Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Okul Öncesi Öğrenme Bağlılığı Gözlem Aracının Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Year 2025, Volume: 27 Issue: 1, 126 - 136, 31.03.2025
https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.1598138

Abstract

Okul öncesi eğitimde gerçekleşen öğrenme yaşantıları çocukların bilişsel, sosyal ve kişisel gelişimlerinin temelini oluşturmaktadır. Öğrenme süreçlerinin etkili bir şekilde gerçekleşmesinde ön plana çıkan öğrenme bağlılığı okul öncesi dönemde çocukların materyallere ve öğrenme çevresi ile olan etkileşimi olarak ele alınmakta çocukların gelişiminde önemli bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu kapsamda bu araştırmanın amacı okul öncesi dönemde öğrenme bağlılığını ölçmek üzere “Okul Öncesi Öğrenme Bağlılığı Gözlem Aracı”nı geliştirmektir. Gözlem aracının kapsam geçerliği için okul öncesi eğitim ve ölçme değerlendirme alanında bilimsel çalışmalar gerçekleştiren dokuz uzmanın görüşü alınmıştır. Güvenirlik çalışmaları, Ankara ili Yenimahalle ilçesine bağlı bir anaokuluna devam eden 60 ay ver üzeri çocuklardan oluşan iki sınıfta, on iki çocuk, iki gözlemci aracılığıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Elde edilen verilerin analizleri sonucunda gözlem aracının kapsam geçerlilik indeks (KGİ) değeri 0,82 olarak bulunmuştur. Bu değer, gözlem aracının kapsam geçerliliğinin istatistiksel olarak anlamlı olduğunu göstermiştir. İki farklı puanlayıcının uyum yüzdesini belirlemek için Cohen kappa istatistiği, puanlayıcı verilerinin ilişki katsayısını hesaplamak içinse Kendall’s Tau b korelasyon katsayısı kullanılmıştır. Cohen Kappa istatistik değeri 0,625 ile 0,887 arasında hesaplanmış ve bu değerler önemli ve çok önemli uyumu göstermiştir. Kendall’s Tau b değerleri ise 0,618 ile 0,908 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Bu değerler puanlayıcılar arası pozitif ve anlamlı ilişkiyi işaret etmektedir. Elde edilen sonuçlar doğrultusunda geliştirilen gözlem aracının eğitim araştırmalarında ve uygulamalarında çocukların öğrenme bağlılığının değerlendirmesinde etkili bir araç olarak kullanılabileceği sonucuna varılmıştır.

