This study tested the validity and reliability of the Private Victory (PV) using items from 5 of subscales of the Student Readiness Inventory (SRI). The sample consisted of 230 college students from a small liberal arts college. After normalizing and removing inconsistent items, the internal consistency of the three PV subscales were (α = .62, .72, and .73). The SRI items displayed an internal consistency of (α = .75). The SRI shared significant correlations with all 3 PV subscales (r = .44, .45, and .66, p < .01) and college GPA (r = .28, p < .01). These results establish a baseline for the construct validity of the PV and indicate the need to refine its subscales.

1. PV & SRI 1
Running head: HABITS OF STUDENT EFFECTIVENESS
The Private Victory and the Student Readiness Inventory
Sean Weigold Ferguson
Rollins College

2. PV & SRI 2
Abstract
This study tested the validity and reliability of the Private Victory (PV) using items from 5 of
subscales of the Student Readiness Inventory (SRI). The sample consisted of 230 college
students from a small liberal arts college. After normalizing and removing inconsistent items, the
internal consistency of the three PV subscales were (α = .62, .72, and .73). The SRI items
displayed an internal consistency of (α = .75). The SRI shared significant correlations with all 3
PV subscales (r = .44, .45, and .66, p < .01) and college GPA (r = .28, p < .01). These results
establish a baseline for the construct validity of the PV and indicate the need to refine its
subscales.

3. PV & SRI 3
Do the components of life effectiveness translate into success in the college classroom?
The clear bridge between the two resides in student psychosocial factors (PSF)s; specifically
those found to have incremental validity in predicting college performance. Certainly high
school grades and standardized test scores can validly predict outcomes, but even when
combined they only account for 25% of the variance in a college student's first-year GPA (ACT,
1997; Boldt, 1986; Mathiasen, 1984; Mouw & Khanna, 1993; as cited by Robbins et al., 2004).
The ability of these factors to predict performance declines over time illustrating the need for
more sustainable predictors.
The Student Readiness Inventory
Robbins et al. (2004) saw the clear need to look beyond traditional predictors. In a meta-
analysis of 108 studies measuring college success and PSF factors, researchers established the
foundation for what would become the Student Readiness Inventory (SRI). Based on the
research, ten psychosocial and study skills constructs: achievement motivation, academic goals,
institutional commitment, perceived social support, social involvement, academic self-efficacy,
general self-concept, academic related skills, and contextual influences. Of these, academic self-
efficacy, achievement motivation, and academic goals were shown to incrementally predict
college GPA after controlling for more traditional predictors. Le et al. (2005) used the findings of
this study to create the SRI which is composed of ten slightly different constructs: general
determination, academic discipline, goal striving, commitment to college, study skills,
communication skills, social activity, social connection, academic self-confidence, and emotional
control. In a study of over 14,000 students, Robbins et al. (2005) found significant correlations
between college GPA and academic discipline, academic self-confidence, and commitment to
college. For the purposes of this study, five relevant constructs were chosen.

4. PV & SRI 4
Academic Self-Confidence (ASC)
As defined by Le et al. (2005), ASC is “the extent to which students are confident that
they can perform well in school.” An adaptation of the earlier construct academic self-efficacy,
ASC correlates significantly with academic discipline (AD), goal striving (GS), and commitment
to college (CC). Of the SRI constructs, it is the most highly correlated with ACT score and high
school GPA.
Commitment to College (CC)
From Le et al. (2005), “the extent to which students appreciate the values of education
and are committed to attaining the college degree.” Similar to goal focus from Robbins et al.
(2004), CC shares significant correlations with ASC, AD, GS, and communication skills. CC is
also correlated with gender as females tend to score higher than men on the scale. Additionally, it
shows a positive correlation with high school GPA.
Academic Discipline (AD)
AD is defined by Le et al. (2005) as “the extent to which students value schoolwork and
approach school-related tasks.” Females tend to score higher on the AD scale than do males.
High school GPA and AD are positively correlated. AD shares positive correlations with GD, GS,
and study skills.
General Determination (GD)
Le et al. defines GD as “the extent to which students are dutiful, careful, and
dependable.” Compared with the the findings of Robbins et al. (2004), GD contains some of the
elements of conscientiousness. GD correlates positively with AD, GS, CC, and communication
skills.

