Ortaokul Öğrencileri için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması

Suat Türkoguz; Handan Bozkurt Yıldız

TR EN

Ortaokul Öğrencileri için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, ortaokul öğrencilerinin mühendislik tasarım becerileri algısını ölçmeye yönelik geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı uyarlamaktır. Araştırma, nicel araştırma yaklaşımı kapsamında metodolojik bir ölçek uyarlama deseniyle yürütülmüştür. Ölçek uyarlama sürecinde Moazzen, Miller, Wild, Jackson ve Hadwin (2014) tarafından geliştirilen, Kayalar (2017) tarafından fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarıyla Türkçeye uyarlanan ve Sarı (2025) tarafından Bilim ve Sanat Merkezi 7. sınıf öğrencileriyle tekrar yapılandırılan ölçek, STEM eğitimi almayan ortaokul öğrencileri için uygun biçimde yeniden düzenlenmiştir. Ölçeğin 62 maddelik ön uygulama formu, 2023–2024 eğitim-öğretim yılında İzmir ili Karabağlar ilçesinde öğrenim gören 5., 6., 7. ve 8. sınıf öğrencilerine uygulanmıştır. Yapılan analizler sonucunda ölçeğin taslak formundan 23 maddelik dört faktörlü bir yapı elde edilmiştir. Ölçeğin alt boyutları "Kuluçka Aşamasında Tasarım Planlama ve Geliştirme Becerileri Algısı", "Yenilikçi Tasarım Geliştirme ve Süreci Yönetme Becerileri Algısı", "Mühendislik Raporlama ve Sunum Becerileri Algısı" ve "Tasarım Değerlendirme Becerileri Algısı" olarak adlandırılmıştır. Alt boyutlara ilişkin Cronbach Alfa katsayıları 0,61 ile 0,75 arasında değişmekte; ölçeğin tamamı için bu değer 0,72 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonuçlarından modelin iyi uyum değerlerine sahip olduğu anlaşılmaktadır. Elde edilen bulgular, geliştirilen ölçeğin ortaokul öğrencilerinin mühendislik tasarım becerileri algısını ölçmede geçerli ve güvenilir bir araç olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

Bu çalışma, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü Matematik ve Fen Bilimleri Eğitimi Anabilim Dalı Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenliği yüksek lisans programında yürütülmekte olan “Ortaokul Öğrencileri İçin Mühendislik Tasarımı ve Takım Becerileri Algısına Yönelik Ölçeklerin Geliştirilmesi” başlıklı yüksek lisans tezinden üretilmiştir.

Ethical Statement

Çalışmada etik dışı bir husus bulunmadığını, araştırma ve yayın etiğine özenle uyulduğunu beyan ederiz.

Adapting the Engineering Design Skills Perception Survey (EDSPS) for Middle School Students into Turkish

Abstract

The aim of this study is to adapt a valid and reliable measurement tool to assess middle school students' perception of engineering design process skills. The study was conducted with a methodological scale adaptation design within the quantitative research approach. During the scale adaptation process, the scale originally developed by Moazzen, Miller, Wild, Jackson, and Hadwin (2014), adapted into Turkish for preservice science teachers by Kayalar (2017), and restructured with 7th grade Science and Art Center students by Sarı (2025), was readapted appropriately for middle school students without prior formal STEM education. The initial form of the scale consisted of 62 items and was administered to middle school students across grades 5 to 8 from two different schools in the Karabağlar district of İzmir during the 2023–2024 academic year. As a result of the analysis, a 4-factor structure consisting of 23 items was obtained from the draft form of the scale. The subscales of the instrument were named 'Perception of Design Planning and Development Skills in the Incubation Stage', 'Perception of Innovative Design Development and Process Management Skills', 'Perception of Engineering Reporting and Presentation Skills', and 'Perception of Design Evaluation Skills'. The Cronbach's Alpha coefficients for the sub-dimensions range from .61 to .75; this value is calculated as .72 for the entire scale. Confirmatory factor analysis results indicate that the model exhibits good fit indices. The findings demonstrate that the adapted scale is a valid and reliable tool for measuring middle school students' perceptions of engineering design processes.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

This study was derived from the master's thesis titled “Development of Scales Towards Perception of Engineerıng Design and Team Skills for Secondary School Students,” which is currently being conducted in the Master's Program in Science Education, Department of Mathematics and Science Education at the Institute of Educational Sciences, Dokuz Eylül University.

