Öğrenme Merkezli Liderlik Ölçeğinin (ÖMLÖ) Türkçeye Uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Year 2017, Volume: 18 Issue: 3, 132 - 144, 31.12.2017

Ali Çağatay Kılınç , Mehmet Şükrü Bellibaş , Sedat Gümüş

https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.315124

Cited By: 5

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı Liu, Hallinger ve Feng (2016)
tarafından geliştirilen Öğrenme Merkezli Liderlik Ölçeğinin - ÖMLÖ
(Learning-Centered Leadership Scale – LCLS) Türk kültürüne uyarlanmasıdır.
Araştırmaya Konya ve Adıyaman illerinde bulunan ilk ve ortaokullarda görev
yapan toplam 232 öğretmen katılmıştır. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliğini tespit etmek
amacıyla Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) ve Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA)
yapılmıştır. Yapılan AFA sonucu ölçeğin üç boyuttan oluştuğu ortaya konmuştur.
Bu alt boyutlar ölçeğin orijinal formuyla ve ilgili alan yazınla uyumlu biçimde
''öğrenmeye dönük bir vizyon oluşturma'', ''öğrenme desteği sağlama'' ve
''öğrenme programını yönetme ve model olma'' olarak yeniden isimlendirilmiştir.
Nihai formu 19 maddeden oluşan ölçeğin alt boyutlarından elde edilen puanların
iç tutarlılık değerleri .88 ile .91 arasında değişmektedir. Araştırma sonuçları
Türkçeye uyarlanan Öğrenme Merkezli Liderlik Ölçeği’nin (ÖMLÖ) ilk ve
ortaokullarda görev yapan okul müdürlerinin öğrenme merkezli liderlik
düzeylerini belirlemede kullanılabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı
olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Öğrenme merkezli liderlik, uyarlama, geçerlik-güvenirlik, okul müdürü

Adaptation of Learning-Centered Leadership Scale: A Validity and Reliability Study

Abstract

The purpose of
this study was to adapt Learning-Centered Leadership Scale into Turkish
culture. The participants of the study included a total of 232 teachers
employed in primary and secondary schools located in Konya and Adıyaman. This
study conducted Explanatory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor
Analysis (CFA) to test the construct validity of the Turkish-adapted form of
the scale. EFA results yielded a three-factor structure of the scale. These
factors were labelled as Building a Learning Vision, Providing Learning Support
and Managing the Learning Program and Modelling. The results of the study
revealed that the scale consisted of 19 items and internal consistency values
of the three factors ranged between .88 and .91. The results of the study
demonstrated that The Turkish Form of Learning-Centered Leadership Scale is
reliable and valid instrument to measure the level of school principals’
learning-centered leadership behaviours.

Keywords

Learning-centered leadership, adaptation, validity-reliability, school principal, teacher

References

• Bayram, N. (2016). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş ve AMOS uygulamaları (3. Baskı). Bursa: Ezgi Kitabevi.
• Bellibaş, M. Ş. (2015). Principals’ and teachers’ perceptions of efforts by principals to improve teaching and learning in Turkish middle schools. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(6), 1471-1485.
• Bush, T. (2003). Theories of educational leadership and management. London, UK. Sage Publication.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (11. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Cravens, X.C. (2008).The cross-cultural fit of the learning-centered leadership framework and assessment for Chinese principals, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN
• Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., ve Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve Lisrel uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Doll, W.J., Xia, W., & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A confirmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument. MIS Quarterly, 18(4), 453-461.
• DuFour, R. (2002). The learning-centered principal. Educational leadership, 59(8), 12-15.
• Field, A. P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS: and sex and drugs and rock 'n' roll (third edition). London: Sage.
• Goldring, E., Porter, A., Murphy, J., Elliott, S. N., & Cravens, X. (2009). Assessing learning-centered leadership: Connections to research, professional standards, and current practices. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 8(1), 1-36.
• Gumus, S., & Akcaoglu, M. (2013). Instructional leadership in Turkish primary schools: An analysis of teachers’ perceptions and current policy. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41(3), 289-302.
• Gumus, S., Bellibas, M. S., Esen, M., & Gumus, E. (2017). A systematic review of studies on leadership models in educational research from 1980 to 2014. Educational Management Administration & Leadership,
• Hallinger, P. (2005). Instructional leadership and the school principal: A passing fancy that refuses to fade away. Leadership and policy in schools, 4(3), 221-239.
• Hambleton, R. K., & Patsula, L. (1999). Increasing the validity of adapted tests: Myths to be avoided and guidelines for improving test adaptation practices. Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 1(1), 1-30.
• Hu L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit ındexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
• Knapp, M.S., Copland, M.A., Honig, M.I., Plecki, M.L. and Portin, B.S. (2010), Learning-Focused Leadership and Leadership Support: Meaning and Practice in Urban Systems, The Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
• Liu, S., Hallinger, P., & Feng, D. (2016). Supporting the professional learning of teachers in China: Does principal leadership make a difference?. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 79-91.
• Marks, H. M., & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational administration quarterly, 39(3), 370-397.
• Murphy, J. F., Goldring, E. B., Cravens, X. C., Elliott, S. N., & Porter, A. C. (2011). The Vanderbilt assessment of leadership in education: Measuring learning-centered leadership. Journal of East China Normal University, 29(1), 1-10.
• Reardon, R. M. (2011). Elementary school principals' learning-centered leadership and educational outcomes: Implications for principals' Professional development. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 10(1), 63-83.
• Saphier, J., King, M. and D'Auria, J. (2006). Three strands form strong school leadership, Journal of Staff Development, 27(2), 51-57.
• Sun, M., Youngs, P., Yang, H., Chu, H., & Zhao, Q. (2012). Association of district principal evaluation with learning-centered leadership practice: Evidence from Michigan and Beijing. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 24(3), 189-213.
• Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3(6), 49-73.
• Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ankara: Ekinox
• Tan, C. Y. (2014). Influence of contextual challenges and constraints on learning-centered leadership. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(3), 451-468.