5. PV & SRI 5
Goal Striving (GS)
The definition of GS according to Le et al. (2005) is “the extent to which student (a) set
important goals, (b) make efforts to achieve the goals, and (c) are confident about their abilities
to succeed.” GS correlates directly with GD, AD, CC, study skills, and communication skills. GS
contains elements of the original scales of conscientiousness and goal focus.
The Private Victory (PV)
The findings of the aforementioned researchers are of great value, but they are specific to
the academic environment. To seek out similar constructs that apply universally requires
expanding beyond the traditional psychological literature. Interestingly enough, it is from the
personal development industry that one finds a construct that addresses sustainable life
effectiveness. In one of the bestselling personal development books of all time, The 7 Habits of
Highly Effective People, Covey (1989) defines effectiveness:
The Seven Habits are habits of effectiveness. Because they are based on principles, they
bring the maximum long-term beneficial results possible. They become the basis of a
person's character creating an empowering center of correct maps from which an
individual can effectively solve problems, maximize opportunities, and continually learn
and integrate other principles in an upward spiral of growth.
The difference between effectiveness and efficiency is that the latter over-emphasizes
production and neglects production capacity. Balancing the investment of resources into both
factors is the essence of effectiveness. This definition of effectiveness is useful in that it focuses
on long-term consequences. The ability to make predictions beyond a one semester time frame is
extremely valuable.
For the purposes of this study, the three habits most relevant to the academic environment

6. PV & SRI 6
were chosen. As defined by Covey (1989), a habit is:
the intersection of knowledge, skill, and desire. Knowledge is the theoretical paradigm,
the what to do and the why. Skill is the how to do. And desire is the motivation, the want
to do. In order to make something a habit in our lives, we have to have all three.
The first three habits, Be Proactive (H1), Begin with the End in Mind (H2), and Put First
Things First (H3) compose the Private Victory (PV). The PV construct is characterized by
independence, self-mastery, inner-direction, self-reliance, and self-confidence. Low PV indicates
one has a high degree of dependence on others, while those high on the PV scale display a high
degree of inner guidance and independence.
Be Proactive (H1)
H1 is a measure of one's proactivity. High scorers are considered proactive while low
scorers are termed reactive. Not to be confused with merely taking initiative, being proactive
means being
responsible for our own lives. Our behavior is a function of our decisions, not our
conditions. We can subordinate feelings to values. We have the initiative and the
responsibility to make things happen. Highly proactive people recognize that
responsibility. They do not blame circumstances, conditions, or conditioning for their
behavior. Their behavior is a product of their own conscious choice, based on values,
rather than a product of their conditions, based on feeling (Covey, 1989).
Those considered reactive are often influenced by their environment, both social and
physical. Their emotions and subsequent actions are dependent on external stimuli. H1 is
strongly related to the the self-efficacy and locus of control constructs. We expect it to contain
elements of ASC, GD, and GS.

7. PV & SRI 7
Begin with the End in Mind (H2)
According to Covey (1989), high scorers in H2 use the end of their life as a reference to
examine their behavior. They have a clear understanding of their life vision and most important
values, and follow a mission statement derived from those elements. This mission statement or
creed is the foundation for their decisions. Those high in H2 center their lives on principles,
defined by Covey (1989) as self-evident natural laws that govern human behavior. It is expected
that H2 contains elements of CC, GD, and GS.
Put First Things First (H3)
As defined by Covey (1989), H3 is “the fulfillment, the actualization, the natural
emergence of Habits 1 and 2. It's the exercise of independent will toward becoming principle-
centered. It's the day-in, day-out, moment-by-moment doing it.” H3 centers around the concept
of self-management, or the implementation of H1 and H2. Self-management is defined by Covey
(1989) as “the ability to make decisions and choices and to act in accordance with them. It is the
ability to act rather than to be acted upon, to proactive carry out the program we have
developed.” We expect H3 to contain elements of AD, GD, and GS.