Ethical Statement

We declare that there are no unethical matters in the study and that research and publication ethics were meticulously observed.

References

ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission. (2019). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, 2019–2020. ABET Board of Delegates.
American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: Project 2061. Oxford University Press.
Astano, J. L. (2019). Trends and challenges in the classroom implementation of engineering design process (EDP): A systematic literature review. International Journal of Education Science (IJES), 2(1), 55–74.
Bailey, R., & Szabo, Z. (2006). Assessing engineering design process knowledge. International Journal of Engineering Education, 22(3), 508–518.
Baker, D., Krause, S., & Purzer, S. (2008, June 22–25). Developing an instrument to measure tinkering and technical self efficacy in engineering. 2008 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Bakırcı, H., & Kaplan, Y. (2021). Fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin mühendislik ve tasarım becerileri alanında karşılaştığı sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 9(18), 626–654. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.908161
Balçın, M. D., Yıldırım, M., & Oymak, S. A. (2024). Ortaokul öğrencilerine yönelik mühendisliğin doğası anlayışı ölçeği: Geliştirme, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Manisa Celal Bayar University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 12(2), 437–457. https://doi.org/10.52826/mcbuefd.1517818
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman and Company.

Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Benek, I. & Akcay, B. (2019). Development of STEM attitude scale for secondary school students: Validity and reliability study. International Journal of Education in Mathematics,Science and Technology (IJEMST), 7(1), 32-52. https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.509258
Bond T. G., & Fox C. M. (2007). Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Institute for Objective Measurement.
Boone, W. J., & Noltemeyer, A. (2017). Rasch analysis: A primer for school psychology researchers and practitioners. Cogent Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1416898
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2006). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (7. bsk.). Pegem A Yayıncılık.
Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çokluk-Bökeoğlu, Ö., & Köklü, N. (2021). Sosyal bilimler için istatistik (29. baskı). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30–35.
Canbazoğlu Bilici, S., Küpeli, M. A., & Guzey, S. S. (2021). Inspired by nature: an engineering design-based biomimicry activity. Science Activities, 58(2), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/00368121.2021.1918049
Cantrell, P., Pekcan, G., Itani, A., & Velasquez-Bryant, N. (2006). The effects of engineering modules on student learning in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(4), 301–309. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00905.x
Capobianco, B. M., Diefes-Dux, H. A., Mena, I., & Weller, J. (2011). What is an engineer? Implications of elementary school student conceptions for engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 304–328. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb01015.x
Capobianco, B. M., French, B. F., & Diefes-Dux, H. A. (2012). Engineering identity development among pre-adolescent learners. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 698–716. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb01125.x
Carberry, A. R., Lee, H. S., & Ohland, M. W. (2010). Measuring engineering design self-efficacy. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(1), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01043.x
Cardella, M. E., Oakes, W. C., Zoltowski, C. B., Adams, R., Purzer, S., Borgford-Parnell, J., Bailey, R., & Davis, D. (2011, October). Assessing student learning of engineering design. Special session at the 41st meeting of ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Rapid City, SD. https://doi.org/10.1109/fie.2011.6143109
Carr, R. L., & Strobel, J. (2011). Integrating engineering design challenges into secondary STEM education. National Center for Engineering and Technology Education. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ncete_publications/172
Çepni, S. (2021). Araştırma ve proje çalışmalarına giriş (9. baskı). Celepler Matbaası.
Çepni, S. (2023). Kuramdan uygulamaya STEM+ eğitimi (5. baskı). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. Pegem Akademi.
Çorlu, M. S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). Introducing STEM education: Implications for educating our teachers in the age of innovation. Education and Science, 39(171), 74-85. https://doi.org/10.15390/ES.2014.1219
Crismond, D. P., & Adams, R. S. (2012). The informed design teaching and learning matrix. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 738–797. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb01127.x
