Öğretmen Adaylarının Kaynaştırmanın Etkisine Yönelik Tutumları: Kaynaştırmanın Etkisi Anketi’nin (KEA) Geçerlilik Güvenirlilik Çalışması

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, orijinali Hastings ve Oakford, (2003) tarafından geliştirilen Kaynaştırma Etkisi Anketi’ni (KEA) Türkçeye uyarlayarak ölçeğin Türkiye koşullarında geçerlik ve güvenirliğini incelemektir. Geçerlik ve güvenirliğin sağlanması amacıyla, ölçek araştırma grubu tesadüfi örnekleme yöntemi ile belirlenmiştir. Ölçek, İstanbul İlline bağlı Üniversitelerde öğrenim gören 286 dördüncü sınıf öğretmen adayına uygulanmıştır. Kaynaştırma Etkisi Anketi (KEA) ilişkin yapı geçerliliğini tespit etmek ve faktör yapısını ortaya koymak amacıyla Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) yapılmıştır. Gerçekleştirilen açımlayıcı faktör analizleri ile ölçeğin dört boyutlu bir yapıyı temsil ettiği bulunmuştur. Model üzerine kurulan yapının doğruluğu daha gelişmiş bir analiz tekniği olan Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) ile test edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, ölçeğin dört boyutlu bir yapı gösterdiğini destekler yöndedir. Buna göre ölçeğin birinci boyutu; kaynaştırma eğitimi ile ilgili olumlu tutumlar, ikinci boyutu; kaynaştırma eğitimi ile ilgili olumsuz tutumlar, üçüncü boyutu; kaynaştırmanın öğretmene etkisi ve son boyutu ise; kaynaştırmanın topluma etkisidir. Aynı zamanda iç tutarlılık güvenirlik analizi de gerçekleştirilmiş ve elde edilen Alpha değerinin (.86) yüksek iç tutarlılığa işaret ettiği görülmüştür. Elde edilen sonuçlar, KEA’nin Türkiye’de kullanılabilecek nitelikte olduğunu göstermiştir.

Keywords

• Kaynaştırma
• tutumlar
• öğretmen adayları
• güvenirlilik ve geçerlilik çalışması.
• Kaynaştırma Etkisi Anketi.

Attitudes of Teacher Candidates towards the Impact of Inclusion: Validity and Reliability Study of the Impact of Inclusion Questionnaire (IIQ)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to adapt the original Impact of Inclusion Questionnaire (IIQ), developed by Hastings and Oakford (2003), into Turkish and examine the validity and reliability of the scale under Turkish conditions. To ensure validity and reliability, the sample group for the scale was determined through random sampling method. The scale was administered to 286 fourth-year teacher candidates studying at universities in Istanbul Province. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted to determine the construct validity of the Impact of Inclusion Questionnaire (IIQ) and to reveal its factor structure. The exploratory factor analyses conducted indicated that the scale represented a four-dimensional structure. The accuracy of the model constructed on the structure was tested using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), which is a more advanced analysis technique. The findings supported that the scale exhibited a four-dimensional structure. Accordingly, the first dimension of the scale represents positive attitudes towards inclusive education, the second dimension represents negative attitudes towards inclusive education, the third dimension represents the impact of inclusion on teachers, and the fourth dimension represents the impact of inclusion on society. Additionally, internal consistency reliability analysis was conducted, and the obtained Alpha value (.86) indicated high internal consistency. The results demonstrated that the IES is suitable for use in Turkey.

Keywords

• Inclusion
• Attitudes
• Teacher candidates
• Reliability and validity study
• Impact of Inclusion Questionnaire.

References

1. Agbenyega, J. (2007). Examining Teachers' Concerns and Attitudes to Inclusive Education in Ghana. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 3(1), 41-56.
2. Alpar, R. (2013). Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik yöntemler. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık
3. Avramidis, E., & Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers' attitudes towards integration / inclusion: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17(2), 129-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250210129056
4. Aydın, İ., & Gümüşboğa, İ. (2022). İnternet Aracılığıyla Spor Ürünü Satın Alma Niyeti Ölçeği: Türkçe Uyarlama Çalışması. Abant Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 22(2), 418-431.
5. Bailey, K. D. (1982). Methods of Social Research. New York: Free Press.
6. Bizer GY, Barden JC, Petty RE. (2003). Attitudes. Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. London: Nature Publishing Group, 247–53.
7. Brown, C. (2018). Meeting the needs of all students: A teacher perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 25(2), 201-215.
8. Brown, C. (2019). Teacher perceptions of inclusion: A qualitative study. International Journal of Special Education, 34(3), 201-215.