8. PV & SRI 8
Methods
Participants
In total, 230 college students from a small, 4-year liberal arts secondary education
institution volunteered to participate in this study. To meet these criteria, participants were
removed (n = 50) from the sample if they were not college students, not attending the institution
being studied, or did not complete at least 10% of the SRI and PV. Participants' ages ranged from
18 to 61, with a mean age of 23.7 years (SD = 8.7 years; median = 21 years). The sample was
70% female. Only 9 students did not report their high school grade point average (GPA1).
Students' GPA1 ranged from 0.90 to 4.00 with a mean of 3.49 (SD = .48; median = 3.65). In
total, 187 students reported their SAT score. Scores ranged from 660 to 1600 with a mean of
1255 (SD = 160; median = 1269). Additionally, 104 students reported their ACT score which
ranged from 12.0 to 36.0 with a mean of 27.5 (SD = 4.5; Median = 28.0)
Only 8 students did not report their college GPA (GPA2). GPA2 ranged from 1.60 to 4.00
with a mean of 3.40 (SD = .46; median = 3.47). The mean number of semesters completed by
students in this sample was 4.6 (SD = 2.9), and the mean number of college credits obtained was
79.4 (SD = 43.4). The most commonly listed student majors were psychology (n = 35),
economics (n = 20), English (n = 19), and international relations (n = 19). A student major index
was created allowing students to be sorted into groups based on their focus on study. Groups
were business (n = 67), arts and language (n = 60), social sciences (n = 64), physical sciences (n
= 34), and other or no answer (n = 5).
Measures
The Private Victory (PV) Assessment contains 30 items and assesses the degree of
integration of Covey's (1989) first three habits: Be Proactive (H1), Begin with the End in Mind

9. PV & SRI 9
(H2), and Put First Things First (H3). PV items were developed using Covey's (1989) diction,
themes, definitions, and examples. Items are scored using a 7-point scale with anchors of
Nothing like me (1), and Exactly like me (7). Of the 30 items, 15 are reverse-scored. H1, H2, and
H3 each initially contained 10 items before removing 3, 2, and 0 respectively to increase internal
consistency. The mean of the remaining items within each subscale equates to a participant's
score on that habit's construct. The mean of H1, H2, and H3 equates to one's PV score.
According to Le et al. (as cited by Peterson et al., 2006),
The Student Readiness Inventory (SRI) is a 108-item inventory comprising 10 scales that
measure students' academic-related personality facets and skills. The inventory was
designed to assist postsecondary institutions in identifying and intervening with students
at risk for drop out or poor performance. Items are scored using a 6-point, Likert scale
that ranges from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Scales range from 10 to 12 items
and have demonstrated moderate to high internal consistency reliabilities (alpha range
= .81 to .87; median = .84), as well as incremental validity over demographic,
institutional, and standardized achievement variables.
Of the 10 SRI scales, the five showing the strongest (r ≥ .25) correlations with GPA2
were chosen for this study. The chosen scales were academic self-confidence (ASC),
commitment to college (CC), academic discipline (AD), general determination (GD), and goal
striving (GS). As the SRI in its entirety was unavailable for use, the mean of two sample
questions found in the ACT's (2008) SRI User's Guide was used to represent each scale. The
mean of all five scales was used to represent the SRI.
Procedure
The assessment was created using an online survey research tool. It was then hosted on

10. PV & SRI 10
the tool's website. Students were contacted in person, by email, and through social networking
websites. An informed consent form was provided at the beginning of the online assessment
assuring participants that their responses would remain confidential. Additionally, it informed
participants of the expected time commitment (10 minutes), and allowed them to input their
email address to receive the results of the study. The contact information of the primary
researcher and the Chair of the Committee for Protection of Human Participants was listed at the
bottom of the form. After agreeing to the terms of the study, participants were taken to a form to
input their sex and age. Participants then completed the PV assessment. This was followed by a
form collecting GPA1, SAT score, and ACT score. At the bottom of this form, participants were
asked if they were currently enrolled in an undergraduate degree program. Those that indicated
they were not were taken to the end of the assessment.
Those that answered affirmatively were taken to a page containing the ten SRI questions.
Upon completion, the next page asked students for their college major, college minor (or second
major), number of semesters completed, number of credits obtained, and GPA2. This page
included a link to students' academic institution's website, and encouraged students to look up
this information so as to give an accurate response. The next and final page of the assessment
thanked the participant and provided the contact information of the primary researcher. In this
assessment, only two questions were required for the participant to continue moving forward.
These were the participant's agreement to the informed consent form and their current college
enrollment status.