Cunningham, C. M., & Hester, K. (2007, June 24–27). Engineering is elementary: An engineering and technology curriculum for children. 2007 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, HI, United States.
Cunningham, C. M., Lachapelle, C., & Lindgren-Streicher, A. (2005, June). Assessing elementary school students' conceptions of engineering and technology. Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, Oregon.
Davila Rangel, J. G. (2010). Engineering design educational model: From skills to objectives (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Texas at El Paso.
Delen, İ., & Yuksel, T. (2022). Understanding trends in engineering design and design-based learning studies with a bibliometric approach. European Journal of Engineering Education, 47(6), 1380–1398. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2022.2104695
Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O., Frey, D. D., & Leifer, L. J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103–120.
Ercan, S., & Bozkurt, E. (2013). Mühendislik tasarım temelli fen eğitimi: Bir uygulama örneği. Eğitim ve Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 193–203.
Ergün, A. (2018). Türk ortaokul öğrencilerinin mühendislik ve teknoloji algıları: Sınıf düzeyi ve cinsiyetin etkisi. Journal of Human Sciences, 15(4), 2657–2673.
Erol, A., Canbeldek Erol, M., Özcan, Ö., Öğütcen, A., & İvrendi, A. (2026). Psychometric properties of self-efficacy scales in early STEM education and teaching engineering. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2026.2669559
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2003). Designing and teaching courses to satisfy the ABET engineering criteria. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(1), 7–25.
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Fischl, C., & Fisher, A. G. (2007) Development and Rasch analysis of the assessment of computer-related skills. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 14(2), 126–135.
Guzey, S. S., & Ring-Whalen, E. A. (2018). Negotiating science and engineering: An exploratory case study of a reform-minded science teacher. International Journal of Science Education, 40(7), 723–741. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1445310
Harari, Y. N. (2018). 21. yüzyıl için 21 ders (S. Siral, Çev.). Kolektif Kitap.
Harrington, D. (2009). Confirmatory factor analysis. Oxford University Press.
Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (Ed.). (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press.
Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.
Hynes, M., Portsmore, M., Dare, E., Milto, E., Rogers, C., Hammer, D., & Carberry, A. (2011). Infusing engineering design into high school STEM courses. National Center for Engineering and Technology Education. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/ncete_publications/165
Jin, S. H., Song, K. I., Shin, D. H., & Shin, S. (2015). A performance-based evaluation rubric for assessing and enhancing engineering design skills in introductory engineering design courses. International Journal of Engineering Education, 31(4), 1007–1020.
Kahraman, N., Yecan, E., Taşkın Ekici, F., & Kara, İ. (2024). Mühendislik tasarım becerileri özyeterlik algı ölçeği’nin (MTBÖAÖ) geliştirilmesi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 61, 458–480. https://doi.org/10.9779/pauefd.1284927
Karakaya, F., & Yılmaz, M. (2021). Fen lisesi öğrencilerinin mühendislik tasarım süreçlerinin incelenmesi. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(3), 511–534. https://doi.org/10.17860/mersinefd.993346
Kayalar, A. (2017). Mobil teknolojiye dayalı FeTeMM uygulamalarının öğretmen adaylarının mühendislik tasarım becerilerine, sistem düşünme zekâsına öğretmenlik özyeterliklerine etkisi (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi.
Khan, M. S., Wu, N., & Ibrahim, M. (2018, June 24–27). A study on measuring self-efficacy in engineering modeling and design courses. 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.
Kline, P. (2014). An easy guide to factor analysis. Routledge.
Koskey, K. L. K., Makki, N., Ahmed, W., Garafolo, N. G., & Visco, D. P. (2020). Modification and validation of the mixed-format Engineering Concept Assessment for middle school students using many-facet Rasch measurement. School Science and Mathematics, 120(6), 309–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12405
Koyuncu, İ., & Kılıç, A. (2019). The use of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses: A document analysis. Education and Science, 44(198), 361-388. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2019.7665
Krynen, A., Kim, C. J., Burkholder, E. W., & Sheppard, S. D. (2025). A novel assessment of mechanical engineering design skills. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 53(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/03064190251396099
