Tables XX: Indicators of internal consistency and validity (factor covariance) for the

final model
No Types of REQ Estimates CR AVE MSV ASV 1 2 3 4 5
.
1 Active and collaborative 0.90 0.51 0.05 0.02 -
Learning 5 6 3 7
2 Student-Faculty Interaction 0.89 .598 0.37 0.14 .057 -
9 2 0
3 Supportive campus 0.86 .477 0.57 0.25 .15* 0.61* -
environment 0 8 8 * *
4 Level of Academic 0.92 0.62 0.57 0,21 .17* 0.43* 0.76* -
Challenge 1 3 8 8 * * *
5 Enriching Educational 0.93 0.56 0,07 0.04 .23* .033* 0.24* 0.28* -
Experience 4 4 8 2 * * * *
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) and **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Tables XX: Indicators of internal consistency and validity (factor correlation) for the
final model
No Types of REQ Estimates CR AVE MSV ASV 1 2 3 4 5
.
1 Active and collaborative 0.90 0.51 0.05 0.02 -
Learning 5 6 3 7
2 Student-Faculty Interaction 0.89 .598 0.37 0.14 .102* -
9 2 0
3 Supportive campus 0.86 .477 0.57 0.25 .227** .624** -
environment 0 8 8
4 Level of Academic 0.92 0.62 0.57 0,21 .230** .445** .634** -
Challenge 1 3 8 8
5 Enriching Educational 0.93 0.56 0.07 0.04 .401** .033 .241** .26* -
Experience 4 4 8 2 *
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) and **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Tables YY: Estimates of Confirmatory factor analysis: Model fit indices of the five
Dimension Academic Engagement Constructs
Model chi2_of chi2 of B RMSEA SRM AIC BIC CFI TLI CD
M Vs S Vs S R
Academic 2254.8 17302.3 0.059 0.06 61891.1 62464.9 .90 .90 1.00
Engagement 7 2 0 9 3 8 1

Interpreting the dimension’s measuring ability for Academic engagement Scales

The analysis of the output results for Cronbach’s Alpha, particularly concerning the dimension of
Active and Collaborative Learning, reveals a robust internal consistency among the items
evaluated. The values for Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Dropped fall within the range of .872
to .889, indicating that the reliability of the scale remains high even when individual items are
excluded. Furthermore, the item total correlation values, which range from .592 to .803, suggest
that each item correlates significantly with the overall scale, reinforcing the notion that these
items are effectively measuring the intended construct. The corrected item-total correlation
values, ranging from .588 to .789, further support this assertion, as they indicate that the items
are not only related to the total score but also contribute meaningfully to the scale's reliability.

2. In examining the Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted for all items within the Active and
Collaborative Learning dimension, the values range from .935 to .936. This high level of
reliability suggests that the items collectively contribute to a strong measure of academic
engagement. The mean values for the construct fall between .318 and .372, which indicates a
moderate level of agreement or frequency of the behaviors being measured. Additionally, the
standard deviation values, ranging from .935 to 1.259, reflect a considerable variability in
responses, suggesting that while there is a general trend, individual experiences or perceptions
may differ significantly among respondents.

3. The skewness values for each item, which range from .260 to .649, indicate a slight positive
skew in the distribution of responses. This suggests that there may be a tendency for respondents
to rate the items more favorably, which could imply a generally positive perception of active and
collaborative learning practices. Overall, the total items yield a Cronbach’s Alpha of .894,
signifying excellent internal consistency for the scale as a whole. This comprehensive analysis
underscores the reliability and validity of the Active and Collaborative Learning dimension in
measuring academic engagement, providing a solid foundation for further research and
application in educational settings.

The output results of Cronbach’s Alpha when considering the potential removal of items within
the dimension of Level of Academic Challenge indicate a high level of internal consistency.
Specifically, the Cronbach’s Alpha values, which range from .911 to .926, suggest that the items
are reliably measuring the same underlying construct. Additionally, the item total correlation
values, which fall between .781 and .867, further reinforce the strength of the relationship
between individual items and the overall scale. The corrected item-total correlation values,
ranging from .710 to .862, also highlight that even if certain items were removed, the remaining
items would still maintain a strong correlation with the total score.

