Academic Entitlement: An individual difference measureKarolyn Budzek Nicole Judice Campbell University of Oklahoma

Problem Correlates with Academic Entitlement scale The purpose of this research is to validate a measure of “academic entitlement.” We define academic entitlement as the tendency to possess an expectation of academic success without taking personal responsibility for achieving that success. We recognize it as incivility in the classroom (e.g., rude emails demanding special consideration for a late paper or extra credit opportunities to make up for unexplained absences). Research has investigated student incivility and misbehavior as a function of the structure of the academic setting (e.g., Tiberius & Flak, 1999). The current research investigates the validity of academic entitlement as an individual difference that may explain some of these negative, self-serving behaviors.

Academic EntitlementResponsibility Expectations

Psychological Entitlement Scale .374** .342**Academic Self-Efficacy -.611** -.075, nsStrategic Flexibility: Adaptive .073, ns -.110, nsStrategic Flexibility: Irresolute .248** .271**Strategic Flexibility: Inflexible .018, ns .211**Narcissistic Personality Inventory .110* .188**NPI: Entitlement/Exploitativeness .225** .182**State-Trait Grandiosity Scale .162** .184**Attitudes toward Forgiveness -.350** -.091, nsNeed for Cognition -.284** -.175**Agreeableness -.320** -.017, nsConscientiousness -.381** -.089, nsRosenberg Self-Esteem Scale -.269** -.015, ns

*p < .01, **p < .001

Creating a vignette measure In order to ensure the participants were operating in similar stimulus space, a vignette measure was developed to identify specific uncivil student behaviors. We generated academic scenarios thought to evoke entitled behaviors and collected student responses to open-ended questions. Open-ended statements that appeared to capture a continuum of student responses were selected and retained to administer to participants in the first sample (N = 362, Spring 2005). The vignette measure consists of four vignettes with five to nine responses per situation. Students rate each of these multiple response options regarding the likelihood they would engage in this behavior as well as the appropriateness of this behavior. Subject-matter experts (N = 21) rated the vignette responses on appropriateness (1-6). The experts were instructors recruited from the psychology department, with teaching experience ranging from 0 to 37 years. The items used in subsequent analyses were selected based on rater consensus: highly inappropriate (M < 2, 14 items) and highly appropriate (M > 5, 12 items). The 14 inappropriate responses include items such as “I would complain to the professor who misled me!” ( λ = 4.627, Cronbach’s α = .86). The 12 appropriate responses include items such as “I would answer the questions to the best of my ability” ( λ = 5.347, Cronbach’s α = .81).

Creating an individual difference measure In order to develop a measure of academic entitlement, participants across two samples completed a series of questionnaires to receive credit towards a course requirement. Measures included seventy potential academic entitlement items. Data from the first sample (N = 398, Spring 2006) were gathered for exploratory purposes and were analyzed using principal axis factor analysis with direct oblimin rotation, as well as principal component analysis with quartimax rotation. A second, larger sample (N = 819, Fall 2006) was gathered to reproduce the factor structure of the entitlement items and to validate the construct with several related measures. Factor analysis of the academic entitlement items from the first sample revealed two factors: Responsibility and Expectations. The Responsibility subscale consists of 13 items (e.g., “It is ultimately my professors’ responsibility to make sure that I learn the material of a course”) and has a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.82. The Expectations subscale consists of four items (e.g., “My professors should reconsider my grade if I am close to the grade I want”) and has a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.81. Factor analysis of the second sample revealed the same factor structure with similar alphas (0.76 and 0.77).

njudice@ou.edu

kbudzek@psychology.ou.eduPredicting inappropriate student behaviors Student behaviors prediction equations

In four vignettes about academic situations, students (N = 398) rated multiple response options identified by instructors as inappropriate or appropriate. The participants rated both the appropriateness of each behavior and the likelihood they themselves would engage in the behavior.

Multiple regression analysis was used to predict students’ likelihood and students’ appropriateness ratings for inappropriate and appropriate items. In addition to the newly-developed Responsibility and Expectations subscales, related variables were considered as predictors (i.e. personal self-efficacy (Paulhus, 1983), strategic flexibility (Cantwell & Moore, 1996), and psychological entitlement (Campbell, Bonacci, Shelton, Exline, & Bushman, 2004)).

Prediction equations were formed for four outcome variables: students’ ratings of the likelihood and appropriateness of inappropriate and appropriate items. The academic entitlement subscale of Expectations, irresolute strategies, and students’ own ratings of appropriateness predict their likelihood ratings for inappropriate responses. The academic entitlement subscales of Expectations and Responsibility, as well as psychological entitlement predict students’ appropriateness ratings for inappropriate responses.

Likelihood of appropriate items Ŷ = 1.047 + .649 (Appropriateness) + .112

(Personal Self-Efficacy) + e R² = .493, F = 184.911, p < .001

Appropriateness of appropriate items Ŷ = 4.305 - .351 (Responsibility) + .209

(Inflexible Strategies) + .196 (Personal Self-Efficacy) + e

R² = .281, F = 50.048, p < .001 Likelihood of inappropriate items

Ŷ = .827 + .294 (Expectations) + .138 (Irresolute Strategies) + .522 (Appropriateness) + e

R² = .575, F = 168.168, p <.001 Appropriateness of inappropriate items

Ŷ = .819 + .352 (Expectations) + .214 (Responsibility) + .196 (Psychological Entitlement) + eR² = .302, F = 54.520, p <.001

Taken together, these studies show that the newly developed Academic Entitlement scale possesses a reliable two-factor structure, correlates with related measures, and has predictive power for self-reported behaviors. Understanding the predictors of student incivility and entitled behaviors will inform research and teaching in higher education.

1 - - - - - - 2 - - - - - - 3 - - - - - - 4 - - - - - - 5 - - - - - - 6

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

Responsibility1. It is unnecessary for me to participate in class

when the professor is paid for teaching, not for asking questions.

2. If I miss class, it is my responsibility to get the notes. (Reverse)

3. I am not motivated to put a lot of effort into group work, because another group member will end up doing it.

4. The price of my tuition buys me course credit.5. I believe that the university does not provide

me with the resources I need to succeed in college.

6. Most professors don’t really know what they are talking about.

7. I should not have to pay tuition twice if I have to repeat a course.

8. If I do poorly in a course and I could not make my professor’s office hours, the fault lies with my professor.

9. I believe that it is my responsibility to seek out the resources to succeed in college. (Reverse)

10.For group assignments, it is acceptable to take a back seat and let others do most of the work if I am busy.

11.For group work, I should receive the same grade as the other group members regardless of my level of effort.

12.Professors are just employees who get money for teaching.

13. It is ultimately my professors’ responsibility to make sure that I learn the material of a course.

Expectations14. My professors are obligated to help me prepare

for exams.15. Professors must be entertaining to be good.16. I expect my professors to make their class notes

available for me.17. My professors should reconsider my grade if I

am close to the grade I want.18. I should never receive a zero on an assignment

that I turned in.19. My professors should curve my grade if I am

close to the next letter grade.njudice@ou.edu kbudzek@psychology.ou.edu