Writing Self-Efficacy Instrument Validation

Update:  March 24 — I think I have enough! Thanks so much everyone for your enthusiastic support.
Hello Twitter Followers and Blog Followers,
I am seeking experts to help me review, revise and validate,  a newly developed writing self-efficacy instrument. My instrument takes a different approach to writing self-efficacy.  Current instruments tend to assess textual surface abilities and writing process abilities. I intent to also consider the role of discipline and writing context on writing self-efficacy.
I am in the process of putting together the final members of a Delphi panel to assess the fit of 41 pre-developed items to the concept of writing self-efficacy and several theoretical socially constructed domains of writing (identity, creativity, relationality, emotions, and context). I hope to be able to send out the survey by the end of next week.
My inclusion criteria for this panel are:
1. Nursing scholars interested in writing in the nursing discipline (as I am studying writing from within the discipline of nursing)
2. Writing scholars (which is broadly defined).
I have several scholars from Canada, the US and Australia who have tentatively agreed to receive my online survey related to validating the newly developed instrument, however I desire a more widely international panel and would love to also include scholars from Europe, Asia, Africa, South America and the Middle East as is possible.  However, if you are from Canada, US, or Australia and are keen to participate, I will not turn you away. You do not need to be an established scholar as masters and doctoral students studying writing scholarship would also qualify.
If you or anyone you know may be interested in participating on this expert panel, please feel free to reply to this blog, to the corresponding Twitter post, or email me at academicswrite @ gmail .com (close the spaces).
In terms of time commitment, there will be several rounds of surveys which will help with making decisions about retaining, eliminating and editing the items as they are currently written. As items are approved for inclusion, they will be eliminated from future rounds. I expect a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 4 rounds. The first round will take the longest (30-60) minutes. The subsequent rounds should take less time.
Please let me know if you have any questions and feel free to pass on this request to other scholars who might be interested.
Kim M. Mitchell  RN MN
Doctoral Candidate
University of Manitoba