References

  • Altaş, D., Kaspar, E. Ç., ve Ergüt, Ö. (2012). İlişki katsayılarının karşılaştırılması: Bir simülasyon çalışması. Sosyal Bilimler Metinleri, 2012(2), 1-9.
  • Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., and Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
  • Barghaus, K., Fantuzzo, J., Brumley, B., Coe, K. and LeBoeuf, W. (2017). A Comprehensive Examination of the School District of Philadelphia’s Kindergarten Classroom Engagement Scale (CES): Validation Report. Reports. 1. https://repository.upenn.edu/pennchild_reports/1
  • Bilgen, Ö. B., ve Doğan, N. (2017). Puanlayıcılar arası güvenirlik belirleme tekniklerinin karşılaştırılması. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 8(1), 63-78
  • Bredekamp, S. (2015). Erken Çocukluk Eğitiminde Etkili Uygulamalar. (Effective Practices in Early Childhood Education, 2nd Edition). (Çev. Hatice Zeynep İnan ve Taşkın İnan). 343-345. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Coates, H. (2007). A model of online and general campus‐based student engagement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 121-141.
  • Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
  • Cohen. J. R., Swerdlik M. E., and Phillips, S. M. (1996). Psychological testing and assessment. (3th Ed.). London: Mayfield.
  • Connell, J. P. (1990). Context, self, and action: A motivational analysis of self-system processes across the life span. In D. Cicchetti and M. Beeghly (Eds.), The self in transition: Infancy to childhood (pp. 61–97). University of Chicago Press.
  • Connell, J.P., Spencer, M.B. and Aber, J.L. (1994) Educational risk and resilience in African-American youth: context, self, action, and outcomes in school. Child Development, 65, 493-506. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131398
  • Connell, J.P. and Wellborn, J.G. (1991) Competence, Autonomy, and Relatedness: A Motivational Analysis of Self- System Processes. In Gunnar, M.R. and Sroufe, L.A., Eds., Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, Vol. 23, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 43-77.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2017). Araştırma deseni: nitel, nicel ve karma yöntem yaklaşımları. Çev. Ed. Selçuk Beşir Demir). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.
  • DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Ölçek geliştirme: Kuram ve uygulamalar. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Doğan, U. (2014). Validity and Reliability of Student Engagement Scale (Öğrenci Bağlılık Ölçeğinin Geçerlik ve Güvenirliği. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 3(2), 390-403.
  • Evci, N., and Aylar, F. (2017). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında doğrulayıcı faktör analizinin kullanımı. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4(10), 389-412.
  • Ercan, İ., ve Kan, İ. (2004). Ölçeklerde güvenirlik ve geçerlik. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(3), 211-216.
  • Erkan ve Akyol. (2017). Leuven küçük çocuklar için katılım ölçeği geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Socıal Scıences Studıes Journal (SSSJournal), 3(9), 819-828.
  • Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117-142.
  • Finn, J. D., and Zimmer, K. S. (2012). Student engagement: What is it? Why does it matter? In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 97–133). New York: Springer
  • Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., and Paris, A. H. (2004). School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
  • Gökoğlu, S. (2021). Öğrenme Ortamlarında Bağlılık: Türkiye Adresli Lisansüstü Tezlerin İncelenmesi. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(2), 159-177.
  • Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., and Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, 90, 36–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005
  • Hesse, L. (2017). The effects of blended learning on K-12th grade students. Graduate Research Papers. 116. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/grp/116
  • Hojnoski, R. L., Missall, K. N., and Wood, B. K. (2020). Measuring Engagement in Early Education: Preliminary Evidence for the Behavioral Observation of Students in Schools–Early Education. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 45(4), 243-254. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1534508418820125
  • Karakoç, F. Y., ve Dönmez, L. (2014). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında temel ilkeler. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası, 13(40), 39-49.
  • Kishida, Y., and Kemp, C. (2006). A measure of engagement for children with intellectual disabilities in early childhood settings: a preliminary study. Journal of intellectual & developmental disability, 31(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668250600710823
  • Kocour, N. (2019). How Blended Learning Impacts Student Engagement in an Early Childhood Classroom. Retrieved from https://nwcommons.nwciowa.edu/education_masters/125
  • Kumtepe, A. T. (2011). Gözleme dayalı teknikler. A. A. Ceyhan ve M. Ören, (Eds.), Çocukları tanıma teknikleri içinde (ss. 53-77). Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi. Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayını No: 2273
  • Landis, J, R., and Koch, G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174
  • Ling, S. M., and Barnett, D. W. (2013). Increasing Preschool Student Engagement During Group Learning Activities Using a Group Contingency. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 33(3), 186-196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121413484595