Lee, E., Carberry, A. R., Dalal, M., & Miller, M. J. (2021, July), Exploring the validity of the engineering design self-efficacy scale for secondary school students (Research to practice). 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual Conference, Long Beach, CA, USA.
Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., Disessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A. (2019). Design and design thinking in STEM education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 2(2), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-019-00020-z
Linacre J. M. (2019). FACETS: Computer program for many faceted Rasch measurement (Version 3.82.1). Mesa Press.
Linacre, J. M. (2002). What do infit and outfit, mean-square and standardized mean? Rasch Measurement Transactions, 16(2), 878.
Linacre, J. M. (2006). Data variance explained by Rasch measures. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 20(1), 1045.
Linacre, J.M. (2014). Facets many-facet Rasch measurement software. Mesa Press.
Lippard, C. N., Lamm, M. H., & Riley, K. L. (2017). Engineering thinking in prekindergarten children: A systematic literature review. Journal of Engineering Education, 106(3), 454–474. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20174
Lucas, B., & Hanson, J. (2016). Thinking like an engineer: Using engineering habits of mind and signature pedagogies to redesign engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP), 6(2), pp. 4–13. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v6i2.5366
Mamaril, N. A., Usher, E. L., Li, C. R., Economy, D. R., & Kennedy, M. S. (2016). Measuring undergraduate students' engineering self-efficacy: A validation study. Journal of Engineering Education, 105(2), 366–395. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20121
Mamaril, N. J. A. (2014). Measuring undergraduate students' engineering self-efficacy: A scale validation study [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Kentucky.
Metin, Ş., Akgül, E., Başaran, M., Özbay, Y., Seheryeli, M. Y., Kalyenci, Z. D., & Özcan, M. (2026). Engineering design test in early childhood: A validity and reliability study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-026-10071-0
Miaoulis, I. (2009). Engineering the K-12 curriculum for technological innovation. IEEE-USA Today’s Engineer Online.
Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB] (2018). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı (İlkokul ve ortaokul 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar). Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.
Moazzen, I., Miller, M., Wild, P., Jackson, L., & Hadwin, A. (2014, June 8-11). Engineering design survey. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association. Canmore, AB, Canada.
Morrison, J. S. (2006). Attributes of STEM education: The student, the academy, the classroom. TIES STEM Education.
Mourtos, N. J. (2012). Defining, teaching, and assessing engineering design skills. International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education, 2(1), 14–30. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijqaete.2012010102
National Academy of Engineering [NAE], & National Research Council [NRC] (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects (L. Katehi, G. Pearson, & M. Feder, Ed.). The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12635
National Research Council [NRC] (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13158
Next Generation Science Standards Lead States (NGSS) (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press. https://www.nextgenscience.org
Ormancı, Ü., & Çepni, S. (2022). Kuramdan uygulamaya 21. yüzyıl becerileri ve öğretimi. Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık
Othman, N., Salleh, S. M., Hussein, H., & Ab. Wahid, H. (2014, May 18-21 ). Assessing construct validity and reliability of competitiveness scale using Rasch model approach. WEI International Academic Conference, Bali, Indonesia. https://www.westeastinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Suria-Mohd-Salleh.pdf
Özdamar, K. (2002). Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi (Cilt 1–2, 2. baskı). Kaan Kitabevi.
Özünlü, Ö., & Çepni, S. (2023). Türkiye’de mühendislik tasarım temelli öğretim ile ilgili fen eğitimi alanında yapılan çalışmaların tematik analizi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 56, 890–910. https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1263217
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldhusen, J., & Grote, K. H. (2007). Engineering design: A systematic approach (3rd ed.). Springer.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543–578. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066004543
Paul, D., Nepal, B., Johnson, M. D., & Jacobs, T. J. (2018). Examining validity of general self-efficacy scale for assessing engineering students’ self-efficacy. International Journal of Engineering Education, 34(5), 1671–1686.
Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2012). An introduction to applied multivariate analysis. Routledge
Reckase, M. D. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: results and implications. Journal of Educational Statistics, 4(3), 207-230. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986004003207
Şahiner, E. (2020). Mühendislik tasarım süreci etkinliklerinin sınıf öğretmen adaylarının fen teknoloji mühendislik matematik (FeTeMM) farkındalıklarına ve mühendis algılarına etkisi (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Yozgat Bozok Üniversitesi.
Sarı, K. (2025). Bilim ve sanat entegrasyonunda leonardo etkisi: Öğrencilerin mühendislik tasarım becerileri ile yaratıcılıklarının incelenmesi (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi.
Seth, D., Tangorra, J., & Ibrahim, A. (2015, October 21-24). Measuring undergraduate students' self-efficacy in engineering design in a project-based design course. 2015 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), El Paso, TX, United States. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2015.7344247
Shah, J. J., Smith, S. M., & Woodward, J. (2009, August 24–27). Development of standardized tests for design skills. 17th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 09), Stanford, CA, United States.
Sheppard, S., Macatangay, K., Colby, A., & Sullivan, W. M. (2009). Educating engineers: Designing for the future of the field. Jossey-Bass.
Shuman, L. J., Besterfield-Sacre, M., & McGourty, J. (2005). The ABET “professional skills” — Can they be taught? Can they be assessed?. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00828.x
Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş: Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ekinoks Yayıncılık.
Sürmeli, H., Yıldırım, M., Sevgi, Y., & Göcük, A. (2018). Mühendislik tasarım sürecine dayalı etkinliklere yönelik ortaokul öğrencilerinin performansları ve görüşleri. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 47(2), 844–872. https://doi.org/10.14812/cuefd.395594
Sze, A. W. K., Hassan, N. C., Jaafar, W. M. W., Ahmad, N. A., & Arsad, N. M. (2022). Development of a STEM self-efficacy scale for Malaysian primary school children: A validity and reliability study. Asia-Pacific Social Science Review, 22(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.59588/2350-8329.1436
Ullman, D. G. (2003). The mechanical design process (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Ürey, M., & Cerrah Özsevgeç, L. (2015). The relation between the pre-service elementary teachers’ levels of relating science knowledge to daily life and their attitude and scientific literacy. Journal of Theoretical Educational Sciences, 8(3), 397-420. ttps://keg.aku.edu.tr/arsiv/c8s3/c8s3m6.pdf
Van Haneghan, J. P., Harlan, J. M., & Dean, M. D. (2015, April). The impact of engineering focused modules on the engineering design knowledge of eighth graders. The annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Winarno, N., Rusdiana, D., Samsudin, A., Susilowati, E., Ahmad, N. J., & Afifah, R. M. A. (2020). Synthesizing results from empirical research on engineering design process in science education: A systematic literature review. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(12), Article no: em1912. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/9129
Wyss, V. L., Heulskamp, D., & Siebert, C. J. (2012). Increasing middle school student interest in STEM careers with videos of scientists. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 7(4), 501–522.
Yaman, S., Demirel, H., & Demirpolat, S. (2026). Etkinlik temelli STEM uygulamalarının 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin STEM beceri düzeyi algılarını ve tutumlarını geliştirmesine yönelik etkisi. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(2), 1469–1495.
Yayla-Eskici, G. (2023). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının mühendislik tasarım sürecine dayalı STEM etkinliklerinin incelenmesi. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 11(22), 924–951. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1344266
Yılmaz, S., Ağır, G., Öngün Yılmaz, H., Arslan, S., & Söyük, S. (2026). Ölçek uyarlama araştırmalarında metodolojik çerçeve: Geçerlik ve güvenilirlik için sistematik bir değerlendirme rehberi. Turkish Research Journal of Academic Social Science, 9(1), 83–106. https://doi.org/10.59372/turajas.1895326.
Zain, J. M., Mohd, W. M. W., & El-Qawasmeh, E. (Ed.). (2011, June 27-29). Software engineering and computer systems. Part III: Second International Conference, ICSECS 2011 (Vol. 181), Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia. Springer.
Zhan, X., Sun, D., Qiang, C., Song, R., & Wan, Z. H. (2019). Propensity score analysis of the impacts of junior secondary students’ participation in engineering practices on their attitudes toward engineering. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(11), Article em1765. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/106761

