Content validity of the Constructivist Learning in Higher Education Settings (CLHES) scale in the context of the flipped classroom in higher education

The study addresses the need to evaluate student learning experiences in flipped classroom (FC) environments in higher education, particularly in Saudi Arabia, where few studies have validated appropriate instruments. The CLHES scale (Alt, 2014), comprising eight constructivist dimensions, was adapted for FC contexts to capture both in-class and out-of-class learning experiences. The research question guiding the study is: How do flipped classroom experts assess the content validity of the CLHES scale in the context of Saudi higher education? Establishing content validity ensures the instrument measures its intended constructs and supports evidence-based evaluation of FC implementations.

The literature highlights FC as a student-centered, active learning approach that reallocates lecture time to pre-class study and uses class time for collaborative, problem-solving activities, improving engagement and outcomes. Studies report benefits such as individualized pacing through video lectures and increased teacher-student interaction. Instrumentation work in FC often emphasizes in-class aspects (e.g., competencies, readiness, design features) but lacks comprehensive tools capturing both outside- and inside-class experiences aligned with constructivist principles. The CLHES scale, with eight dimensions (construction of knowledge, learning deeply, authenticity, perspective, teacher-student interaction, prior knowledge, social interaction, cooperative dialog), is proposed as a comprehensive measure suited to FC contexts.

Design: Quantitative validation using two complementary techniques: (1) Content Validity Ratio (CVR) with expert panels; (2) Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) with a student pilot sample. Instrument adaptation: The CLHES scale (Alt, 2014) was adapted to FC contexts. It comprises 32 items across eight dimensions: Construction of knowledge (5 items), Learning deeply (4), Authenticity (4), Perspective (4), Prior knowledge (4), Lecturer/Teacher-student interaction (5), Social interaction (3), Cooperative dialog (3). Wording was adjusted to fit FC use in higher education. Participants: - Experts for CVR: 24 experts purposively selected (18 Saudi public university instructors experienced in FC; 6 FC researchers); 15 completed the evaluation (63% response rate). Experts rated each item’s essentiality on a 3-point scale (1=not relevant, 2=useful but not essential, 3=essential). - Students for EFA: Questionnaire distributed to 300 undergraduates in Saudi universities; 200 responses were obtained and analyzed (satisfying recommended EFA sample size of 150–300). Procedures and analyses: - CVR: For each item, CVR was computed from the proportion of experts rating it as essential. With N=15 experts, the critical CVR threshold was 0.49 (Lawshe, 1975). Items with CVR≥0.49 were retained; otherwise rejected. Computations were conducted in Microsoft Excel. - EFA: Conducted in SPSS with three steps: (1) Assess data suitability using Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity; (2) Factor extraction using eigenvalues>1 (Kaiser’s criterion), scree test, and parallel analysis; assess item communalities (remove items <0.30); (3) Factor rotation and interpretation using Oblimin rotation (Pattern and Structure matrices). Items with loadings <0.30 were candidates for removal, and each factor was expected to have at least three items with acceptable loadings.

- CVR results: Of 32 items, 31 met the CVR threshold (≥0.49) and were accepted; Item 16 was rejected (7 of 15 experts rated as essential; CVR=−0.07). Several items had strong agreement, e.g., Item 22 CVR=1.00 (15 essential), Items 2, 8, 11, 14, 19, 27 CVR=0.87 (14 essential). - EFA data suitability: KMO=0.904 (acceptable >0.6); Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity χ2=3311.343, df=465, p<0.001, indicating factorability. - Communalities: 31 items showed extraction communalities >0.5; Item 16 had 0.273 (<0.30) and was unsuitable, supporting its removal. - Factor extraction: Eight factors with eigenvalues >1 accounted for 59.694% of total variance (within acceptable range for social sciences). Scree plot and parallel analysis supported retaining eight factors. - Factor structure and loadings: After Oblimin rotation, all retained items loaded >0.30 on their respective factors in both Pattern and Structure matrices. Items grouped as: 1–5 (Construction of knowledge), 6–9 (Learning deeply), 10–13 (Authenticity), 14–16 (Perspective; with Item 16 ultimately removed), 17–20 (Teacher-student interaction), 21–25 (Prior knowledge), 26–28 (Social interaction), 29–31 (Cooperative dialog). Overall: The adapted CLHES scale demonstrated strong content validity and acceptable factor structure for assessing FC student learning experiences in Saudi higher education, with 31 validated items across eight dimensions.

The findings directly address the research question by demonstrating expert-supported content validity of the adapted CLHES scale for FC contexts in Saudi higher education. The CVR analysis confirmed the essentiality of 31 items, while EFA established that the items coherently represent eight constructivist dimensions aligned with FC pedagogy. The strong KMO and significant Bartlett’s test support the appropriateness of factor analysis, and the eight-factor solution explains an acceptable proportion of variance. Removing Item 16 improved construct validity, reflecting expert feedback about clarity and respondent comprehension. The validated instrument captures both in-class and out-of-class learning experiences central to FC, facilitating robust assessment of student-centered, constructivist learning processes in higher education.

The study validates the content and structure of an adapted CLHES scale for evaluating student learning experiences in flipped classrooms in Saudi higher education. Using CVR and EFA, 31 of 32 items across eight constructivist dimensions were retained, yielding a psychometrically sound instrument. The work provides a practical tool and guidelines for researchers and practitioners to assess FC quality and outcomes. Recommendations include training and supporting instructors in FC implementation, fostering active learning and student ownership, providing resources for self-paced learning, and continuously monitoring and refining FC practices. Future research should test the instrument across diverse cultural and educational contexts and explore its applicability in K–12 settings.

- The study sample is limited to higher education students in Saudi Arabia; findings may not generalize to other countries or educational levels. - K–12 learners were excluded. - Cultural and institutional differences elsewhere may yield different validity outcomes.