The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Do College Student Surveys Have Any Validity?
Abstract
Using standards established for validation research, I review the theory and evidence underlying the validity argument of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). I use the NSSE because it is the preeminent survey of college students, arguing that if it lacks validity, then so do almost all other college student surveys. I find that it fails to meet basic standards for validity and reliability, and recommend that higher education researchers initiate a new research agenda to develop valid college student surveys.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“As documented by Porter, S.R. (2011), student surveys are prone to social desirability bias, retrospective reconstruction, and weak correlations with actual learning outcomes.”
From Generative AI in Design Thinking Pedagogy: Enhancing Creativity, Critical Thinking, and Ethical Reasoning in Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as Porter, S.R. (2011)
Citations
Cites
Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys
Groves, R. M. (2006) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfl033 · Cited by 2,420
Methods of coping with social desirability bias: A review
Nederhof, A. J. (1985) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420150303 · Cited by 2,340 · cited 2×
“Social desirability bias, or providing survey responses that make the respondent look favorable to others, has been extensively documented in the field of survey methodology (see, for example, DeMaio, 1984; Nederhof, 1985), but has been little studied in the area of college student survey response.”
BackgroundEffect Size, Practical Importance, and Social Policy for Children
McCartney, K., & Rosenthal, R. (2000) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00131 · Cited by 429 · cited 1×
“Cohen’s rule of thumb for effect sizes is now recognized as rigid and, for the most part, useful only for power analyses (McCartney & Rosenthal, 2000); researchers instead rely on the research context to determine the substantive relevance of an effect size.”
Garry, M., Sharman, S. J., Feldman, J., Marlatt, G. A., & Loftus, E. F. (2002) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/0278-6133.21.6.629 · Cited by 44
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Framing student engagement in higher education
Kahu, E. R. (2013) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.598505 · Cited by 2,103
Stebleton, M. J., Soria, K. M., & Huesman, R. L. (2014) · Journal of College Counseling · doi:10.1002/j.2161-1882.2014.00044.x · Cited by 401
First-generation students' academic engagement and retention
Soria, K. M., & Stebleton, M. J. (2012) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2012.666735 · Cited by 371
“…relies on students’ selfreported assessment of academic engagement, a factor that some have identified as problematic due to inaccuracy (Bowman 2011; Porter 2009); however, Bowman (2010) found that first-generation students tend to be more accurate in self-reports than other students, which could…”
BackgroundTovar, E. (2015) · Community College Review · doi:10.1177/0091552114553788 · Cited by 197
“However, it is important to acknowledge that grades, especially self-reported GPAs, as a measure of learning have been called into question and also deemed unreliable (Porter, 2011).”
BackgroundReassessing Disparities in Online Learner Student Engagement in Higher Education
Paulsen, J., & McCormick, A. C. (2020) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x19898690 · Cited by 186
“While the validity of student surveys in general and NSSE specifically has been challenged (Porter, 2011), leaders of NSSE and its counter-part, the Community College Survey of Student Engagement, offered a point-by-point response to the critique (McCormick & McClenney, 2012), and 2-and 4-year…”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Porter, S. R.
- Corresponding author
- Porter, Stephen R.
- ORCID
- Porter, Stephen R.
- Venue
- The Review of Higher Education
- Publisher
- Project MUSE
- Published
- 2011-09
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 45-76
- ISSN
- 0162-5748 (ISSN-L)
- 1090-7009
- OpenAlex
- W2112927083
- Cited by
- 286
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 133.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Review of higher education/The review of higher education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
- Keywords
- National Survey of Student Engagement, survey validity, reliability statistics, student engagement
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review