  • Mandernach, B. J. (2015). Assessment of student engagement in higher education: A synthesis of literature and assessment tools. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 12(2), 1–14. Retrieved February 12, 2018 from http://www.ijlter.org/index.php/ ijlter/article/view/367.
  • Malhan S., ve Öksüz E. (2005). Geçerlik. Sağlığa Bağlı Yaşam Kalitesi Kalitemetri içinde 7. Bölüm: ss.78-103. Başkent Üniversitesi.
  • McWayne, C. M., Ochoa, W., Segovia, J., Zan, B., Greenfield, D., and Mistry, J. (2023). Engagement in the preschool classroom: Brief measures for use with children from ethno-racially diverse and low-income backgrounds. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 64, 177-185.
  • McWilliam, R. A., and Bailey, D. B. (1995). Effects of classroom social structure and disability on engagement. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 15(2), 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/027112149501500201
  • Newmann, F.M. (1981) Reducing Student Alienation in High Schools: Implications of Theory. Harvard Educational Review, 51, 546-564. http://dx.doi.org/10.17763/haer.51.4. xj67887u87l5t66t Newmann, F. M. (Ed.) (1992). Student Engagement and Achievement in American Secondary Schools. New York: Teachers College Press
  • OECD. (2006). Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care. OECD.
  • OECD. (2011). Starting Strong III, A Quality Toolbox for Early Childhood Education and Care. OECD.
  • OECD (2018), Education at a Glance 2018: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing.
  • Özdamar, K. (2016). Eğitim, sağlık ve davranış bilimlerinde ölçek ve test geliştirme yapısal eşitlik modellemesi. Eskişehir: Nisan Yayıncılık.
  • Price, T. S., and Jaffee, S. R. (2008). Effects of the family environment: Gene-environment interaction and passive gene-environment correlation. Developmental Psychology, 44(2), 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.44.2.305
  • Ritoša, A. (2023). Measurement of child engagement in early childhood education and care (Doctoral dissertation, Jönköping University, School of Education and Communication).
  • Ritoša, A., Åström, F., Björck, E., Borglund, L., Karlsson, E., McHugh, E., and Nylander, E. (2023). Measuring children’s engagement in early childhood education and care settings: A scoping literature review. Educational Psychology Review, 35(4), Article 99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09815-4
  • Rodgers, T. (2008). Student engagement in the e-learning process and the impact on their grades. International Journal of Cyber Society and Education, 1(2), 143-156. ATISR. Retrieved March 7, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org /p/209167/.
  • Sameroff, A. J., and Fiese, B. H. (2000). Transactional regulation: Thedevelopmental ecology of early intervention. In J. P. Shonkoff and S. J. Meisels (Eds), Handbook of early childhood intervention (2ndEdition, pp. 135–159). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  • Satapathy, S. (2019). Observation as a tool for collecting data. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research, 8(5), 152-164.
  • Sencer, M. ve Sencer, Y. (1978). Toplumsal araştırmalarda yöntembilim. Ankara: Türkiye ve Orta Doğu Amme İdaresi Enstitüsü Yayını.
  • Shapiro, E. S. (2011). Academic skills problems, fourth edition: Direct assessment and intervention. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Sim, J., and Wright, C. C. (2005) The Kappa statistic in reliability studies: Use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Physical Theraphy, 85(3), 258-268
  • Skinner, E. A. and 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(4), 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-0663.85.4.571
  • Steinhardt F, Dolva AS, Jahnsen R, Ullenhag A. Exploring two subdimensions of participation, involvement and engagement: A scoping review. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2022 Aug; 29 (6):441-463. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2021.1950207 Epub 2021 Jul 9. PMID: 34242105.
  • Şavran, T.G. (2012). Toplum, bilim ve yöntem. Suğur, N. (Ed.). Sosyolojiye Giriş içinde (Ünite 1). Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Wall, S., I. Litjens and M. Taguma (2015), Early childhood education and care review: England, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/education/school/earlychildhood-education-and-care-pedagogy-review-england.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2019).
  • Williford, A. P., Vick Whittaker, J. E., Vitiello, V. E., and Downer, J. T. (2013). Children's Engagement within the Preschool Classroom and Their Development of Self-Regulation. Early education and development, 24(2), 162–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2011.628270
  • Tavşancıl, E. (2002). Tutumların Ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
  • Tight, M (2020) Student retention and engagement in higher education, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44:5, 689-704, https://www.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X. 2019.1576860
  • Tuğrul, B. (2002). Erken çocukluk döneminde öğrenmeyi ve öğretimi kolaylaştıran özellikler. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(22).
  • Yurdugül, H. (2005). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında kapsam geçerliği için kapsam geçerlik indekslerinin kullanılması. XIV. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi, 1, 771-774.