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

Science Education, STEM Education

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Suat Türkoguz ^*
0000-0002-7850-2305
Türkiye

Handan Bozkurt Yıldız
0009-0004-6326-2523
Türkiye

Publication Date

September 30, 2026

Submission Date

August 8, 2026

Acceptance Date

September 30, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 9 Number: 3

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA42CY68AR

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Türkoguz, S., & Bozkurt Yıldız, H. (2026). Ortaokul Öğrencileri için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması. Fen Matematik Girişimcilik Ve Teknoloji Eğitimi Dergisi, 9(3). https://izlik.org/JA42CY68AR

AMA

1.Türkoguz S, Bozkurt Yıldız H. Ortaokul Öğrencileri için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması. Fen Matematik Girişimcilik ve Teknoloji Eğitimi Dergisi. 2026;9(3). https://izlik.org/JA42CY68AR

Chicago

Türkoguz, Suat, and Handan Bozkurt Yıldız. 2026. “Ortaokul Öğrencileri Için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması”. Fen Matematik Girişimcilik Ve Teknoloji Eğitimi Dergisi 9 (3). https://izlik.org/JA42CY68AR.

EndNote

Türkoguz S, Bozkurt Yıldız H (September 1, 2026) Ortaokul Öğrencileri için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması. Fen Matematik Girişimcilik ve Teknoloji Eğitimi Dergisi 9 3

IEEE

[1]S. Türkoguz and H. Bozkurt Yıldız, “Ortaokul Öğrencileri için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması”, Fen Matematik Girişimcilik ve Teknoloji Eğitimi Dergisi, vol. 9, no. 3, Sept. 2026, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA42CY68AR

ISNAD

Türkoguz, Suat - Bozkurt Yıldız, Handan. “Ortaokul Öğrencileri Için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması”. Fen Matematik Girişimcilik ve Teknoloji Eğitimi Dergisi 9/3 (September 1, 2026). https://izlik.org/JA42CY68AR.

JAMA

1.Türkoguz S, Bozkurt Yıldız H. Ortaokul Öğrencileri için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması. Fen Matematik Girişimcilik ve Teknoloji Eğitimi Dergisi. 2026;9. Available at https://izlik.org/JA42CY68AR.

MLA

Türkoguz, Suat, and Handan Bozkurt Yıldız. “Ortaokul Öğrencileri Için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması”. Fen Matematik Girişimcilik Ve Teknoloji Eğitimi Dergisi, vol. 9, no. 3, Sept. 2026, https://izlik.org/JA42CY68AR.

Vancouver

1.Suat Türkoguz, Handan Bozkurt Yıldız. Ortaokul Öğrencileri için Mühendislik Tasarım Becerileri Algısını Tarama Ölçeğinin (MüTasBAT) Türkçeye Uyarlanması. Fen Matematik Girişimcilik ve Teknoloji Eğitimi Dergisi [Internet]. 2026 Sep. 1;9(3). Available from: https://izlik.org/JA42CY68AR

In accordance with the integration of disciplines, it is to disseminate studies that consider Science, Mathematics, Entrepreneurship and Technology education together and to contribute to the formation of the infrastructure of the skills required by the 21st century.

Understanding that scientific activities cannot be done with the knowledge and skills of a single discipline, has become a paradigm that dominates the education world in recent years. When the rationales behind this paradigm are examined, single-disciplinary studies in science education can not solve big problems in practice and every year new skills are added to the skills that are thought to be developed to students in schools to overcome these big problems. One of the reasons for this understanding to attract the attention of all countries is their anxiety towards future economic development. Societies with good engineers are aware that their technological advances and economic development are also good. In this process, the main concern is that high school graduates who do not have academic knowledge and real life skills are not able to improve themselves in universities; this will pose great risks for countries in the future in technological and economic development.

