed and the distribution tends to be

mesokurtic for practical inclination and analytical interest but leptokurtic for

intellectual independence and assertiveness.

The Cronbachs alpha obtained for the entire test is .94 indicating high

internal consistency of the items. The Cronbachs alpha for the factors practical

inclination, analytical interest, intellectual independence, and assertiveness are

.84, .91, .83 and .82 respectively all indicating high internal consistency.

Table 2

Correlation Matrix

Practical

InclinationAnalytical

InterestIntellectual

Independence AssertivenessPractical Inclination 1 0.56** 0.51** 0.31**Analytical Interest 1 0.77** 0.54**IntellectualIndependence 1 0.56**

Assertiveness 1** p


29/53


30/53


31/53


Figure 2

Scree Plot

232

229

226

223

220

217

214

211

208

205

202

199

196

193

190

187

184

181

178

175

172

169

166

163

160

157

154

151

148

145

142

139

136

133

130

127

124

121

118

115

112

109

106

103

100

97

94

91

88

85

82

79

76

73

70

67

64

61

58

55

52

49

46

43

40

37

34

31

28

25

22

19

16

13

10

741

Component Number

50

40

30

20

10

0

E i g e n v a l u e

Scree Plot

The confirmatory factor analysis using the covariance approach and

general least squares technique was used to prove the factor structure of the

attitude scale for the BET. The parameter estimate loadings of each factor

composing the BET construct are all significant with estimates .09, .22, .13 and

.09 respectively for practical inclination, analytical interest, intellectual

independence and assertiveness.

31


32/53


Figure 3

Factor Structure of Best Engineering Traits

1.00

Engineering Traits

PracticalInclination

.01

e11

AnalyticalInterest

.01

e21

IntellectualIndependence

.01

e31

Assertiveness

.01

e41

.22 .13 .09.09

Table 5

Parameter Estimates of the factors of other BET

Estimate P CRanalyticalinterest


33/53


The estimates show that analytical interest and intellectual independence

have the heaviest loadings on the BET. The assertiveness and practical

inclination factors may have low eights but they are still considered significant

p


34/53


high and low manifestation of the characteristic with the probability of getting a

high score is calibrated at 50%. Each item in the Rasch corresponds to a log

value and the goodness of fit for each of the items are tested using a t-value. The

t-values of items with 1.6 and below are considered to be fitted in the Rasch

model and the items with very high t values are removed in the pool. In the

analysis very few items are removed having high t-values. For Practical

inclination, 8 items are removed, for analytical interest 19 items are removed, for

intellectual independence 10 items are removed, and for assertiveness 8 items

are removed.However it was decided that each factor needs to have equal weights and

representation for the whole test in general. A total of 50 items were retained for

each factor with items showing good content and low fit index. The final pool of

items is composed of 200 items (see Appendix E). The item reliability obtained

from the Rasch analysis is .37, .42, .41 and .36 respectively for practical

inclination, analytical interest, intellectual independence, and assertiveness.

Interpretation of BET Scores

The scores obtained in the BET Inventory will be interpreted as follows:

ScalePoints Continuum of Values Interpretation

4 (SA) 3.50-4.00 Most likely to manifest the traitsdescribed in a particular subscale

3 (A) 2.50-3.49 Likely to manifest the traitsdescribed in a particular subscale

2 (D) 1.50-2.49 Unlikely to manifest the traitsdescribed in a particular subscale

34


35/53


36/53


Brown, N. W., & Cross, E. J. (1991). Capitalizing on personality differences of Black and White engineering students. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 18 (1),43-50.

Cavanagh, S. (2005). Experts disagree over what to include in revised NAEP.Education Week, 25 , 10.

Clough, W. (2004). Once an engineer, always an engineer . ASEE Prism, 13 , 56.

College of Engineering. (2006). www.dlsu.edu.ph

Downey, G. L., Lucena, J. C., Moskal, B. M., Parkhurst, R. et al. (2006). Theglobally competent engineer: Working effectively with people who defineproblems differently. Journal of Engineering Education, 95 , 107-113.

