The purpose of this study was to embody the concept of the high school students’ learning flow experiences and to develop the students’ learning flow scale, which can measure their learning flow degree and validate the developed learning flow scale. To develop students’ learning flow scales, I analyzed the concepts of learning flow through examining various literature reviews and then explored the constructs of learning flow through the open pilot survey and the group interview and with the help of expert’s advice. Each construct consists of the sub-factors, which were defined operationally. And these could be measured by the developed sample questions. I prepared the sample questions through the open pilot survey and group interviews based on the previous learning flow scales and constructs. In addition the experts tested to validate the content validity of the sample questions and the target group conducted the face validity of learning flow scales. Then I tried to verify how good the questions are through a purification process based on a pilot survey and conducted the learning flow scale validity through the main survey. The procedure of the study was as follows. First, I could check the detailed properties of the learning flow through comparison with the similar concept of learning flow, which and I was able to confirm the bounds and limits of learning flow by finding differences between the two concepts. I examined the 3-channel learning flow model, 4-channel learning flow model, and the 8-channel learning flow model as the theoretical models. I used the experience sampling method, observation, interviews, stories survey methods, and paper survey to measure the learning flow. I could grasp the conceptual structure of the learning flow by studying the learning flow means and theory. By doing so, I was able to give the operative definition of the nine sub-factors and come up with the example questions to measure them.
Second, I carried out the pilot surveys and group interviews to find out how psychological constructs of learning flow in the learning experiences of high school students are formed on the basis of the understanding of learning flow concept. And I discussed the results with the experts and could set up nine learning flow sub-factors. They are as follows: “clear goals” factor, “immediate feedback” factor, “challenge-skill balance” factor, “concentration on the task at hand” factor, “merging of action and awareness” factor, “loss of self-consciousness” factor, “altered sense of time” factor, “sense of control” factor, and “autotelic experience” factor.
Third, I designed three-area, 10-step scale development process on the basis of the relevant prior scale studies before I developed the learning flow scale. I critically reviewed the prior learning flow scales on the basis of scale development procedures. I critically reviewed the areas such as total questions, scale development, and assessment scales from 11 domestic theses (from 2003 to 2012). The problems of the learning flow scale development in this process were quantitatively presented.
Fourth, the subjects are as follows: 110 high school students to open pilot survey, 15 high school students to group interviews, 110 high school students in the face validity, 15 professionals on the content validity, 540 people in the preliminary survey, 240 people in the main survey, a total of 1025 people were asked to answer in this study. I developed 61 questions through open pilot survey and applied group interview in order to conduct a preliminary question. I developed a total of 255 questions in addition to the 194 preliminary questions through examining learning flow scales. I developed 50 learning flow questions through a process such as the content validity of the expert group and the facial validity of the application group. I carried out a preliminary survey of 540 high school students for the question analysis, the primary validation, exploratory factor analysis, and developed 32 learning flow scale questions. I carried out the main survey with 32 learning flow scale questions, 30 character of question, academic achievement, and population metro-logical questions. Through a revision process for the confirmatory factor analysis and model based on the results of the study, I completed a measure of the final 9 constructs and 30 learning flow questions. The derived final model: x²/df=3.650 (p <.001), CFI = .923, TLI = .94, RMSEA = .058 was analyzed as suitable levels. In addition, the result of validity review, the convergence validity, the discriminant validity, the law validity, the second factor analysis model, and the structural equation modeling ware able to validate the validity of learning flow scales. Concept reliability in each sub-factor showed as follows: clear goals factor .749, immediate feedback factor .750, challenge-skill balance factor .799, concentration on the task at hand factor .749, merging of action and awareness factor .747, loss of self-consciousness factor .749, altered sense of time factor .798, sense of control factor .749, autotelic experience factor .932, and the total learning flow factor .922.
After analyzing the structural equation model for the Law Validation, I had the result: χ² = 1057.68(df=132, p=.000, Q = 8.013, CFI = .895, TLI = .864, RMSEA=.095), which showed the goodness of fit of the structural model insufficient and confirmed the influence between relevant variables. First the structural equation model analysis showed that learning flow affects the academic achievement, an individual’s personality affects the learning flow and therefore, indirectly affects on academic achievement. Modification model analysis based on the individual’s personality in academic achievement, total learning flow effect, the analysis of the direct and indirect effect result, showed that individual’s personality mediates the learning flow and the result: β=.201 (p<.001) is effectively mediating academic achievement. The law validity was proven through path analysis and parameter analysis of the effect of these structural model. I performed correlation analysis to find out the correlation between learning flow variants and examined correlation among variants, sub-factors of individual’s personality and learning flow, and academic achievement specifically. I found out the meaningful correlation among learning flow and sub-factors: individual’s personality sub-factor, extroversive sub-factor, exoteric sub-factor, neurotic sub-fac