When examining the Cronbach's Alpha if an item were deleted, the values for all items under the
Level of Academic Challenge dimension range from .933 to .934. This indicates that the overall
reliability of the scale would not significantly improve by removing any of the items, suggesting
that each item contributes positively to the construct being measured. This high level of
reliability is crucial for ensuring that the academic engagement scales are accurately capturing
the intended dimensions of student experience and challenge.

In terms of descriptive statistics for the academic engagement scales, the mean values range from
2.30 to 2.58, indicating a moderate level of engagement among respondents. The standard
deviation values, which range from 1.283 to 1.393, suggest some variability in responses,
reflecting differing levels of academic challenge perceived by students. Furthermore, the
skewness values for each item, ranging from .029 to .566, indicate a slight positive skew,
suggesting that a majority of respondents may perceive a higher level of academic challenge.
 Overall, the total items yield a Cronbach’s Alpha of .930, affirming the robustness of the scale in
measuring academic engagement effectively.

Factors & Cronbach's Corrected Cronbach's M(SD) Skewnes

Item total
items Alpha if Item Item-Total Alpha if Item s
correlation
Dropped Correlation Deleted (n=40)
Active and Collaborative Learning (α =.894 )
ACL_1 .885 .672 .613 .935 3.72(.935) .403
ACL_2 .884 .675 .622 .936 3.64(1.070) .552
ACL_3 .880 .723 .680 .935 3.50(1.040) .413
ACL_4 .878 .736 .702 .935 3.18(1.212) .260
ACL_5 .883 .683 .639 .935 3.48(1.006) .509
ACL_6 .884 .656 .629 .935 3.42(1.098) .448
ACL_7 .872 .803 .789 .935 3.56(.989) .520
ACL_8 .882 .672 .657 .935 3.62(.989) .519
ACL_9 .889 .592 .588 .936 3.68(1.259) .649
Student-Faculty-Interaction (α =.906 )
SFI_1 .889 0.753 .746 .935 3.23(1.053) -.047
SFI_2 .889 0.752 .743 .935 3.25(1.089) -.111
SFI_3 .892 0.733 .726 .935 3.42(.998) -.191
SFI_4 .888 0.762 .758 .935 3.10(1.241) -.045
SFI_5 .893 0.724 .716 .935 3.18(1.061) .065
SFI_6 .885 0.774 .770 .935 3.04(1.174) .144
Supportive Campus Environment (α =.915 )
SCE_1 .896 0.828 .801 .933 2.29(1.283) .580
SCE_2 .897 0.796 .784 .933 2.36(1.386) .504
SCE_3 .900 0.775 .755 .934 2.56(1.347) .224
SCE_4 .894 0.861 .818 .934 2.57(1.314) .262
SCE_5 .897 0.804 .785 .933 2.32(1.363) .518
SCE_6 .915 0.665 .618 .933 2.33(1.391) .519
SCE_7 .913 0.661 .627 .933 2.52(1.337) .370
Level of Academic Challenge (α =.930 )
LAC_1 .916 0.828 .819 .933 2.30(1.289) .566
LAC_2 .922 0.781 .757 .933 2.37(1.390) .489
LAC_3 .920 0.781 .770 .933 2.58(1.342) .199
LAC_4 .911 0.867 .862 .933 2.58(1.312) .251
LAC_5 .919 0.793 .779 .933 2.32(1.355) .509
LAC_6 .926 0.758 .710 .934 2.60(1.287) .217
LAC_7 .923 0.779 .743 .934 2.79(1.336) .029
Enriching Educational Experience (α =.932)
EEE_1 .925 0.799 .735 .935 3.53(1.104) -.420
EEE_2 .926 0.765 .715 .935 3.49(1.103) -.388
EEE_3 .928 0.713 .667 .935 3.52(1.098) -.386
EEE_4 .924 0.817 .761 .934 3.36(1.094) -.359
EEE_5 .924 0.808 .756 .934 3.54(1.111) -.432
EEE_6 .925 0.792 .735 .935 3.47(1.089) -.495
EEE_7 .927 0.727 .696 .935 3.53(1.081) -.562
EEE_8 .922 0.863 .814 .934 3.43(1.116) -.319
EEE_9 .924 0.798 .773 .934 3.26(1.089) -.176
EEE_10 .928 0.735 .664 .935 3.41(1.052) -.398
EEE_11 .932 0.637 .579 .937 3.63(1.055) -.680
  Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling adequacy =.940 and
 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity, χ 2 =16872.13 p=.000<<.05 with df = 780
 Total Variance Explained by all factors=64.294%
Communalities