Downing, R.E., Moore, J.L., and Brown, S.W. (2005). The effects and interactionof spatial visualization and domain expertise on information seeking. Computersin Human Behavior, 21, 195 209.

Dunn, (1982). Hands-on approaches to learning styles: A practical guide tosuccessful schooling . PA: Thompson House.

Garrison, S., & Jenkins, J. O. (1986). Differing perceptions of Blackassertiveness as a function of race. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 14 (4), 157-166.

Hall, J. R., & Beil-Warner, D. (1978). Assertiveness of male Anglo and MexicanAmerican college students. The Journal of Social Psychology, 105 , 175-178.

Hodges, W. (2001). Logic. An introduction to Elementary Logic , Penguin Books.

Honawar, V. (2005). U.S. Leaders Fret Over Students' Math and ScienceWeaknesses. Education Week, 25 , 1-2.

Jonquieres, G. (2006, June 3). Asia cannot fill the world's skills gap. Financial Times , p. 13

Kubler and Forkes (2002). Engineering subject centre: Student employability profile . The higher Education Academy.

Lazarus, A. A. (1973). Assertive training: A brief note . Behavior Theory, 4, 697-699.

Lieberman, R. P. (1972). A guide to behavioral analysis and therapy . New York:Pergamon Press.

36


37/53


Lineberger, M. H., & Calhoun, K. S. (1983). Assertive behavior in Black andWhite American undergraduates. The Journal of Psychology 113 , 139-148.

Magno, C. (2003). The relationship between the attitude towards technical

education and achievement in mathematics and science . An unpublishedmasters thesis, Ateneo de Manila University, Philippines.

McFall, R. M., & Lillesand, D. B. (1971). Behavior rehearsal with modelling andcoaching in assertion training. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 77 , 313-323.

Meece, J., Eccles-Parsons, J et al. (1982). Sex Differences in Math Achievement:Toward a Model of Academic Choice. Psychological Bulletin, 91 , 324-348.

Mohr, P. (2006). NCTL: Engineering skills should be assessed. Education Daily,39 , 81.

Muchinsky, P. M. (1993). Validation of intelligencer and mechanical aptitude testsin selecting employees for manufacturing jobs. Journal of Business and Psychology, 7 , 373-382.

Ness, M. K., Donnan, H. H., & Jenkins, J. (1983). Race as an interpersonalvariable in negative assertion. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 39 , 361-369.

Newport and Elms (1997). Efective engineers. International Journal for Engineering Education, 13 , 325-332.

Niikura, R. (1999). Assertiveness among Japanese, Malaysian, Filipino, and U.S.white-collar workers. The Journal of Social Psychology, 139 , 690-700.

Oliver, J. S. & Nichols, B. K. (2001). Intellectual independence as a persistenttheme in the literature of science eduction: 1900-1950. School Science and Mathematics, 101 , 49-58.

Paterson, R. J. (2000). The assertiveness workbook . Oakland CA: NewHarbinger Publications.

Poteat, W. L. (1901). The laboratory as a means of culture. School Science, 1 (6),285-287.

Santi, P. M. and Higgins, J. D. (2005). Preparing geologists for careers inengineering geology and hydrogeology. Journal of Geoscience Education , 53,513-522.

Scinta, C. (2006, July 26). U.S. firms search for technical talent. Wall StreetJournal, p. B2D

37


38/53


Scriven, M. (1976). Reasoning . New York: McGraw-Hill.

Shuster, L. A. (2005). U.S. Students Perform below Average on InternationalMath and Problem-Solving Test. Civil Engineering, 75 , 25.

Sternberg, R. J. (2003). A broad view of intelligence: The theory of successfulintelligence. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 55 , 139-154.

Sternberg, R. J., Castejn, J.L., Prieto, M.D., Hautamki, J., & Grigorenko, E. L.(2001). Confirmatory factor analysis of the sternberg triarchic abilities test inthree international samples an empirical test of the triarchic theory of intelligence.European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17 , 1-16.

Sternberg, R. J., Conway, B. E., Ketron, J. L., & Bernstein, M. (1981). People'sconception of intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 37-55.

