Reconsidering the measurement of student self-concept : use and misuse in a Chinese context

![CDATA[For many countries, self-concept is stated to be an important educational outcome in documents about the school curriculum at all levels (e.g., Curriculum Development Council, Hong Kong, 2001; Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, 1999). Thus, to evaluate the effectiveness of teaching and learning, the measurement of self-concept is a major concern of educators and educational researchers (Dante, 1995; Faubert, Locke, Sprinthall, & Howland, 1996; Flay, Allred, & Ordway, 2001; Kirkland-Holmes & Federlein, 1990; Schirduan, 2000). However, different researchers may use different instruments to measure self-concept changes. The choice of instruments can seriously influence the validity of findings of studies. Unless the measuring instrument has strong theoretical underpinnings and has been validated as showing strong psychometric properties for the sample under consideration, the use of an inappropriate instrument can result in misleading conclusions. Even if an appropriate instrument is used, the results derived from an analysis of the data based on the instrument can be misinterpreted. Therefore, it is essential to consider carefully the appropriate use and potential misuse of self-concept measurement instruments. One consideration in terms of the appropriateness of measurement is related to the specificity of the sample in question. Thus even the best self-concept instrument can have problems when used with students of a specific cultural background. The present chapter discusses issues of self-concept measurement with particular relevance to samples of Chinese students. In particular, the complexity of cognitive representations of Chinese students' self-concept is discussed in terms of recent theories of self-concept measurement and intervention.]]