Development of Post-Earthquake Cognitions Scale for Adolescents: Validity and Reliability Studies

Year 2025, Volume: 27 Issue: 1, 126 - 136, 31.03.2025
https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.1598138

Abstract

The learning experiences offered to children in preschool education form the basis of children's cognitive, social and personal development. Engagement, which comes to the forefront in the effective execution of learning processes, is considered as children's interaction with materials and the learning environment in the preschool period and plays an important role in children's development. In this context, the aim of this research is to develop the "Preschool Learning Engagement Observation Tool" to measure engagement in the preschool period. For the scope validity of the observation tool, 9 experts who carry out scientific studies in the field of preschool education and measurement and evaluation were included in the study. For reliability analyses, 12 children in 2 classes consisting of children aged 60 months and over attending a kindergarten in Yenimahalle district of Ankara province were observed by 2 observers. As a result of the analyses obtained, the scope validity index value of the observation tool was found to be 0.82. Cohen kappa statistic was calculated to determine the agreement percentage of two different raters, and Kendall's Tau b correlation coefficient was calculated to calculate the relationship coefficient of rater data. Cohen Kappa statistic value was calculated between 0.625 and 0.88. Kendall's Tau b values were calculated as 0.618 and 0.908. These values are marked as positive and consistent between raters. In line with the results obtained, it was concluded that the observation tool developed can be used as an effective tool in the evaluation of children's learning engagement in educational research and applications.