The Graduate Aptitude Test in Engineering (GATE) (2006). Wikipedia.com

Vyom Technosoft (2006). The Graduate Aptitude Test in Engineering

Yoshioka, M. (2000). Substantive differences in the assertiveness of low-incomeAfrican American, Hispanic, and Caucasian Women. The Journal of Psychology,134 , 243-250.

Zane, N. W. S., Sue, S., Hu, L., & Kwon, J. H. (1991). Asian American assertion:A social learning analysis of cultural differences. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38 , 63-70.

Appendix A

Engineering Characteristics Survey Questionnaire

1. How do you show your expertise in different situations in being an Engineering student?

2. How do you apply engineering theories in your everyday life?

3. What are the instances that an Engineer needs to be assertive ?

4. In what ways can an Engineer be independent in his intellectual thinking ? 5. What do you think are other personality traits or characteristics that would make you an

effective engineer?

38


39/53


Appendix B

Items in the Pretest Form

1. I am inclined to fix broken things in the house.2. I hate to buy things in hardware stores.3. I love to help out anyone in fixing broken things at home.4. I am not good at estimating precisely sizes of any objects.5. I do manual computation if there is no available calculator.6. I am afraid to explore all the features of the computer because it might be damaged.7. I like to tinker with things.8. I cannot imagine myself driving a bulldozer in action.9. I use gadgets and machines to make my work easier.10. I am not bothered every time I see flooding as an effect of ill-constructed drainage

systems.11. I make wise use of my body in any physical activity with my knowledge about the

principles of force.12. My family does not rely on me to fix anything that goes wrong in the comfort room.13. I use available batteries and wires to produce light if there is no electricity.14. I cannot make a way if there is a leak in the water pipes.15. I am likely to prevent fire accidents through my knowledge of flame formation.16. I am not usually relied on to check appliances if something is wrong with it.17. I choose appliances with low power output to save on electricity.18. I cannot be expected to keep a complete set of tools in the house.19. I tend to measure the length of objects even without any ruler.20. My family does not expect me to fix broken objects.21. I am likely to easily size up any object without using any gadget at hand.22. I am not likely to pinpoint the damage that occurs in an appliance if it is broken.23. I am likely to estimate the velocity of a moving car when I cross the street.24. I do not know the brand of appliances that are durable.25. I know how to choose the right materials in building objects.26. I am less likely to improvise tools when building objects.27. I tend to predict the outcome of events using fundamental principles in engineering.28. There are a lot of broken objects in our house because I cannot easily remedy them.29. I find it easy to detect problems in defective appliances.30. I am least likely consulted by my relatives on any building construction.31. I like to fix defective objects in the house.32. It is unlikely for me to remedy water leaks from the ceiling during heavy rains.33. I take precautions given my knowledge on proper handling of appliances.34. I am least likely expected to fix anything that goes wrong with our electricity.35. I am likely to cut the pizza pie evenly across its radius.36. I do not care about bringing out solutions to disaster mitigation.

37. I tend to calculate the amount of calories that I can burn after eating.38. I have little concern over the problems of the countrys housing industry.39. I am inclined to approximate the amount of heat required in cooking foods.40. I do not go around the lawn to check the house after a heavy rain.41. I am most likely the handyman at home.42. I do not know how to use variety of tools in the house.43. I know the good materials needed in constructing durable objects.44. I am not usually relied on to help build things in the house.45. I most likely know how durable a material is by its mere look and appearance.46. I do not know what to do with the car when it suddenly stops while driving.