11. PV & SRI 11
Results
Table 1 shows the number of items, standard deviation, and internal consistency of the
SRI, the PV, and the subscales of both. The standard deviations and alphas showed no similarity
to the findings of Peterson et al. (2006). This was expected as the subscales of the full SRI each
contain ten to twelve questions rather than two, influencing both the alphas and standard
deviations. Of the PV subscales, H1 was found to have a relatively low alpha even after
removing three items indicating that the construct requires revision.
Table 1
Descriptive statistics and Cronbach's coefficient alpha of the SRI, the PV, and their subscales
Scale N SD α
SRI 10 .55 .75
ASC 2 .82 .54
CC 2 .81 .42
AD 2 .78 .38
GD 2 .85 .58
GS 2 .82 .50
PV 25 .47 .85
H1 7 .55 .62
H2 8 .58 .72
H3 10 .57 .73
Table 2 shows the intercorrelations of the SRI subscales in this study. Correlations range
from .19 to .47, with a median of .29. The lowest correlations exist between GS and CC, and
between GS and ASC. The highest correlations exist between GS and AD, and between GS and

12. PV & SRI 12
GD. All correlations are significant p < .01.
Table 2
Intercorrelations of the SRI subscales from this study
Scale ASC CC AD GD GS
ASC –
CC .32 –
AD .26 .19 –
GD .26 .33 .35 –
GS .21 .24 .47 .47 --
Note. N = 229. All correlations are significant (p < .01).
Table 3 shows intercorrelations of the SRI subscales from Robbins et al. (2005).
Correlations range from .40 to .79 with a median of .58. The lowest correlation exists between
ASC and GD. The highest correlation exists between GS and GD. With the exception of CC, the
correlation pattern between the two tables is roughly similar. If CC is removed, the two sets of
correlations show a significant relationship (r = .77). The lower correlations in Table 2 are likely
attributable to the smaller sample size and fewer SRI items in the current study.
Table 3
Intercorrelations of the SRI subscales from Robbins et al. (2005)
Scale ASC CC AD GD GS
ASC –
CC .43 –
AD .44 .54 –

13. PV & SRI 13
GD .40 .63 .69 –
GS .49 .63 .62 .79 --
Note. N = 14,464.
All three PV subscales significantly correlated with one another (p < .01). H1 related to
H2 at .52, and to H3 at .53. H2 and H3 shared a strong correlation of .62. These high
intercorrelations indicate that there is cause to consider the PV as a singular construct.
Table 4 features correlations between the SRI and the PV. As expected, the SRI showed a
strong relationship with the PV (r = .59). Including both sets of subscales, correlations ranged
from .19 (CC, H1) to .60 (SRI, H3) and all were significant (p < .01). The SRI and the subscales
of the PV were strongly related (r = .45 to .60). The PV showed strong relations with the
subscales of the SRI ranging from .25 (CC), to .57 (GS). The strongest relations within subscales
were found in GS and H3 (r = .56), GD and H3 (r = .48), GS and H2 (r = .46), AD and H3 (r = .
44), and GS and H1 (r = .42). The weakest relationships were between H1 and CC (r = .19), and
H2 and CC (r = .19).
Table 4
Correlations of the SRI and subscales with the PV with subscales
Scale H1 H2 H3 PV
ASC .24 .24 .25 .29
CC .19 .19 .25 .25
AD .29 .29 .44 .41
GD .36 .31 .48 .45
GS .42 .46 .56 .57