The results from the Communalities output in table below reveal significant insights into various
dimensions of student engagement as measured by the adapted Amharic version of the NSSE
Benchmarks. The dimension of Active and Collaborative Learning (ACL) shows values ranging
from 0.475 to 0.733, indicating a moderate to strong level of engagement among students in
collaborative activities. This suggests that while some students may experience lower levels of
active participation, a substantial portion is actively engaged in collaborative learning
experiences, which are crucial for fostering deeper understanding and retention of knowledge.
In examining the dimension of Student-Faculty Interaction (SFI), the values range from 0.644 to
0.720, reflecting a positive correlation between student engagement and faculty involvement.
This range suggests that students generally perceive their interactions with faculty as supportive
and beneficial to their academic journey. Furthermore, the Supportive Campus Environment
dimension shows values between 0.490 and 0.804, indicating a broad spectrum of experiences
regarding the campus climate. A higher value in this dimension suggests that many students feel
supported in their academic endeavors, which is essential for promoting overall student
satisfaction and success.
The Level of Academic Challenge dimension presents values from 0.637 to 0.821, highlighting
the varying degrees of academic rigor experienced by students. This range indicates that while
some students may find their academic challenges manageable, others may perceive them as
significantly demanding. Lastly, the Enriching Educational Experience dimension ranges from
0.473 to 0.768, suggesting that students have diverse experiences regarding the enrichment
opportunities available to them. The KMO value of 0.940 further supports the reliability and
validity of the data collection instruments used in this study, reinforcing the robustness of the
findings in assessing student engagement within the context of recent literature and publications.
Rotated Component Matrix
The factor loading results from the Rotated Component Matrix provide valuable insights into the
various dimensions of student engagement as measured by the NSSE Benchmarks. The
dimension of Active and Collaborative Learning (ACL) exhibits factor loadings ranging
from .672 to .837, indicating a strong correlation between this dimension and the overall
construct of student engagement. Similarly, the dimension of Students Faculty Interaction (SFI)
shows loadings between .751 and .789, suggesting a significant relationship with student
engagement as well. The Supportive Campus Environment dimension presents a wider range of
loadings from .471 to .811, which may imply varying levels of influence on student engagement
across different contexts.
In terms of the Level of Academic Challenge, the factor loadings range from .729 to .869,
reflecting a robust connection to student engagement, while the Enriching Educational
Experience dimension shows loadings between .656 and .830. Each of these dimensions
contributes to the overall understanding of student engagement, with the percentage of variance
explained by each factor providing further context. Specifically, Active and Collaborative
Learning accounts for 8.473% of the variance, Students Faculty Interaction explains 6.077%,
Supportive Campus Environment contributes 3.829%, Level of Academic Challenge accounts
for 16.777%, and Enriching Educational Experience explains a substantial 29.138% of the
variance.
The Principal Component Analysis (PCA) conducted for the adaptation and validation of the
Amharic version of the NSSE Benchmarks Student Engagement Scale serves to assess the
reliability and validity of the data collection instruments. This analysis is grounded in recent
literature and publications, ensuring that the findings are relevant and applicable to current
educational contexts. By examining these dimensions and their respective factor loadings,
researchers can better understand the multifaceted nature of student engagement and the critical
factors that influence it within academic settings.
1. The factor loading output for the dimension of Active and Collaborative Learning (ACL)
indicates values ranging from .672 to .837, suggesting a strong correlation between the items
within this dimension and the underlying construct. This range reflects a robust level of
engagement among students in collaborative learning activities, highlighting the effectiveness of
pedagogical strategies that promote active participation. Similarly, the dimension of Students
Faculty Interaction (SFI) shows values between .751 and .789, which further emphasizes the
importance of meaningful interactions between students and faculty in enhancing the educational
experience.