39


40/53


47. I like to handle building tents during outings and picnics.48. I have little involvement in planning our house renovation.49. I can easily operate new appliances in the house without reading their manuals first.50. I am less likely expected to fix a busted faucet or shower.51. I tend to inspect the drainage outside the house after a heavy rain.52. I do not tend to keep scrap materials for future use.53. I can use varied ways to fix clogged water drains.54. I can easily estimating the cost needed in building an object.55. I am unable to create an object with limited resources.56. I can jumpstart an object if there is faulty wiring.57. I am unlikely to be approached in operating electronic devices.58. I am expected to demonstrate the operation of any electronic devices.59. I am likely to throw away scrap materials than recycle them to build something else.60. I can use alternative materials to create an object.61. I like watching repairmen when they are fix something.62. I am not interested to know the processes involved in making a gadget.63. I enjoy looking at electronic gadgets in stores.64. I dislike inventing things.65. I enjoy doing computations.66. I do not rely on mathematical solutions in arriving at conclusions.67. I like subjects that use mathematical formulas and equations.68. I am not interested to watch shows that feature electronic gadgets.69. I like using formula to solve problems.70. I hate science fiction movies.71. I think that the scientific method is important in giving accurate data.72. I dislike learning anything about science.73. I find numbers exciting.74. I am not interested in watching car shows.75. I like thinking of different ways to quantify objects.76. I hate studying about the universe and the solar system.77. I love to collect tools and gadgets.78. I hate talking about buildings and construction.79. I can easily solve mathematical problems just by looking at the given parameters.

80. I enjoy any math subject.81. I enjoy making models of objects.82. I like to help others who are poor in math.83. I enjoy teaching people who have difficulty in problem solving.84. I can easily visualize how a machine works.85. I am able to translate my imagination into physical objects.86. I love playing building blocks.87. I enjoy solving brainteasers and jig-saw puzzles.88. I enjoy looking for various ways to solve a problem.89. I like assessing the designs of others.90. I enjoy solving word problems.91. I enjoy using quantitative approaches in solving problems.92. I am interested to know how each of my body systems work.

93. I enjoy using various softwares in solving a problem.94. I like creating computer programs that efficiently handle tasks that are time-consuming.

95. I enjoy using mathematical equations for varied purposes.96. I can easily detect any malfunction of a machine.97. I enjoy crossword puzzles.98. I find thinking out of the box difficult to do.99. I dislike explaining things in a scientific manner.100. I think that it is only through scientific reasoning that I could speculate how the world

works.

40


41/53


101. I enjoy following step-by-step procedure in completing tasks.102. I like generating conclusions using accurate facts.103. I am not interested in designing any product.104. I do not enjoy playing games of chance.105. I love doing tasks that engage me to use various strategies.106. I enjoy playing magic cubes.107. I love solving puzzles and mazes.108. I hate scrutinizing every detail of things.109. I love watching suspense and detective films.110. I appreciate the wonders of computers.111. I love to explore on new computer softwares.112. I enjoy surfing in using the internet .113. I do not enjoy building systems on how things work.114. I love science subjects.115. I hate to assemble anything.116. I enjoy computer games.117. I dislike playing with puzzles.118. I enjoy playing chess.119. I enjoy films that require me to analyze the story.120. I love playing strategy games.121. I gather necessary information before making decisions.122. I need not validate an accepted theory.123. I usually observe before making any judgment.124. I do not feel that discussing things helps clarify my ideas as well as those of others.125. I support my claims with facts and evidences.126. I am impressed with people who do not stand for their own belief.127. I enjoy exploring ideas than verifying data from others.128. I do not question some ideas even if they do not seem to work.129. I rely on textbooks for the information I need to do a task.130. I am not convinced with the outcomes of science and technology.131. I like to verify information before accepting them at face value.132. I do not find it necessary to ask questions about lessons from my teachers.133. I believe that an experiment is the best way to prove an assumption.

134. I hate to challenge the beliefs of other people.135. I love to pursue an idea when others are against it.136. I do not enjoy classes where the teacher dominates the discussion.137. I rely on experts opinion rather than exploring on my own.138. I do not like to probe further into the explanation of my teacher for fear that I might

flank in the course.139. I believe that there is a single right way of doing things.140. I usually do not expect rewards for performing well in class.141. I believe that any policy should be open for discussion before it gets implemented.142. I need not look for the scientific evidence when faced with unusual events.143. I believe that learning is acquiring accepted truths than rethinking knowledge in our

own terms.144. I easily believe in what an authority figure is saying about things.

145. I discern first on my own before consulting with others.146. I believe that students learn best if they agree with authority.147. I am confident that the directions I give are correct.148. I often feel that my personal opinion in an issue does not count at all.149. I make firm goals and decisions to obtain success in my chosen career.150. I believe that teachers and students do not need to have an academic discourse in

the classroom.151. I fully trust my abilities in doing certain tasks.152. I enjoy solving problems without doubt in producing excellent solutions.153. I can anticipate problems that may arise in implementing projects.

