Development of a Grit Measurement Scale for Thai Dramatic Arts Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed to achieve two main objectives: 1) investigating the components and predictors of grit among Thai Dramatic Arts students, hereafter referred to as TDART students, in a Thai college; and 2) establishing and validating a grit scale specifically designed for TDART students. A total of three hundred and forty-five TDART students were selected using the Multi-stage Random Sampling method to participate in this study. The research instrument used was a grit measurement survey comprising 60 rating-scale items. Mean and standard deviation were employed for data analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess construct validity. The findings revealed two distinct components of TDART students’ grit: passion and perseverance, forming a five-dimensional structure for the scale. The grit scale exhibited strong reliability with a value of 0.946, and the power of discrimination (rxy) ranged from 0.247 to 0.586. The results indicated acceptable construct validity for the grit scale, as evidenced by goodness of fit indices meeting criteria (Chi-Square=23.768, df=23, X2/df=1.033, p-value=0.417, CFI=1.000, TLI=1.000, RMSEA= 1.000, and SRMR=0.028).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".