Development and Evaluation of a Concentration Questionnaire for Students
in Classroom
I-Hua Chen*, Ya-Ting C. Yang, Wan-Chi Wu, and Szu-Wen Hsu
National Cheng Kung University
No.1, University Road, Tainan City 701, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Email: aholechen@gmail.com
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to develop a concentration questionnaire for senior and
vocational high school students appropriate for in-class use. A questionnaire was developed based
on Knudsen’s (2007) model—Functional Components of Attention (FCA), which includes four
factors: salience filters, sensitivity control, competitive selection and working memory. 140 senior
high school students completed the questionnaire, and exploratory factor analysis was used to test
the validity and reliability of the data. Five questions, out of a total of 24, were below the standard
value and therefore were deleted. Factor analysis assigned the remaining 19 questions to one of
four sub-scales, with Cronbach’s α values of .83, .84, .88, and .87, respectively and an overall α of
.95 for the inventory, which demonstrates excellent construct validity and reliability for the
questionnaire. To further elaborate these findings, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) is
recommended for future studies when testing the FCA model with empirical data. The developed
concentration questionnaire can be applied to a variety of classroom learning situations, such as elearning, and should assist educational practitioners in evaluating students’ in-class concentration,
enabling teachers to understand the impact of an instructional activity on students’ concentration.
Introduction
The Importance of Student In-class Concentration
“In-class concentration” refers to students’ ability to focus on classroom instructional activities (Lin,
Huang, & Liu 2010). From the perspective of Information Processing Theory, messages or stimuli can only enter
working memory, be processed, and stored when students attend to instructional activities. Therefore, students’ inclass concentration is fundamental for information processing and is often regarded as the key element for learning
(Lin & Chou 2010; Lin et al. 2011).
Some informal investigations, primarily conducted by the media, claim that students in Taiwan have
difficulty focusing during class. For instance, one questionnaire survey (with 852 respondents) administered to
primary and junior high school teachers by the magazine “Education, Parenting, Family Lifestyle” revealed that
94% of teachers deemed their students did not demonstrate sufficient concentration in class (Hsu 2008).
Furthermore, a research study carried out with 300 Taiwanese adolescents, aged from 15 to 22, by Research
International in 2007 reported that 92% of students expressed that they were unable to concentrate in class. Based on
this evidence provided by the media, it would appear that Taiwanese students do not demonstrate sufficient
concentration during class. However, due to the lack of verified and validated questionnaires, the effectiveness of
these results remains questionable.
Prior Research on In-class Concentration
The lack of appropriate concentration measurement scale also reveals the inadequacy of research in this
field. In Taiwan, related empirical research can generally be divided into two categories: (a) concentration training
for students with learning disabilities, including the testing and verification of the effectiveness of concentration
training interventions for students with special learning needs (Dai & Li 2007; Lin 1991); and (b) discussion about
the function of attention under ordinary circumstances, particularly analyzing students’ attention under ordinary
situations from an experimental psychology perspective (Chou, Chiu, & Song 1993; Lin & Chou 2010). However,
the research results from special needs samples are difficult to apply in other contexts. Additionally, Lin et al. (2010)
argue that the function of attention discussed from an experimental psychological point of view is unable to capture
students’ concentration status in real classroom settings. They suggest that further studies based on real classroom
scenarios should be conducted. Hence, from an academic research perspective, there is still a huge gap in the
literature on in-class concentration. Furthermore, from the perspective of practitioners, it is important to understand
students’ attention in authentic classroom settings, since the level of in-class concentration shows students’
concentration during instructional activities, thus enabling teachers to evaluate the impact of specific instructional
activities on students’ concentration.
The Research of Measurement Scales for Concentration in Class
Research in the past years mainly focus on function of attention under ordinary circumstances, and
therefore the development of measurement scales was remained in that area (Chou et al. 1993; Chu 1997; Lin &
Chou 2010). This type of measurement cannot be directly applied to concentration level in academic subject
teaching classroom.
A representative concentration questionnaire developed by Lin et al. (2010) has been verified and validated
to measure students’ concentration in class. However, the scenario in the measurement scale is Biology class in a
university, and the questionnaire content is mainly involved with Biology teaching activities, which limited its
research development in other subjects. In addition, Weinstein and Palmer (1990) as well as Cheng, Fu, & Sau
(2006) both developed measurement scales (Learning and Study Strategies Inventory) for high school students.