41


42/53


154. I can finish a task by myself.155. I can effectively give instructions in accomplishing a task.156. I am not easily swayed by the ideas of others.157. I love to solve mathematical problems by myself.158. I enjoy reasoning out technically with others.159. I can decide on my own during critical circumstances.160. I take chances and probabilities to pursue my idea even without the help of others.161. I support my ideas with knowledge-based information.162. I believe that I have the competency for an engineering course.163. I am certain I get a high score in a math intelligence test.164. I usually assess the accuracy of facts before I accept them.165. I believe in things that can demonstrate its usefulness in whatever I am doing.166. I conduct my own inquiry to find the truthfulness of things.167. I love to explore multiple sources to verify a fact.168. I believe that conclusions are valid only when based upon scientific observations.169. I think that the scientific method is the most accurate way in arriving at new

knowledge.170. I support conclusions that I deduced from accurate evidences.171. I believe that the teacher is the ultimate source of knowledge.172. I do not resist tradition even when it hinders my development.173. I hate teachers that discourage students from arguing with their ideas in class.174. I challenge others to change their predetermined roles to produce alternative ones.175. I love to argue with others especially with people of authority.176. I am not comfortable to be working in a team.177. I prefer to work on my own first before I get derailed with the inefficiency of others.178. I like teachers who know how to facilitate learning in the classroom.179. I tend to be overly critical of the ideas of others.180. I can work with a team, but I need to do my tasks first before I get contaminated with

how others work.181. I express my thoughts freely during discussions.182. I rather be nice to someone than face any confrontations.183. I love to actively participate in group activities.184. I am reluctant to express my opinions, especially when others do not seem to agree

with me.185. I make sure I give my ideas in a discussion.186. I give up easily when engaging even in a simple debate with friends.187. I make sure to inform other people what needs to be done immediately.188. I feel uncertain about discussing new ideas.189. I like convincing people to follow my ideas.190. I can am submissive to the whims of others.191. I make sure that I contribute ideas during discussions.192. I tend to get the approval of others before my idea gets through.193. I take the risk of informing people about the problem even though I know it will hurt

them.194. I have difficulty in responding to the arguments of others.195. I take a stand to defend my beliefs.

196. I prefer to keep silent about what I think for fear that others might not like it.197. I usually support my claims so that others will accept my idea.198. I am confident that what I will say and do could be acceptable by others.199. If an opinion is flawed I can easily disagree with it.200. I feel that my participation is important in every project I undertake.201. I call the attention of others who are doing things the wrong way.202. I easily could express to others what bothers me.203. I make sure I finish what I am supposed to say before others get their way.204. I can tell other people to stop if they are annoying me.205. I cannot tolerate accepting rules and policies that are flawed.

42


43/53


206. I can tactfully express my disagreement with the opinions of others without hurtingtheir feelings.

207. I enjoy arguing with others when necessary.208. I can easily tell others what I feel about them even at the expense of their feelings.209. I can confidently answer questions in order to get the position I want.210. I can easily voice out my opinion regarding a matter even to people of authority.211. I stand up to what I believe is right.212. I can point out the mistakes of others without hurting their feelings.213. I can defend my own viewpoints no matter what others say.214. I can advice anyone to go straight to the point when engaging in a discussion with

me.215. I easily get frustrated when I am not given a chance to talk.216. I seldom take pride in my accomplishments.217. I am too dependent upon the opinions of others.218. I can easily discuss my ideas without showing disrespect with people of authority.219. I spend a lot of time planning that it leaves me too little time for implementing

anything.220. I cannot easily accept the viewpoints of others.221. I tend to beat around the bush when I express my ideas.222. I get discouraged if my opinion is not solicited by my peers.223. I love to argue just for the sake of argument.224. I easily accept ideas at face value rather than ask more questions about them.225. I can easily tell my superiors if I cannot tackle a task long before they would discover