When we examine our current educational situation in schools; It is understood that almost all of the courses in the program are concentrated in a single discipline, and the courses are taught with an algorithmic teaching approach, and the information presented in schools is not directed towards educating skilled individuals who can solve serious problems of the society. ıt is emphasized the education policies of the modern world to overcome this problem; increasing interest, curiosity and concentration in school knowledge, highlighting students' imaginations and creativity, being active in learning environments, associating school subjects with life and bringing all these activities together with disciplines should be formed into an integrated understanding. If this understanding is realized, 21st century skills will come out of theory and become meaningful in practice. It shows that the societies that develop 21st century skills will develop new products and new technologies and based on this, new professions and new markets will emerge. Therefore, we look forward to your research articles on science, mathematics, entrepreneurship and technology education carried out in the field of educational sciences (pre-school, elementary school, secondary school, high school, education faculty and other education stakeholders) to be evaluated in our online journal "Science, Mathematics, Entrepreneurship and Technology Education" which has recently started publishing. We would like you to know that interdisciplinary studies will be given priority.

FMGT Education Magazine is a refereed journal and is published three times a year. Research articles to be sent to the journal can be written in Turkish or English.

1. Articles to be sent to the journal are 2.5 cm in top, bottom and right space on A4 size white paper and left space should be 3 cm (21x29.7 cm area), using single line spaced, 12 font size, Times New Roman (Turkish), justified plain text and line break without spelling. In each section, paragraphs should be started with a 1 cm indentation. Articles should not exceed 15 pages.

2. In the articles, the spelling guide of the Turkish Language Institution should be taken as an example, and Turkish words should be used instead of foreign words. While very unfamiliar words are used in Turkish, the equivalent of the foreign language should be given in parentheses in the first place (Turkish and English).

3. For Turkish articles, a broad English summary of at least 500 words or 4000 characters including justification, method, findings, conclusions and discussion sections should be prepared. After the broad English summary article is accepted for publication, it should be prepared and submitted in a separate file.

4. Articles; The title should include the Abstract (Turkish), Keywords, Main Text (Introduction, Purpose, Method, Findings, Discussion, Conclusion, Suggestions and References) sections. The headings of the chapters should be written without indenting, and the first sentence of the paragraph should be indented with 1cm indenting. All pages should be numbered as (1, 2, ...) below the page and in the middle.

a) Title: The name and surname of the authors should be given under the title of the article consisting of maximum 3-12 words. The author's academic title, institution and department he / she works for should be written under the name section. Unless necessary, abbreviation should not be used in the title. In addition, the author's correspondence address, e-mail address, fax and telephone number should be specified in the correspondence address section (see h) after resources.

b) Summary and Keywords: The summary section should be prepared under the title of "Summary" between 10 points and 100-150 words. Keywords (between 3 and 5) should be given under the summary, using the 'Keywords' title. Care should be taken to ensure that the summary reflects critical information regarding the purpose, method, content and results of the study.

c) Main text: In research type articles, the main text should consist of sections (Introduction, Purpose, Method, Findings, Discussion, Conclusion and Suggestions, References), respectively. Compilation type articles, literature reviews and titles appropriate to the aims and dimensions of the study should be used in translations.

The introduction should include the approaches and findings in the literature and the rationale for the research.

The purpose of the study should be clearly stated in the purpose section.

In the method section, necessary explanations should be made about the sample, data sources, data collection tools and materials used, analysis and interpretation of the data.

The findings should include statistical analyzes used to test the research's hypotheses, mean and standard deviation values of each variable. Tables or figures should be given on the same page without dividing.

The discussion section should include explanation and discussion of the research findings in the light of the literature.

The conclusion should include the findings from the research and the situation resulting from the discussion.

The Suggestions section should include the researcher's (s) 'suggestions for the subject.

d) References should start from a new page. All the sources cited in the text should be listed in the "References" list in accordance with the APA 6 (American Psychological Association) style and in alphabetical order.

e) Attachments should start from a new page. If it is not necessary, supplementary files should not be given. In the studies for developing a measurement tool, all the items that make up the tool must be given in the text or in addition. Attachments should be written in 10 font size.

f) Tables should be given within the same page without dividing each table, using a minimum of 9 and a maximum of 10 points. The table number and the text of the table should be written in 11 font size, italic and the first letters of the text should be above the table. (ex: Table 1. Table Title should be written like this) In addition, the width of the tables is 12cm., the height is 19 cm. should not be more than.

g) Figures and Graphics should be given in the same page without dividing. Figures and graphic numbers and letters should be written in 11 font size with the first letters of the words in the same page, under the figure and in italics (eg: Figure 1. Figure Title should be written like this). In addition, the shape or graphic is 12 cm wide and 19 cm high. should not be more than.