14. PV & SRI 14
SRI .45 .44 .60 .59
Note. N = 228. All correlations are significant (p < .01).
Participant demographics were significantly correlated with several scales. Age displayed
a direct relationship with H1 (r = .20, p < .01), H2 (r = .18, p < .01), H3 (r = .14, p < .05), PV (r
= .20, p < .01), and GS (r = .17, p < .05). Sex showed significant relationships with H1 and CC.
An independent samples t-test confirms that on average males scored .44 points lower on CC (t =
3.9, p < .01), and .19 points higher on H1 (t = 2.4, p < .05).
Several significant relationships were found between GPA2 and other demographics and
scales. GPA2 shares a positive relationship with GPA1 (r = .61, p < .01), SAT score (r = .19, p
< .01), and ACT score (r = .33, p < .01). Additionally, H3 shares a positive correlation with
GPA2 (r = .17, p < .05).
The SRI shares a positive relationship with GPA2 (r = .28, p < .01). SRI subscales AD (r
= .42, p < .01), and ASC (r = .30, p < .01) show significant positive correlations with GPA2.
These correlations are similar to those found by Peterson et al. (2006) as seen in Table 6.
Table 5
Correlations of GPA2 with the SRI subscales from the current study compared with the
correlations found by Peterson et al. (2006)
GPA2
Subscale Current Studya Peterson et al. (2006)b
ASC .30** .34**
CC .10 .27**
AD .42** .50**

15. PV & SRI 15
GD .06 .30**
GS .06 .25**
Note. Correlations from Peterson et al. (2006) are as listed before partialing out social
desirability.
a
n = 222. bn = 359.
*p < .05. **p < .01.

16. PV & SRI 16
Discussion
This study establishes a baseline for the construct validity and internal consistency of the
PV. As was expected, the SRI and the PV are clearly related (r = .59, p < .01). Furthermore, H1,
H2, and H3 are all directly related to the SRI; (.45, .44, and .60) respectively. All of the SRI
subscales and the PV subscales showed direct relationships with one another (range = .19 to .56,
median = .29, p < .01). As expected, the SRI scales significantly correlated with GPA2. H3 also
significantly correlated with GPA2, although not as strongly as the SRI.
It is to be expected that the SRI would act as a better predictor of GPA2 than any of the
PV constructs. The PV is a universal measure of effectiveness while the SRI's questions are
tailored towards the educational environment. Additionally, Covey's (1989) assumption is that
the habits are being integrated within a natural system such as a farm, within which it is
impossible to over-invest resources in production and ignore production capacity. As evidenced
by phenomenon such as cramming, academic outcomes can be manipulated. Future research
should validate the PV against a long-term, natural construct of effectiveness.
Strengths of this study include the high percentage of respondents that shared their
college GPA. The sample size of this study was reasonable, and eschewing the tendency of most
psychological studies, included fair degree of variability within college major. There are several
limitations to this study. The sample contained a high proportion of females to males, albeit
within the normal range of psychological research. The assessment did not collect data on
socioeconomic or minority status.
The low reliability of H1 needs to be addressed in a future study, and the other two habits
should be reviewed to improve internal consistency. Also, the PV only represents three of seven
habits. As they do not exist in isolation, it is worth including the other four in future research.

17. PV & SRI 17
One major limitation was the small pool of SRI questions from which to choose from. While
unfortunate, the data collected suggests that the items were generally representative of the scales
they were intended to measure.
The next study on the PV should validate against the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Since
Robbins et al. (2006) have already validated the SRI against the BFI, the present data could be
used to generate hypotheses for this future study. This study would allow us to improve the
reliability of the PV, and validate against a well-established psychological construct.

18. PV & SRI 18
References
ACT, Inc. (2008, December). SRI User's Guide. Retrieved April 9, 2009, from
http://www.act.org/sri/pdf/UserGuide.pdf
Covey, S. R. (1989). The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal
Change (pp. 18-179). 1230 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020: Free Press.
Le, H., Casillas, A., Robbins, S. B., & Langley, R. (2005). Motivational and skills, social, and
self-management predictors of college outcomes: Constructing the Student Readiness
Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65(3), 482-508.
Peterson, C. H., Casillas, A., & Robbins, S. B. (2006). The Student Readiness Inventory and the
Big Five: Examining social desirability and college academic performance. Personality
and Individual Differences, 41(4), 663-673.
Robbins, S. B., Allen, J., Casillas, A., Peterson, C. H., & Le, H. (2005). Unraveling the
differential effects of motivational and skills, social, and self-management measures from
traditional predictors of college outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 98(3),
98(3), 598-616.
Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do
Psychosocial and Study Skill Factors Predict College Outcomes? A meta-analysis.
Psychological Bulletin. Vol. 130(2), 130(2), 261-288.