References

  • Altaş, D., Kaspar, E. Ç., ve Ergüt, Ö. (2012). İlişki katsayılarının karşılaştırılması: Bir simülasyon çalışması. Sosyal Bilimler Metinleri, 2012(2), 1-9.
  • Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., and Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
  • Barghaus, K., Fantuzzo, J., Brumley, B., Coe, K. and LeBoeuf, W. (2017). A Comprehensive Examination of the School District of Philadelphia’s Kindergarten Classroom Engagement Scale (CES): Validation Report. Reports. 1. https://repository.upenn.edu/pennchild_reports/1
  • Bilgen, Ö. B., ve Doğan, N. (2017). Puanlayıcılar arası güvenirlik belirleme tekniklerinin karşılaştırılması. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 8(1), 63-78
  • Bredekamp, S. (2015). Erken Çocukluk Eğitiminde Etkili Uygulamalar. (Effective Practices in Early Childhood Education, 2nd Edition). (Çev. Hatice Zeynep İnan ve Taşkın İnan). 343-345. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Coates, H. (2007). A model of online and general campus‐based student engagement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 121-141.
  • Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
  • Cohen. J. R., Swerdlik M. E., and Phillips, S. M. (1996). Psychological testing and assessment. (3th Ed.). London: Mayfield.
  • Connell, J. P. (1990). Context, self, and action: A motivational analysis of self-system processes across the life span. In D. Cicchetti and M. Beeghly (Eds.), The self in transition: Infancy to childhood (pp. 61–97). University of Chicago Press.
  • Connell, J.P., Spencer, M.B. and Aber, J.L. (1994) Educational risk and resilience in African-American youth: context, self, action, and outcomes in school. Child Development, 65, 493-506. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131398
  • Connell, J.P. and Wellborn, J.G. (1991) Competence, Autonomy, and Relatedness: A Motivational Analysis of Self- System Processes. In Gunnar, M.R. and Sroufe, L.A., Eds., Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, Vol. 23, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 43-77.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2017). Araştırma deseni: nitel, nicel ve karma yöntem yaklaşımları. Çev. Ed. Selçuk Beşir Demir). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.
  • DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Ölçek geliştirme: Kuram ve uygulamalar. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Doğan, U. (2014). Validity and Reliability of Student Engagement Scale (Öğrenci Bağlılık Ölçeğinin Geçerlik ve Güvenirliği. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 3(2), 390-403.
  • Evci, N., and Aylar, F. (2017). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında doğrulayıcı faktör analizinin kullanımı. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4(10), 389-412.
  • Ercan, İ., ve Kan, İ. (2004). Ölçeklerde güvenirlik ve geçerlik. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(3), 211-216.
  • Erkan ve Akyol. (2017). Leuven küçük çocuklar için katılım ölçeği geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Socıal Scıences Studıes Journal (SSSJournal), 3(9), 819-828.
  • Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117-142.
  • Finn, J. D., and Zimmer, K. S. (2012). Student engagement: What is it? Why does it matter? In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 97–133). New York: Springer
  • Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., and Paris, A. H. (2004). School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
  • Gökoğlu, S. (2021). Öğrenme Ortamlarında Bağlılık: Türkiye Adresli Lisansüstü Tezlerin İncelenmesi. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(2), 159-177.
  • Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., and Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, 90, 36–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005
  • Hesse, L. (2017). The effects of blended learning on K-12th grade students. Graduate Research Papers. 116. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/grp/116
  • Hojnoski, R. L., Missall, K. N., and Wood, B. K. (2020). Measuring Engagement in Early Education: Preliminary Evidence for the Behavioral Observation of Students in Schools–Early Education. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 45(4), 243-254. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1534508418820125
  • Karakoç, F. Y., ve Dönmez, L. (2014). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında temel ilkeler. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası, 13(40), 39-49.
  • Kishida, Y., and Kemp, C. (2006). A measure of engagement for children with intellectual disabilities in early childhood settings: a preliminary study. Journal of intellectual & developmental disability, 31(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668250600710823
  • Kocour, N. (2019). How Blended Learning Impacts Student Engagement in an Early Childhood Classroom. Retrieved from https://nwcommons.nwciowa.edu/education_masters/125
  • Kumtepe, A. T. (2011). Gözleme dayalı teknikler. A. A. Ceyhan ve M. Ören, (Eds.), Çocukları tanıma teknikleri içinde (ss. 53-77). Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi. Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayını No: 2273
  • Landis, J, R., and Koch, G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174
  • Ling, S. M., and Barnett, D. W. (2013). Increasing Preschool Student Engagement During Group Learning Activities Using a Group Contingency. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 33(3), 186-196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121413484595
  • Mandernach, B. J. (2015). Assessment of student engagement in higher education: A synthesis of literature and assessment tools. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 12(2), 1–14. Retrieved February 12, 2018 from http://www.ijlter.org/index.php/ ijlter/article/view/367.
