Constructing the Vulvar Pain Assessment Questionnaire Inventory

The goals of this program of research were to examine the link between self-reported vulvar pain and clinical diagnoses, and to create a user-friendly assessment tool to aid in that process. These goals were undertaken through a series of four empirical studies (Chapters 2-6): one archival study, two online studies, and one study conducted in a Women’s Health clinic. In Chapter 2, the link between self-report and clinical diagnosis was confirmed by extracting data from multiple studies conducted in the Sexual Health Research Laboratory over the course of several years. We demonstrated the accuracy of diagnosis based on multiple factors, and explored the varied gynecological presentation of different diagnostic groups. Chapter 3 was based on an online study designed to create the Vulvar Pain Assessment Questionnaire (VPAQ) inventory. Following the construct validation approach, a large pool of potential items was created to capture a broad selection of vulvar pain symptoms. Nearly 300 participants completed the entire item pool, and a series of factor analyses were utilized to narrow down the items and create scales/subscales. Relationships were computed among subscales and validated scales to establish convergent and discriminant validity. Chapters 4 and 5 were conducted in the Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology at Oregon Health & Science University. The brief screening version of the VPAQ was employed with patients of the Program in Vulvar Health at the Center for Women’s Health. The accuracy and usefulness of the VPAQscreen was determined from the perspective of patients as well as their health care providers, and the treatment-seeking experiences of patients was explored. Finally, a second online study was conducted to confirm the factor structure, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability of the VPAQ inventory. The results presented in these chapters confirm the link between targeted questions and accurate diagnoses, and provide a guideline that is useful and accessible for providers and patients.

Supporting Metacognitive Development in Early Science Education: Exploring Elementary Teachers' Beliefs and Practices in Metacognition

Metacognition is the understanding and control of cognitive processes. Students with high levels of metacognition achieve greater academic success. The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to examine elementary teachers’ beliefs about metacognition and integration of metacognitive practices in science. Forty-four teachers were recruited through professional networks to complete a questionnaire containing open-ended questions (n = 44) and Likert-type items (n = 41). Five respondents were selected to complete semi-structured interviews informed by the questionnaire. The selected interview participants had a minimum of three years teaching experience and demonstrated a conceptual understanding of metacognition. Statistical tests (Pearson correlation, t-tests, and multiple regression) on quantitative data and thematic analysis of qualitative data indicated that teachers largely understood metacognition but had some gaps in their understanding. Participants’ reported actions (teaching practices) and beliefs differed according to their years of experience but not gender. Hierarchical multiple regression demonstrated that the first block of gender and experience was not a significant predictor of teachers' metacognitive actions, although experience was a significant predictor by itself. Experience was not a significant predictor once teachers' beliefs were added. The majority of participants indicated that metacognition was indeed appropriate for elementary students. Participants consistently reiterated that students’ metacognition developed with practice, but required explicit instruction. A lack of consensus remained around the domain specificity of metacognition. More specifically, the majority of questionnaire respondents indicated that metacognitive strategies could not be used across subject domains, whereas all interviewees indicated that they used strategies across subjects. Metacognition was integrated frequently into Ontario elementary classrooms; however, metacognition was integrated less frequently in science lessons. Lastly, participants used a variety of techniques to integrate metacognition into their classrooms. Implications for practice include the need for more professional development aimed at integrating metacognition into science lessons at both the Primary and Junior levels. Further, teachers could benefit from additional clarification on the three main components of metacognition and the need to integrate all three to successfully develop students’ metacognition.