that I have not done anything about it.226. I just keep quiet when someone argues with me.227. I easily show outbursts of temper.228. I say things in my mind even at the expense of hurting others.229. I can argue with anyone that women can be good engineers.230. I get easily overwhelmed when caught in a crowd of opposing ideas.231. I feel uncomfortable facing others whom I know do not like my ideas.232. I am described to be straight forward even with people whom I seldom deal with.233. I stand out in a crowd because of the brilliant ideas I give.234. I rather keep quiet when facing an uncomfortable situation than speaking up my

mind.235. I love to hear from others what they think about my ideas.236. I speak up what easily comes to my mind without considering the feelings of others.237. I have difficulty in telling others what I feel when I am in an uncomfortable situation.238. I cannot stand pressure when faced with difficulty in doing a task.239. I am overly impatient with people who tend to argue with me.240. I cannot easily speak up for my rights even if others are already hurting my feelings.

Appendix C

Factor Loadings

Component1 2 3 4

item1 0.512935item2 0.481538item3 0.558332item4 0.46251item5

43


44/53


item6item7 0.617517item8 0.538428item9item10item11 0.41187 0.542488item12 0.422346item13item14 0.533252item15 0.428465item16 0.536117item17 0.547442item18 0.838947item19 0.46466item20 0.530962item21item22 -0.43194 -0.6271item23item24item25 0.584475item26 -0.594 -0.47053item27 0.696474item28 -0.73988item29 0.535058item30 -0.55794item31 0.471739item32 0.609731item33 0.429233 0.440907item34 0.784736item35item36 0.572421item37item38 0.798228item39 0.501908item40 0.688884item41 0.48045item42item43 0.437115item44 -0.43194 -0.6271item45 0.461782item46 -0.49855item47 0.405139item48item49 0.404042item50 -0.41849item51 0.523805item52item53 0.625485item54 -0.57386item55

44


45/53


item56 0.532365item57 -0.67231item58 0.609731item59 -0.40429item60 0.437033item61 0.507948item62 -0.61902item63 0.410656item64 0.507564item65 0.488117item66 0.51305 0.551679item67 0.407306item68 0.534759item69 0.489515 0.416114item70item71 0.484562item72 0.435028item73 0.40109item74 0.448181item75 0.417305item76 -0.51054item77 0.553948item78 0.441854item79 0.401046 0.477479item80 -0.55658item81 0.414102item82item83item84item85 0.451895item86 0.441032item87item88 0.417284 0.48341item89item90 0.518454item91 0.464253item92 0.476683item93 0.565831item94 0.514582item95 0.547287item96 0.528332item97 0.679795item98item99item100item101 0.4121 0.458825item102item103 0.589009item104 0.481184item105 0.498296 0.495203

45


46/53


item106item107 0.443574item108 -0.40661 -0.54208item109 0.505033item110 0.760738item111item112 0.539781item113 -0.4636 -0.406item114item115 -0.53651 -0.45689item116 0.621547item117 -0.57042item118item119 0.443257item120 0.682689item121 0.584206item122item123 0.435767 0.453982item124 -0.60603item125 0.481493 0.448807item126 -0.62563item127 0.734402item128 -0.61172item129 -0.71224 -0.48082item130 -0.42072item131 0.598901item132 -0.62782 -0.43626item133 0.401974item134item135 0.471493item136 -0.45943item138 -0.40428 -0.43936item139item140 -0.56256item141 0.682725 0.402714item143 -0.55777item145item147 0.441529item149 0.457287item151 0.59465item152item153 0.620779item154item155 0.414337item156 -0.46537item157 0.476361item158 0.424969item159 0.610599item160 0.538209item161 0.615823

46


47/53


item162 0.529086item163 0.410947item164 0.584676item165 0.57434item166 0.472081item167 0.49181item168 0.438345item169 0.500371item170 0.455313 0.446085item171item172item173 0.442211item174 0.631754 0.408025item175item176item177item178 0.738229item179 0.578598item180item181item182item183item184 -0.69697item185 0.409812 0.407655item186item187 0.422537item188item189item190item191 0.447876item192 -0.45628item193 0.415401item194 -0.74792item195 0.564552 0.455935item196 -0.6281item197 0.580962item198 0.411103item199 -0.53744item200item201 0.502361item202 0.403861 0.456802item203 0.40906item204 0.453943item205item206item207 0.453978item208 -0.5943item209 0.531564item210item211 0.541114 0.423452

