Development and Validation of a Scale for Measuring Instructors Attitudes toward Concept-Based or Reform-Oriented Teaching of Introductory Statistics in the Health and Behavioral Sciences

Despite more than a decade of reform efforts, students continue to experience difficulty understanding and applying statistical concepts. The predominant focus of reform has been on content, pedagogy, technology and assessment, with little attention to instructor characteristics. However, there is strong theoretical and empirical evidence that instructors’ attitudes impact the quality of teaching and learning. The objective of this study was to develop and initially validate a scale to measure instructors’ attitudes toward reform-oriented (or concept-based) teaching of introductory statistics in the health and behavioral sciences, at the tertiary level. This scale will be referred to as FATS (Faculty Attitudes Toward Statistics). Data were obtained from 227 instructors (USA and international), and analyzed using factor analysis, multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis. The overall scale consists of five sub-scales with a total of 25 items, and an overall alpha of 0.89. Construct validity was established. Specifically, the overall scale, and subscales (except perceived difficulty) plausibly differentiated between low-reform and high-reform practice instructors. Statistically significant differences in attitude were observed with respect to age, but not gender, employment status, membership status in professional organizations, ethnicity, highest academic qualification, and degree concentration. This scale can be considered a reliable and valid measure of instructors’ attitudes toward reform-oriented (concept-based or constructivist) teaching of introductory statistics in the health and behavioral sciences at the tertiary level. These five dimensions influence instructors’ attitudes. Additional studies are required to confirm these structural and psychometric properties.

💡 Research Summary

The paper addresses a notable gap in the literature on statistics education reform: while much attention has been given to curricular content, pedagogical strategies, technology, and assessment, the attitudes of instructors—an influential factor in the success of reform—have received comparatively little systematic study. To fill this void, the authors set out to develop and initially validate a psychometric instrument, the Faculty Attitudes Toward Statistics (FATS) scale, designed specifically to gauge university‑level instructors’ dispositions toward concept‑based (also termed reform‑oriented or constructivist) teaching of introductory statistics in the health and behavioral sciences.

Instrument Development
The authors began with an extensive review of theory and prior research on teacher attitudes, drawing on frameworks such as Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior and Bandura’s self‑efficacy construct. They generated an initial pool of 45 items through literature synthesis and expert consultation (including statisticians, educational psychologists, and curriculum developers). Content validity was established via a panel review, after which a pilot test with 38 instructors led to the removal of ambiguous or redundant items, resulting in a final set of 25 statements. Each item is rated on a five‑point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.”

Sample and Data Collection
Data were collected online from 227 instructors teaching introductory statistics in health‑related and behavioral‑science programs across the United States and several other countries. The sample was diverse in terms of age (28–68 years), gender (58 % male, 42 % female), and academic qualifications (31 % holding a master’s degree, 69 % a doctorate). Instructors were also classified a priori into “low‑reform” (traditional, calculation‑focused) and “high‑reform” (concept‑focused) groups based on self‑reported teaching practices.

Statistical Analyses
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with principal axis factoring and Varimax rotation was performed after confirming sampling adequacy (KMO = 0.91) and factorability (Bartlett’s test p < 0.001). Five factors with eigenvalues > 1 emerged, together accounting for 62 % of the total variance. The factors were interpreted as:

1. Perceived Utility – belief that concept‑based teaching enhances student understanding and application.
2. Self‑Efficacy – confidence in one’s ability to implement reform‑oriented methods.
3. Educational Value – perceived importance of such teaching for the discipline and professional preparation.
4. Support Needs – perceived necessity for institutional resources, training, and peer support.
5. Perceived Difficulty – perceived challenges or effort required to adopt the reform approach.

Reliability analysis yielded a Cronbach’s α of 0.89 for the overall scale; subscale alphas ranged from 0.71 (Difficulty) to 0.84 (Utility), indicating acceptable to excellent internal consistency.

Validity Evidence
Construct validity was examined through discriminant testing: high‑reform instructors scored significantly higher than low‑reform instructors on the first four factors (p < 0.01), whereas the Difficulty factor did not differentiate the groups, suggesting that perceived obstacles are not directly linked to actual practice. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis corroborated the distinctiveness of the five dimensions while also revealing a logical grouping (Utility, Value, and Support formed one cluster; Self‑Efficacy and Difficulty formed another).

Demographic analyses showed a modest but significant negative association between age and the positive attitude factors (older instructors tended to endorse lower utility, value, and support needs). No significant differences emerged for gender, employment status (tenured vs. non‑tenured), professional organization membership, ethnicity, highest degree, or disciplinary concentration.

Discussion and Implications
The findings underscore that instructor attitudes toward reform are multidimensional, with perceived benefits and institutional support being the strongest predictors of actual reform‑oriented teaching. The lack of age effects for some variables suggests that professional development initiatives may need to be tailored for more senior faculty, perhaps by emphasizing evidence of student outcomes and providing mentorship opportunities. The scale’s strong psychometric properties make it a valuable tool for researchers investigating the diffusion of statistical pedagogy reforms, as well as for administrators seeking to assess readiness for change and to evaluate the impact of faculty development programs.

Limitations and Future Directions
The authors acknowledge that the sample, while international, is skewed toward English‑speaking contexts, limiting generalizability to non‑Anglophone settings. The cross‑sectional design precludes causal inference; longitudinal studies are needed to track attitude change over time and to link attitudes with student performance metrics. Further validation work—including confirmatory factor analysis in independent samples and testing measurement invariance across cultures—is recommended.

Conclusion
The study successfully introduces the FATS instrument, a 25‑item, five‑factor scale with robust reliability (α = 0.89) and preliminary evidence of construct validity for measuring university instructors’ attitudes toward concept‑based teaching of introductory statistics in health and behavioral sciences. By providing a rigorously tested measurement tool, the authors contribute a critical resource for both scholarship and practice aimed at advancing statistical education reform. Continued research will be essential to confirm the scale’s stability across diverse contexts and to explore how attitudinal shifts translate into improved teaching practices and student learning outcomes.