Fernandez, J., and Mateo, M. A. (1993). The development and factorial validation of the Academic Setting Evaluation Questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement 53:425–35.
Comments: The 33-item Academic Setting Evaluation Questionnaire (ASEQ) assesses faculty satisfaction with working conditions, social climate, and relationships with students.
Scale Construction: The original ASEQ contained 69 items and was validated with 800 university professors. Factor analytic procedures yielded six factors (dissatisfaction with the institution, social climate, student/faculty relationship, performance of center services, teaching autonomy, and faculty selection and evaluation) and a theta coefficient of
0.98 was obtained. The second version contained 59 items. The revised version, which is described below, contains 33 items based on the first three factors.
Sample: A random sample of 748 university professors from the Complutense University participated in this study. For purposes of data analysis, the sample was separated into two equal groups (cross-validation).
Reliability: The alpha coefficients were 0.89 (satisfaction with working conditions and social climate) and 0.87 (rela- tionship with students). The total reliability was 0.90.
Factor Analysis: Principal component factor analysis with orthogonal and oblique rotations were conducted. A three-factor solution was accepted, which accounted for about 78 percent of the variance. There are 19 items on satisfaction with working conditions (1–4, 6, 9–20, 22, and 23); five items on social climate (5, 7, 8, 26, and 33);
and seven items on relationship with students (21, 24, 25, 27–29, and 32.). Two items (30 and 31) failed to load on one of the three factors.
Data Analysis: Homogeneity and validity indices are provided. In addition, the results of a cross validation study are described.
References
Fernandez, J., et al. (1995). Evaluation of the academic setting in Spain. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 11:133–37.
Fraser, B. J., and Treagust, D. F. (1986). Validity and use of an instrument for assessing classroom psychosocial environment in higher education. Higher Education 15:37–57.
Kremer, J. F. (1990). Construct validity of multiple measures in teaching, research, and service and reliability of peer ratings. Journal of Educational Psychology 82:213–18.
Mateo, M. A., and Fernandez, J. (1995). Evaluation of the setting in which university faculty carry out their teaching and research functions: The ASEQ. Educational and Psychological Measurement 55:329–34.
Academic Setting Evaluation Questionnaire
1. The material conditions in which I carry out my work are satisfactory.
2. Economically it is made possible for me to carry out my research.
3. I am given institutional help to publish my studies.
4. I consider my university teaching activities to be fairly paid.
5. I feel supported by my colleagues in the activities I carry out as a faculty member.
6. The academic context encourages my professional work.
7. There is satisfactory academic communication among the members of my department.
8. My human relationship with my departmental colleagues favours my academic/professional activity.
9. Teacher selection systems are suitable.
10. Teaching activity control systems are appropriate.
11. There are clear criteria for evaluating research activities.
12. There is agreement between my expectations of what a faculty member should be and what s/he in fact is.
13. Society appreciates the work done by university faculty.
14. University institutions stimulate me to improve as a university faculty member.
15. Teacher promotion systems are appropriate.
16. I have been prepared institutionally to carry out my duties as a researcher suitably.
17. The prospects for my work as a faculty member are favorable.
18. Future prospects as a university researcher are favorable.
19. I find adequate institutional aid to solve my professional problems as a faculty member.
20. I have sufficient time to carry out my research duties.
21. Students show interest in the subject that I teach.
22. University institutions encourage my research activity.
23. The civil service system is appropriate for carryout faculty’s teaching and research functions.
24. Students ask about their doubts in the time set aside to receive them.
25. Students’ opinions are taken into account with the aim of improving my teaching.
26. The faculty of the department cooperate in the preparation/execution of the department’s research programs.
27. Each year I take students’ opinions into account when working out my teaching methodology.
28. I adapt my teaching to the particular characteristics/demands of each group of students.
29. Students’ work adapts easily to the demands of my subject.
30. Labor contracts would enable faculty duties to be carried out better.
31. Some “objective” system of evaluation of teach faculty member’s research work is necessary.
32. Students show differential evaluation of each faculty member according to his/her teaching quality.
33. I feel supported by my departmental colleagues in my research.
Scoring: A seven-point Likert format ranges from 1 = the lowest level of agreement to 7 = the highest level of agreement.