47


48/53


item212 0.452338item213 0.407601 0.487064item214 0.578371 0.468505item215 0.431705item216item217 -0.49067 -0.51477 -0.4432item218 0.459647item219 -0.4131item220 -0.43017item221item222item223 -0.57292item224item225 0.444372item226 -0.63343item227 -0.54378item228 -0.60266item229 0.644436item230 0.402577item231 0.490669 0.514766 0.443199item232 0.44202item233 0.560605item234 -0.68045item235item236 -0.56307item237 -0.41329item238 -0.49257item239item240 -0.5043 -0.41057

Appendix D

Model Fit Summary

CMIN

Model NPAR CMIN DF P CMIN/DFDefault model 8 .889 2 .641 .444Saturated model 10 .000 0Independence model 4 75.956 6 .000 12.659

RMR, GFI

Model RMR GFI AGFI PGFIDefault model .001 .990 .948 .198Saturated model .000 1.000Independence model .014 .516 .194 .310

48


49/53


Baseline Comparisons

Model NFIDelta1RFI

rho1IFI

Delta2TLI

rho2 CFI

Default model .988 .965 1.015 1.048 1.000Saturated model 1.000 1.000 1.000Independence model .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

Parsimony-Adjusted Measures

Model PRATIO PNFI PCFIDefault model .333 .329 .333Saturated model .000 .000 .000Independence model 1.000 .000 .000

NCP

Model NCP LO 90 HI 90Default model .000 .000 4.878Saturated model .000 .000 .000

Independence model 69.956 45.487 101.874

FMIN

Model FMIN F0 LO 90 HI 90Default model .020 .000 .000 .111Saturated model .000 .000 .000 .000Independence model 1.726 1.590 1.034 2.315

RMSEA

Model RMSEA LO 90 HI 90 PCLOSEDefault model .000 .000 .235 .671

Independence model .515 .415 .621 .000

AIC

Model AIC BCC BIC CAICDefault model 16.889 18.940 31.342 39.342Saturated model 20.000 22.564 38.067 48.067Independence model 83.956 84.982 91.183 95.183

ECVI

Model ECVI LO 90 HI 90 MECVIDefault model .384 .409 .520 .430Saturated model .455 .455 .455 .513Independence model 1.908 1.352 2.634 1.931

HOELTER

Model HOELTER.05HOELTER

.01Default model 297 456Independence model 8 10Minimization: .015

49


50/53


51/53


41. I cannot make a way if there is a leak in the water pipes.42. I am not interested in watching car shows.43. I love to pursue an idea when others are against it.44. I have difficulty in responding to the arguments of others.45. I am likely to prevent fire accidents through my knowledge of flame formation.46. I like thinking of different ways to quantify objects.47. I do not enjoy classes where the teacher dominates the discussion.48. I prefer to keep silent about what I think for fear that others might not like my opinion.49. I am not relied on to check appliances if something is wrong with it.50. I hate studying about the universe and the solar system.51. I rely on experts opinion rather than exploring on my own.52. I support my claims so that others will accept my idea.53. I choose appliances with low power output to save on electricity.54. I love to collect tools and gadgets.55. I do not like to probe further into the explanation of my teacher for fear that I might

flank in the course.56. I am confident that what I will say and do could be acceptable to others.57. I cannot be expected to keep a complete set of tools in the house.58. I hate talking about buildings and construction.59. I believe that there is a single right way of doing things.60. If an opinion is flawed, I can easily disagree with it.61. I tend to measure the length of objects even without any ruler.62. I can easily solve mathematical problems just by looking at the given parameters.63. I believe that any policy should be open for discussion before it gets implemented.64. I call the attention of others who are doing things the wrong way.65. My family does not expect me to fix broken objects.66. I enjoy any math subject.67. I need not look for the scientific evidence when faced with unusual events.68. I can easily express to others what bothers me.69. I am likely to easily size up any object without using any gadget at hand.70. I enjoy making models of objects.71. I believe that learning is acquiring accepted truths than re-thinking knowledge in our

own terms.