5. After the blind review process. the manuscript will be gone a detailed evaluation about the plagiarism including a software support.

Ethical Principles and Publication Policy
Publication Ethics

The publication processes implemented in the Journal of Science, Mathematics, Entrepreneurship and Technology Education constitute the basis for the development and distribution of knowledge in an impartial and respectful manner. The processes implemented in this direction directly reflect on the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support the authors. Peer-reviewed studies are studies that embody and support the scientific method. At this point, it is important for all stakeholders of the process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, referees and editors) to comply with the standards regarding ethical principles. Within the scope of the publication ethics of the Journal of Science, Mathematics, Entrepreneurship and Technology Education, all stakeholders are expected to carry the following ethical responsibilities.

The ethical duties and responsibilities listed below were prepared by taking into account the guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as open access.

Authors' Ethical Responsibilities

Author(s) who submit a study to the Journal of Science, Mathematics, Entrepreneurship and Technology Education are expected to comply with the following ethical responsibilities:

1-Originality: The studies submitted by the author(s) are expected to be original. If the author(s) benefit from or use other studies, they must refer to and/or quote them completely and accurately.

2-Authors: Individuals who did not contribute to the content of the study should not be indicated as authors.

3-Conflict of Interest: Any situations and relationships that may constitute a conflict of interest, if any, for all studies submitted for publication should be disclosed.

4-Raw Data: Raw data regarding their articles may be requested from the author(s) within the framework of the evaluation processes. In such a case, the author(s) should be ready to present the expected data and information to the editorial board and scientific board.

5-Data Usage Rights: Authors must have a document showing that they have the rights to use the data used, the necessary permissions for the research/analysis, or that the consent of the experimental subjects has been obtained.

6-Error Notification: In the event that the author(s) notice a mistake or error regarding their published, early appearance or evaluation stage work, they are obliged to inform the journal editor or publisher, and cooperate with the editor in the correction or withdrawal processes.

7-No Double Application: Authors cannot have their work in the application process of more than one journal at the same time. Each application can be started after the completion of the previous application. A work published in another journal cannot be sent to the Journal of Science, Mathematics, Entrepreneurship and Technology Education.

8-Author Change: It is not possible to propose a change in the author responsibilities of a study whose evaluation process has started (such as adding an author, changing the order of authors, removing authors).

Publication Policy

1-Published Studies: Articles that are stated or determined to have been published elsewhere will not be published. The authors are responsible for the legal consequences that may arise in the context of copyrights of previously published but not specified articles.

2-Copyrights: The copyright of published articles within Turkey belongs to FMGT Education Journal, and the legal and scientific responsibilities belong to the authors.

3-Quoting: Articles published in FMGT Education Journal can only be quoted by citing the source. Persons or organizations that quote and publish any distortions that may occur in the content of the article are legally responsible.

4-Evaluation Process: Articles sent after the article registration to FMGT Education Journal are first evaluated by the editorial board. Articles that do not comply with the journal's objectives are not evaluated.

5-Article Edits: The editorial board may change the words it deems necessary in the article.

6-Referee Evaluation: Articles deemed appropriate by the editorial board are sent to two separate referees. Authors are not informed about the identities of the referees who evaluated their article, nor are referees informed about who the submitted article belongs to.

7- Publishable Article Decision: Articles that can be published are determined by the relevant section editor based on the recommendations of the referees. If the number of articles that the section editors find publishable exceeds the total number of articles to be published in that issue, the Editorial Board decides which articles will be published. If necessary, articles can be sent to more than two referees.

8- Rejection Decision: Articles that are not deemed appropriate by both referees will not be published. If only one of the referees finds it inappropriate, the final decision will be made by the journal editor.

9- Correction Requests: The referee criticisms regarding an article that is deemed publishable, provided that it is corrected, will be notified to the author(s). It is essential that the opinions, suggestions and justifications stated by the referees are taken into consideration by the author(s) and that any necessary corrections are made. The final corrected version of the article will be submitted to the editor within twenty days.