However, although the sub-scale can measure senior high school students’ concentration in class, both of them build
the measurement from the aspect of students’ learning strategies (metacognition), which measured only students’
sustained attention but overlooked other aspects (e.g., executive and orienting attention). As a result, a lack of multidimensional scaling concept (Lin & Chou 2010) is found in these measurement scales.
Purpose of the Current Research
In light of the above discussion, more empirical research studies are needed on the subject of in-class
concentration in Taiwan, and a verified and validated measurement scale is needed for this type of research. Hence,
the current study aims to develop a concentration questionnaire based on Knudsen’s (2007) model - Functional
Components of Attention (FCA), including four factors: salience filters, sensitivity control, competitive selection,
and working memory. The concentration questionnaire was designed for authentic classrooms contexts for senior
and vocational high school students. The FCA was designed from a neurophysiological perspective and can fully
explain the interaction processes between students and teachers in the classroom and takes into account multidimensional scaling principles. Thus, the FCA can serve as the theoretical framework for the development of
measurement scales evaluating students’ in-class concentration. The purpose of the current paper is to develop a
valid and reliable measurement questionnaire for evaluating senior and vocational high school students’ in-class
concentration.
Method
Questionnaire Construction
The first step of questionnaire construction was the formulation of assessment dimensions and topics. The
questionnaire was based on Knudsen’s (2007) model, Functional Components of Attention (FCA), which was
adapted to develop a concentration questionnaire suitable for senior and vocational high school students, containing
four sub-scales to measure students’ concentration in class: salience filters, sensitivity control, competitive selection
and working memory.
The second step of construction was an assessment of content relevance. After the initial draft of the
concentration questionnaire was prepared, one professor specializing in educational testing and evaluation, and one
professor specializing in instructional technology were invited to assess the content of the questionnaire, assigning
relevance through a triangulation method. The resulting questionnaire, with a total of 24 items, was revised
according to the expert consensus. A six-point Likert scale was adopted for each of the questionnaire items, with
higher scores associated with greater in-class concentration.
Once data was collected from the questionnaire, the final step was item analysis and Exploratory Factor
Analysis (EFA). This stage was aimed at the evaluation of preliminary reliability and validity for the measurement
scale.
Participants
Participants were 140 senior and vocational high school students from southern Taiwan, selected using
stratified non-random sampling. According to Chen, Cherng, Chen and Liu (2011), the proportion of questionnaire
items to participants should be at least one to five, thus the number of respondents for exploratory factor analysis
was deemed acceptable.
Data Analysis
Item analysis and exploratory factor analysis were conducted to establish the factorial structure of the
concentration questionnaire. Cronbach’s α coefficient was used as the criterion for testing the internal consistency of
the scale in order to establish reliability and validity.
Results
Item Analysis
Item-total correlation is one criterion for questionnaire item selection, with a minimum correlation of.30
often adopted for item selection (Li 2006). In this study, the correlation between the individual items and total scores
ranged from .37 to .79. Thus, none of the items were deleted during item analysis.
Reliability Analysis
Cronbach’s α for four sub-scales (salience filters, sensitivity control, competitive selection and working
memory) were .83, .84, .88 and .87, respectively, with an overall α of .95. This result indicates good reliability.
Exploratory Factor Analysis
To further verify the validity of the scale, EFA using principal axis factoring was used to determine
common factors, and was then processed by promax rotation to maximize the factor loadings. The results indicate
that the measurement scale contained four factors, roughly the same as the assumed model. The first EFA results
revealed that only five questions resulted in unexpected cross-factor loadings, with all loadings for these five
questions below .30. Therefore, these five questions were deleted before the second round of EFA. These results
revealed that each of the 19 questions fell into the assumed categories (as shown in Table 1) and the total explained
variance of the four factors was 59.32%.
Factor loadings
Items
1. I know the test range announced by
the teacher.
5. I notice highlighted points on the
board/screen.
8. I recognize key points when
mentioned by the teacher.
10. I understand the homework task.
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor 3
Factor 4
Salience
filters
Sensitivity
control
Competitive
selection
Working
memory
.81
-.09
.13
-.10
.58
.69
.09
.02
.02
.61
.68
-.02
.01
.16
.62
.51
.05
-.06
.20
.43
Communality
Cumulative
variance
(%)
48.27
α
.83
12. I notice when classmates answer the
teacher’s question.