  • Malhan S., ve Öksüz E. (2005). Geçerlik. Sağlığa Bağlı Yaşam Kalitesi Kalitemetri içinde 7. Bölüm: ss.78-103. Başkent Üniversitesi.
  • McWayne, C. M., Ochoa, W., Segovia, J., Zan, B., Greenfield, D., and Mistry, J. (2023). Engagement in the preschool classroom: Brief measures for use with children from ethno-racially diverse and low-income backgrounds. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 64, 177-185.
  • McWilliam, R. A., and Bailey, D. B. (1995). Effects of classroom social structure and disability on engagement. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 15(2), 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/027112149501500201
  • Newmann, F.M. (1981) Reducing Student Alienation in High Schools: Implications of Theory. Harvard Educational Review, 51, 546-564. http://dx.doi.org/10.17763/haer.51.4. xj67887u87l5t66t Newmann, F. M. (Ed.) (1992). Student Engagement and Achievement in American Secondary Schools. New York: Teachers College Press
  • OECD. (2006). Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care. OECD.
  • OECD. (2011). Starting Strong III, A Quality Toolbox for Early Childhood Education and Care. OECD.
  • OECD (2018), Education at a Glance 2018: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing.
  • Özdamar, K. (2016). Eğitim, sağlık ve davranış bilimlerinde ölçek ve test geliştirme yapısal eşitlik modellemesi. Eskişehir: Nisan Yayıncılık.
  • Price, T. S., and Jaffee, S. R. (2008). Effects of the family environment: Gene-environment interaction and passive gene-environment correlation. Developmental Psychology, 44(2), 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.44.2.305
  • Ritoša, A. (2023). Measurement of child engagement in early childhood education and care (Doctoral dissertation, Jönköping University, School of Education and Communication).
  • Ritoša, A., Åström, F., Björck, E., Borglund, L., Karlsson, E., McHugh, E., and Nylander, E. (2023). Measuring children’s engagement in early childhood education and care settings: A scoping literature review. Educational Psychology Review, 35(4), Article 99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09815-4
  • Rodgers, T. (2008). Student engagement in the e-learning process and the impact on their grades. International Journal of Cyber Society and Education, 1(2), 143-156. ATISR. Retrieved March 7, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org /p/209167/.
  • Sameroff, A. J., and Fiese, B. H. (2000). Transactional regulation: Thedevelopmental ecology of early intervention. In J. P. Shonkoff and S. J. Meisels (Eds), Handbook of early childhood intervention (2ndEdition, pp. 135–159). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  • Satapathy, S. (2019). Observation as a tool for collecting data. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research, 8(5), 152-164.
  • Sencer, M. ve Sencer, Y. (1978). Toplumsal araştırmalarda yöntembilim. Ankara: Türkiye ve Orta Doğu Amme İdaresi Enstitüsü Yayını.
  • Shapiro, E. S. (2011). Academic skills problems, fourth edition: Direct assessment and intervention. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Sim, J., and Wright, C. C. (2005) The Kappa statistic in reliability studies: Use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Physical Theraphy, 85(3), 258-268
  • Skinner, E. A. and 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(4), 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-0663.85.4.571
  • Steinhardt F, Dolva AS, Jahnsen R, Ullenhag A. Exploring two subdimensions of participation, involvement and engagement: A scoping review. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2022 Aug; 29 (6):441-463. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2021.1950207 Epub 2021 Jul 9. PMID: 34242105.
  • Şavran, T.G. (2012). Toplum, bilim ve yöntem. Suğur, N. (Ed.). Sosyolojiye Giriş içinde (Ünite 1). Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Wall, S., I. Litjens and M. Taguma (2015), Early childhood education and care review: England, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/education/school/earlychildhood-education-and-care-pedagogy-review-england.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2019).
  • Williford, A. P., Vick Whittaker, J. E., Vitiello, V. E., and Downer, J. T. (2013). Children's Engagement within the Preschool Classroom and Their Development of Self-Regulation. Early education and development, 24(2), 162–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2011.628270
  • Tavşancıl, E. (2002). Tutumların Ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
  • Tight, M (2020) Student retention and engagement in higher education, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44:5, 689-704, https://www.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X. 2019.1576860
  • Tuğrul, B. (2002). Erken çocukluk döneminde öğrenmeyi ve öğretimi kolaylaştıran özellikler. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(22).
  • Yurdugül, H. (2005). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında kapsam geçerliği için kapsam geçerlik indekslerinin kullanılması. XIV. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi, 1, 771-774.
There are 57 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Classroom Measurement Practices, Early Childhood Education
Journal Section In This Issue
Authors

Müesser İlknur Coşkunsoy 0009-0003-4356-8819

Hünkar Korkmaz 0000-0002-5289-1111

Early Pub Date March 28, 2025
Publication Date March 31, 2025
Submission Date December 8, 2024
Acceptance Date March 21, 2025
Published in Issue Year 2025 Volume: 27 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Coşkunsoy, M. İ., & Korkmaz, H. (2025). Okul Öncesi Öğrenme Bağlılığı Gözlem Aracının Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(1), 126-136. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.1598138