72. I make sure I finish what I am supposed to say before others get their way.73. I am not likely to pinpoint the damage that occurs in an appliance if it is broken.74. I enjoy teaching people who have difficulty in problem solving.75. I easily believe in what authority figure is saying about things.76. I can tell other people to stop if they are annoying me.77. I am likely to estimate the velocity of a moving car when I cross the street.78. I can easily visualize how a machine works.79. I discern first on my own before consulting with others.80. I cannot tolerate accepting rules and policies that are flawed.81. I do not know the brand of appliances that are durable.82. I am able to translate my imagination into physical objects.83. I believe that students learn best if they agree with authority.84. I can tactfully express my disagreement with the opinions of others without hurting

their feelings.85. I am less likely to improvise tools when building objects.86. I had great fun with playing building blocks when I was young.87. I am confident that the directions I give are correct.88. I enjoy arguing with others when necessary.89. I tend to predict the outcome of events using fundamental principles in engineering.90. I enjoy solving brainteasers and jig-saw puzzles.91. I feel that my personal opinion in an issue does not count at all.92. I can easily tell others what I feel about them even at the expense of their feelings.93. There are a lot of broken objects in our house because I cannot easily remedy them.

51


52/53


94. I enjoy looking for various ways to solve a problem.95. I make firm goals and decisions to obtain success in my chosen career.96. I can confidently answer questions to prove my stand on certain issues.97. I find it easy to detect problems in defective appliances.98. I like assessing the designs of engineers.99. I believe that teachers and students do not need to have an academic discourse in

the classroom.100. I can easily voice out my opinion regarding a matter even to people of authority.101. I am least likely consulted by my relatives on any building construction.102. I enjoy solving word problems.103. I fully trust my abilities in doing certain tasks.104. I can point out the mistakes of others without hurting their feelings.105. I like to fix defective objects in the house.106. I enjoy using quantitative approaches in solving problems.107. I enjoy solving problems without doubt in producing excellent solutions.108. I can advice anyone to go straight to the point when engaging in a discussion with

me.109. It is unlikely for me to remedy water leaks from the ceiling during heavy rains.110. I am interested to know how each of my body systems work.111. I can finish a task by myself.112. I easily get frustrated when I am not given the chance to talk.113. I am least likely expected to fix anything that goes wrong with our electricity.114. I enjoy using various softwares in solving a problem.115. I love to solve mathematical problems by myself.116. I take pride in my accomplishments.117. I am likely to cut the pizza pie evenly across its radius.118. I like creating computer programs that efficiently handle tasks that are time-

consuming.119. I enjoy reasoning out technically with others.120. I am too dependent upon the opinions of others.121. I tend to calculate the amount of calories that I can burn after each meal.122. I enjoy using mathematical equations for varied purposes.123. I can decide on my own during critical circumstances.

124. I can easily discuss my ideas without showing disrespect with people of authority.125. I have little concern over the problems of the countrys housing industry.126. I can easily detect any malfunction of a machine.127. I take chances and probabilities to pursue my idea even without the help of others.128. I cannot easily accept the viewpoints of others.129. I am inclined to approximate the amount of heat required in cooking foods.130. I enjoy crossword puzzles.131. I believe that I have the competency of an engineering course.132. I tend to beat around the bush when I express my ideas.133. I am most likely the handyman at home.134. I find thinking out of the box difficult to do.135. I am certain I get a high score in a math intelligence test.136. I get discouraged if my opinion is not solicited by my peers.

137. I do not know how to use a variety of tools in the house.138. I dislike explaining things in a scientific manner.139. I assess the accuracy of facts before I accept them.140. I love to argue just for the sake of argument.141. I know the good materials needed in constructing durable objects.142. I know that through scientific reasoning, I can speculate how the world works.143. I conduct my own inquiry to find the truthfulness of things.144. I easily accept ideas at face value rather than ask more questions about them.145. I am not relied on to help build things in the house.146. I enjoy following step-by-step procedure in completing tasks.

52


53/53

in search for qualified engineers: construction of the best engineering traits (bet) inventory

Documents