14. I can shift my gaze in class according
to the teacher’s request.
18. I can highlight key points during
lectures.
19. In order to see key points on the
board/screen clearly, I fix my gaze on
the board/screen.
2. I try my best not to be absent-minded,
and to focus on lectures.
3. Even if I yawn and feel sleepy, I try to
stay focused.
4. I try not to be distracted by
classmates’ talking.
6. I can forget about things which
trouble me and remain focused in
class.
7. I can focus on teacher’s instruction.
17. Even if I feel the teaching is plain, I
remain focused in class.
9. I can organize the content of the
lecture.
11. I think about the content of the lecture.
13. I take notes and organize my own
learning.
15. I notice complicated content
mentioned by the teacher.
16. I know the key points of the lesson.
.49
.04
.21
-.04
.41
-.11
.94
.16
-.06
.87
.26
.56
-.21
.19
.60
.33
.49
.02
.04
.63
.05
-.13
.89
-.02
.68
.02
.11
.78
-.10
.63
.08
.12
.57
.02
.51
-.03
-.10
.50
.39
.52
.10
.25
.46
.07
.60
.16
-.03
.45
.22
.51
-.02
.06
-.01
.79
.67
-.17
.09
.20
.69
.64
.18
.02
-.13
.68
.57
.24
-.18
-.03
.68
.52
-.08
.10
.20
.66
.68
53.07
.84
56.51
.88
59.32
.87
Table 1: Factor loadings and communalities for each item of the concentration questionnaire
Conclusions and Areas for Future Development
The concentration questionnaire was developed for authentic classroom settings for senior and vocational
high school students. It can be applied to a variety of classroom learning situations, such as e-learning, and should
assist educational practitioners in evaluating students’ in-class concentration, enabling teachers to understand the
impact of an instructional activity on students’ concentration.
The preliminary evaluation of reliability and validity for the concentration questionnaire was established in
the present study. The results reveal good internal consistency and each of the questions fell into the theoretical
categories of Knudsen’s (2007) model—Functional Components of Attention (FCA). Based on these results,
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) will be conducted by using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to further verify
the validity of the instrument with empirical data from future studies. Additionally, the criterion-related validity will
be established with the mental status of students in class. Finally, an e-learning achievement as the external validity
and a test-retest reliability will be provided after the formal questionnaire is developed completely.
References
Chen, C. C., Cherng, B. L., Chen, S. F., & Liu, T. C. (2011). Multivariate analysis (6th ed.). Taipei: Wunan.
Cheng, S. J., Fu, T. S., & Sau, C. T. (2006). Learning strategies scale for different education phases (I): NSC89-2413-H-006021.
Chou, T. J., Chiu, S. C., & Song, S. H. (1993). Multi-dimensional attention test. Taipei: Psychological Publishing.
Chu, T. F. (1997). Chu's attention test. Taipei: VTH International Limited Company.
Dai, K. Y., & Li, Y. C. (2007). The effects of a behavioral support plan on off-task behaviors of a student with multiple
disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 25, 135-160.
Hsu, F. C. (2008). Building concentration. Education, Parenting, Family Lifestyle, 2, 116-144.
Knudsen, E. I. (2007). Fundamental components of attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 30, 57-78.
Li, M. N. (2006). An introduction to Amos and its uses in scale development: Graphics & basic. Taipei: Psychological Publishing
Lin, G. M. (1991). Effects of music activities intervention on the learning behavior of children suffering from moderate and
severe cases of mental retardation. Journal of National Taipei Teachers College, 4, 409-459.
Lin, H. Y., & Chou, T. J. (2010). The development of an attention test for elementary school children. Bulletin of Special
Education, 35(2), 29-53.
Lin, Y. C., Li, K. H., Sung, W. S., Ko, H. W., Tzeng, O. J., Hung, D. L., & Juan, C. H. (2011). The relationship between
development of attention and learning in children: A cognitive neuroscience approach. Bulletin of Educational
Psychology, 42(3), 517-541.
Lin, Y. W., Huang, T. C., & Liu, C. J. (2010). The development and application of the concentration questionnaire in science
classroom. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 18(2), 107-129.
Weinstein, C. E., & Palmer, D. R. (1990). LASSI-HS: Learning and study strategies inventory - High school version. Clearwater,
FL: H & H Publishing.