Construction and Initial Validation of the Student-Professor Interaction Scale.

This article describes the development of an instrument to measure the multiple dimensions of student-faculty interactions. The sample consisted of 318 students (114 males, 203 females; 58% White, 16% African American, 9% Hispanic Americans) who completed the Student-Professor Interaction Scale (SPIS). Eight dimensions were identified, with Cronbach alphas ranging from . 51 to . 92. Dimensions of student-faculty interactions were related to academic motivation and academic self-concept for the majority While sample, but only academic self-concept for the ethnic minority sample. African American and Hispanic American students reported feeling less connected with professors, perceived their experiences with faculty as more negative, and perceived faculty as less respectful when compared to White students. Implications for student affairs research and practice are discussed. The importance of student-faculty interactions in facililating the intellectual and personal growth of college students cannot be overstated. Wlodkowki and Ginsberg (1995) make the following observation: "People who feel unsafe, unconnected, and disrespected are unlikely to be motivated to learn. This is as true in college as it is in elementary school" (p. 2). The most utilized assessment of student-faculty interactions, operationalized by 10 items on the College Student Experiences Questionnaire (CSEQ), focuses on the frequency of interactions with faculty in different situations. While frequency of interactions is certainly one important aspect of student-faculty interaction, it does not include other dimensions that we believe are central in fully conceplualizing and understanding the construct. Therefore, there is a need to develop an instrument that assesses different dimensions of student-faculty interactions. In their influential book Education and Identity, Checkering and Reisser (1993) state that next to peer relations, relationships with faculty are among the most important for students. Checkering and Reisser (1995) say that when faculty are committed to creating quality learning experiences, when they are consistent in showing respect, caring, and authenticity, and when they are willing to interact with students in a variety of settings, then development of competence, autonomy, purpose and integrity is fostered, (p. 320) Universities and colleges that encourage faculty in developing closer relationships with students report substantial benefits from such efforts. Students who are able to develop a close relationship with at least one faculty member report greater satisfaction with their college experience, are more motivated and feel inspired to set higher career and educational goals (Rosenthal, et al., 2000). Positive student-faculty interactions include situations where teachers are perceived to be easily accessible, caring, willing to spend time and serve as mentors, and encouraging student aspirations. A lack of such opportunities is associated with student dissatisfaction and likelihood of attrition (Woodside, Wong, & Dudley, 1999). Students in college experience intellectual as well as social and emotional growth. Hence, the classroom experience is only a small part of the college experience. Peer relationships play a major role in the life of a college student. However, beyond their classmates, roommates, and friends, the individuals who have the greatest impact are the teachers. Faculty interactions can become very meaningful sources of encouragement and inspiration (Astin, 1993) in creating a positive academic climate. The show of respect for students as people (e.g., showing concern for students, initiating informal gatherings), respect for students' intellect (e.g., accepting constructive criticism, taking time to offer feedback about progress), and doing more than required for the class (e.g., being available beyond class time) are some of the characteristics students have reported to be indicative of a positive academic climate (Fox & Schaefer, 1995; Schaefer & Schaefer, 1993). …