2. The Supportive Campus Environment dimension presents a wider range of values, from .471
to .811, indicating variability in the perceived supportiveness of the campus among students.
This suggests that while some students may feel well-supported, others may experience
challenges that could impact their overall engagement and satisfaction. The Level of Academic
Challenge dimension demonstrates values between .729 and .869, reflecting a strong emphasis
on rigorous academic standards that encourage students to push their boundaries and achieve
higher levels of learning.

3. Lastly, the Enriching Educational Experience dimension shows values ranging from .656
to .830, which signifies a positive correlation with the overall educational engagement of
students. These findings are derived from a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) conducted for
the adaptation and validation of the Amharic version of the National Survey of Student
Engagement (NSSE) Benchmarks. This analysis aims to assess the reliability and validity of the
data collection instruments, drawing on recent references and publications to ensure the accuracy
and relevance of the findings in the context of student engagement.

Rotated Component Matrix

Component/Factors/ Dimensions
Communalities -

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
% of Variance
Extraction
Student_faculi
ty interaction
collaborative

Environment
Educational
Experience

Supportive
Academic
Challenge
Enriching

Active &

Learning
Level of

campus
 EEE_8 .830 .768
EEE_5 .793 .668
EEE_6 .789 .641
EEE_4 .781 .678
EEE_2 .775 .612
EEE_9 .772 .679 29.138
EEE_1 .761 .642
EEE_7 .724 .585
EEE_3 .683 .562
EEE_10 .678 .545
EEE_11 .656 473
LAC_4 .869 .759
LAC_1 .829 .681
LAC_5 .785 .690
LAC_3 .774 .821 16.777
LAC_7 .767 .708
LAC_6 .765 .637
LAC_2 .729 .672
ACL_7 .837 .733
ACL_4 .755 .624
ACL_3 .734 .581
ACL_6 .699 .535
ACL_8 .695 .542 8.473
ACL_2 .692 .514
ACL_9 .685 .475
ACL_5 .683 .522
ACL_1 .672 .494
SFI_1 .789 .691
SFI_3 .787 .672
SFI_2 .780 .687
6.077
SFI_4 .777 .695
SFI_6 .753 .720
SFI_5 .751 .644
SCE_4 .811 .804
SCE_1 .784 .764
SCE_5 .737 .737
SCE_3 .733 .712 3.829
SCE_2 .729 .723
SCE_6 .479 .490
SCE_7 .471 .538
 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis and
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
CR_EEE =
∑ standardized factor loading squared
∑ standardized factor loading squared+ ∑ (1−standardized factor loading squared )
= ¿¿

= 67.930564/(67.930564+4.793354)

= 0.934

AVEEEE=¿ ∑ standardized factor loading squared = 6.206646/11 = 0.564

n

A composite reliability of 0.70 is recommended (Hair,1997),

Fornell and Larcker (1981) recommended a CR value of 0.60 or more

Fornell and Larcker(1981) recommended an AVE greater than 0.5

CR_ACL =
∑ standardized factor loading squared
∑ standardized factor loading squared+∑ (1−standardized factor loading squared )
= ¿¿

= 41.628304/(41.628304+4.352862)

= 0.905

AVE ACL=¿ ∑ standardized factor loading squared = 4.647138/9 = 0.516

n

CR_LAC =
∑ standardized factor loading squared
∑ standardized factor loading squared+ ∑ (1−standardized factor loading squared )
= ¿¿

= 30.448324/(30.448324+2.637342)

0.921
 AVELAC =¿ ∑ standardized factor loading squared = 4.362658/7 = 0.623
n

CR_SCE =
∑ standardized factor loading squared
∑ standardized factor loading squared+ ∑ (1−standardized factor loading squared )
= ¿¿

= 22.505536/(22.505536 +3.664442)

= 0.860

AVESCE =¿ ∑ standardized factor loading squared = 3.335558/7 = 0.477

n

CR_SFI =
∑ standardized factor loading squared
∑ standardized factor loading squared+∑ (1−standardized factor loading squared )
= ¿¿

= 21.501769 /(21.501769 +2.414971)

= 0.899

AVE SFI =¿ ∑ standardized factor loading squared = 3.585029/6 = 0.598

n