DEVELOPMENT AND ADAPTATION STUDY OF TEACHERS’ MOTIVATIONAL SUPPORT SCALE

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to develop a scale in order to determine the students’ perceptions on their teachers’ motivational support. For this purpose two pilot studies, one of which is to develop and the other is to adapt, were realized. 418 high school and 215 middle school students participated in the validity and reliability studies. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was used. Item discriminations were tested and determined, the reliability of scale Cronbach Alpha internal consistency coefficient were calculated. In the end the scale composed of 24 items and four factors that are named as competence support, autonomy support and relatedness support is identified. Cronbach internal consistency coefficient of the whole scale was found to be .94 for high school and for .92 middle school.

Keywords

• Teacher support
• competence
• autonomy
• relatedness
• motivation

ÖĞRETMEN GÜDÜSEL DESTEĞİ ÖLÇEĞİ GELİŞTİRME VE UYARLAMA ÇALIŞMASI

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı öğrencilerin öğretmenlerinin güdüsel desteğine ilişkin algılarını belirlemek amacıyla kullanılabilecek bir ölçme aracı geliştirmektir. Bu amaçla biri ölçek geliştirme biri uyarlama olmak üzere iki ayrı çalışma gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmalara toplam 418 lise öğrencisi ve 215 ortaokul öğrencisi katılmıştır. Analizler sırasında açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizine başvurulmuş, madde ayırt edicilikleri hesaplanmış, Cronbach Alpha güvenirlik sayısı hesaplanmıştır. Çalışmalar sonunda kişisel ilişki desteği, özerklik desteği ve yetkinlik desteği alt boyutlarından oluşan ölçeğin 24 maddeden oluştuğu belirlenmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda üç boyutlu modelin hem lise hem de ortaokul öğrencileri için uygun olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ölçeğin Cronbach Alpha katsayısı lise öğrencileri için .94 ortaokul öğrencileri için. 92 olarak hesaplanmıştır.

Keywords

• Öğretmen desteği
• kişisel ilişki
• yetkinlik
• özerklik
• güdü

References

1. Alfi, O., Assor, A.,& Katz, I. (2004). Learning to allow temporary failure: Potential benefits, supportive practices and teacher concerns. Journal of Education for Teaching, 30(1), 27-41.
2. Assor, A., Kaplan, H., & Roth, G. (2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students' engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(2), 261-278.
3. Başaran, İ.E. (1982). Örgütsel davranış yönetimi. Ankara: A.Ü. Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Yayını, No: 111.
4. Benita, M., Roth, G., & Deci, E. L. (2014). When are mastery goals more adaptive? It depends on experiences of autonomy support and autonomy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 258.
5. Black, A. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). The effects of instructors' autonomy support and students' autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self- determination theory perspective. Science Education, 84(6), 740-756.
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 32, 470-483.
7. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık
8. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1024.

9. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. University Rochester Press.
10. Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A. J., Sheinman, L., & Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to assess adults' orientations toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(5), 642.
11. Furrer, C., & Skinner, E. A. (2003). Sense of relatedness as a factor in children's academic engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 148- 162.
12. Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. E. (1987). Looking in classrooms. NewYork: PearsonEducation Inc.
13. Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1997). Children's relationships with adults and peers: An examination of elementary and junior high school students. Journal of School Psychology, 35(1), 81-99.
14. Midgley, C., Feldlauffer, H., & Eccles, J. (1989). Student/teacher relations and attitudes toward mathematics before and after the transition to junior high school. Child Development, 60, 981-992.
15. Reddy, R., Rhodes, J. E., & Mulhall, P. (2003). The influence of teacher support on student adjustment in the middle school years: A latent growth curve study. Development and Psychopathology, 15(01), 119-138.
16. Reeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students’ autonomy during a learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 209–218.
17. Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S., & Barch, J. (2004). Enhancing students' engagement byincreasing teachers' autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion, 28(2), 147-169.
18. Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25,54- 67.doi:,10.1006/ ceps.1999.1020
19. Ryan, R.M., Stiller, J.D., & Lynch, J.H. (1994). Representations of relationships to teachers, parents, and friendsas predictors of academic motivation and self- esteem. Journal of Early Adolescence, 14, 226-249.
20. Sierens, E., Vansteenkiste, M., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., & Dochy, F. (2009). The synergistic relationship of perceived autonomy support and structure in predictor of self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 57-68.
21. Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 571-581.
22. Stefanou, C. R., Perencevich, K. C., DiCintio, M., & Turner, J. C. (2004). Supporting autonomy in the classroom: Ways teachers encourage student decision making and ownership. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 97-110.
23. Şencan, H. (2005). Sosyal ve davranışsal ölçümlerde geçerlilik ve güvenirlik Ankara: Seçkin Matbaası.
24. Şimşek, Ö.F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş - Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ankara: Ekinoks Yayıncılık.
25. Tucker, C. M., Zayco, R. A., Herman, K. C., Reinke, W. M., Trujillo, M., Carraway, K., Wallack, C., & Ivery P. D., (2002).Teacher and child variables as predictors of academic engagement among low-income AfricanAmerican children. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 477–488.
26. Vansteenkiste, M., Zhou, M., Lens, W., & Soenens, B. (2005). Experiences of autonomy and control among Chinese learners: Vitalizing or immobilizing?.Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3), 468.
27. Yılmaz, V. & Çelik, H.E. (2009). Lisrel ile yapısal eşitlik modellemesi-I Ankara:Pegem Akademi