9. Brown, E., & Jones, F. (2017). Understanding the role of teacher attitudes in inclusive classrooms. Educational Psychology Review, 38(4), 567-581.
10. Burke, K & Sutherland, C. (2004). Attitudes toward inclusion: knowledge vs. experience. Education,125(2), 163-172.
11. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2011). Testlerin geçerlik ve güvenirlik analizlerinde kullanılan bazı istatistikler. Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı, 15, 82-167.
12. Byrne, M. B. (1998). Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. New York: Psychogy Press.
13. Chow, P., & Winzer, M. M. (1992). Reliability and validity of a scale measuring attitudes toward mainstreaming. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52(1), 223-228. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316449205200127
14. Çaparlar, C. Ö., Dönmez, A. (2016). Bilimsel Araştırma Nedir, Nasıl Yapılır?. Turk J. Anaesthesiol Reanim, 44, 212-218.
15. De Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2011). Regular primary schoolteachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education: A review of the literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(3), 331-353. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110903030089
16. Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194-197.
17. Durna, T. (2009). Nedensellik ve Araştırma Tasarımları. K. Böke (Ed.) Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri. İstanbul: Alfa Yayınları.
18. Eğitim reformu girişimi (ERG) (2011). Eğitim izleme raporu 2010. İstanbul: Sabancı Üniversitesi. 25 Kasım 2012 tarihinde http://erg.sabanciuniv.edu/egitimizlemeraporlari adresinden erişildi.
19. Eğitim reformu girişimi (ERG) (2016). Eğitim izleme raporu: 2016-2017. http://www.egitimreformugirisimi.org/egitim-gozlemevi/izleme/ adresinden erişilmiştir.
20. Ellins, J., & Porter, J. (2005). Departmental differences in attitudes to special educational needs in the secondary school. British Journal of Special Education, 32(4), 188-195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8578.2005.00396.x
21. Favazza, P. C., & Odom, S. L. (1997). Promoting Positive Attitudes of Kindergarten-Age Children toward People with Disabilities. Exceptional Children, 63(3), 405-418. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299706300308
22. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
23. Florian, L. (2010).“The Concept of Inclusive Pedagogy.” InTransforming the Role of the SENCO, 61–72. Buckingham: Open University Press.
24. Forlin, C., & Chambers, D. (2011). Teacher preparation for inclusive education: Increasing knowledge but raising concerns. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 39(1), 17-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866x.2010.540850
25. Hastıngs, R. P., & Oakford, S. (2003). Student teachers' attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special needs. Educational Psychology, 23(1), 87-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410303223
26. Hayes, K., & Gunn, P. (1988). Attitudes of parents and teachers toward mainstreaming. The Exceptional Child, 35(1), 31-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/0156655880350104
27. Johnson, A., & Smith, B. (2021). Attitudes of teachers towards the inclusion of children with special needs. Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(2), 78-92.
28. Johnson, D. (2018). Teacher perceptions and attitudes towards inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(2), 201-215.
29. Jordan, A. (2007). Introduction to inclusive education. Mississauga, ON: John Wiley and Sons.
30. Jöreskog, K. G. ve Sörbom, D. (2002). The Student Editions of LISREL 8.53 for Windows. Lincolnwood. IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.
31. Jury, M., Laurence, A., Cèbe, S., & Desombre, C. (2023). Teachers’ concerns about inclusive education and the links with teachers’ attitudes. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.1065919
32. Karasar, N. (2009). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. (20. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
33. Leyser, Y., & Kirk *, R. (2004). Evaluating inclusion: An examination of parent views and factors influencing their perspectives. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 51(3), 271-285. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912042000259233
34. Majoko, T. (2018). Participation in higher education: Voices of students with disabilities. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1542761. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2018.1542761
35. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2005). Teachers Matter: Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers, OECD, Paris, 2005.
36. Punch, K. F. (2000). Developing Effective Research Proposals. London: Sage Publications.
37. Punch, K. F. (2003). Survey Research The Basics. London: Sage Publications.
38. Ross‐Hill, R. (2009). Teacher attitude towards inclusion practices and special needs students. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 9(3), 188-198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2009.01135.x
39. Salend, S.J., & Duhaney, L.M.G. (1999). The impact of inclusion on students with and withoutdisabilities and their educators. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 114–126.
40. Savaşır, I., & Şahin, N. H. (Eds.). (1997). Bilişsel-davranışçı terapilerde değerlendirme: Sık kullanılan ölçekler. Türk Psikologlar Derneği.
41. Savolainen, H., Engelbrecht, P., Nel, M., & Malinen, O. (2011). Understanding teachers’ attitudes and self-efficacy in inclusive education: Implications for pre-service and in-service teacher education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 27(1), 51-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2011.613603
42. Schroth, G., Moorman, M. A., & Fullwood, H. (1997). Effects of training on teachers' stages of concern regarding inclusion (Report No. 020922). Commerce, TX (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 406 099).
43. Scruggs, T.E., & Mastropieri, M.A. (1996). Teacher perceptions of mainstreaming/inclusion, 1958–1995: A research synthesis. Exceptional Children, 63, 59–74.
44. Smith, A., & Johnson, B. (2020). Teacher concerns and challenges in inclusive education. Journal of Inclusive Education, 10(3), 45-58.
45. Smith, A., Johnson, B., & Davis, C. (2020). The impact of teacher attitudes on inclusion success. Journal of Education Research, 25(3), 45-58.
46. Stoiber, K. C., Gettinger, M., & Goetz, D. (1998). Exploring factors influencing parents' and early childhood practitioners' beliefs about inclusion. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 13(1), 107-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0885-2006(99)80028-3 Symeonidou, S., & Phtiaka, H. (2009). Using teachers' prior knowledge, attitudes and beliefs to develop in-service teacher education courses for inclusion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(4), 543-550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.001
47. Tabachnick, B. G. ve Fidell, L. S. (2006). Using Multivariate Statistics. (15. Baskı). New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
48. Taylor, R. W., & Ringlaben, R. P. (2012). Impacting Pre-Service Teachers' Attitudes toward Inclusion. Higher Education Studies, 2(3), 16-23.doi:10.5539/hes.v2n3p16
49. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (2021). Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu Bölgelere Göre Nüfus Yoğunluğu. Erişim adresi: https://cip.tuik.gov.tr/#, (Erişim tarihi: 21.02.2024).
50. UNESCO.1994.The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Salamanca: UNESCO
51. Westwood, P., & Graham, L. (2003). Inclusion of students with special needs:Benefits and obstacles perceived by teachers in New South Wales and south Australia. Australian Journal of Learning Disabilities, 8(1), 3-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404150309546718