Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

The Adaptation of the School Cohesion Scale into Turkish Culture

Year 2018, Volume: 8 Issue: 3, 115 - 127, 15.12.2018
https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.357548

Abstract

The aim of this study is to adapt Student Perceptions of School Cohesion scale (Springer et al., 2009) into Turkish through testing the language validity and conducting Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). While the sample for EFA consisted of 311 students, the sample for CFA 220 consisted of students. Since the CFA was administered first and it was determined that some items were not meaningful at .05 level it was decided to administer the EFA. The 8th and 9th items were taken out of the scale considering the total item correlation before EFA. A single sub-dimensional structure was obtained as a result of the EFA administered with the remaining items. In order to test the structure obtained from the EFA, CFA was administered with different data sets and the factor structure was determined to be acceptable. The only sub-dimensional structure of the scale was given the name "student cohesion". The internal consistency coefficient of the reliability study was calculated as .80. The Pearson Moments Multiplication Correlation Coefficient calculated for the test-retest reliability study was found to be significant. All in all, the scale is a valid and reliable tool that can be used in Turkish culture.

References

  • Anderson, J. C, & Gerbing, D. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49, 155-173.
  • Baş, T. (2006). Anket. Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Battistich, V., & Hom, A. (1997). The relationship between students' sense of their school as a community and their involvement in problem behaviors. American journal of public health, 87(12), 1997-2001.
  • Baykul, Y. (2000). Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme: Klasik Test Teorisi ve Uygulaması. Ankara: ÖSYM Yayınları.
  • Bernard, B. (1991). Fostering resiliency in kids: Protective factors in the family, school, and community Portland, Oregon: Western Center for Drug- Free Schools and Communities.
  • Bond, L., Butler, H., Thomas, L., Carlin, J., Glover, S., Bowes, G., & Patton, G. (2007). Social and school connectedness in early secondary school as predictors of late teenage substance use, mental health, and academic outcomes. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40(4), 357-e9.
  • Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Brownlow, C. (2004). SPSS Explained. London: Routledge.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: istatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum. (12. bs.). Ankara: Pegem A.
  • Coker, J. K., & Borders, L. D. (2001). An analysis of environmental and social factors affecting adolescent problem drinking. Journal of Counseling & Development, 79(2), 200-208.
  • Cole, D. A. (1987). Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy¬chology, 55, 1019-1031.
  • Erkuş, A. (2003). Psikometri Üzerine Yazılar. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
  • Gabriel, R. M., Hopson, T., Haskins, M., & Powell, K. E. (1996). Building relationships and resilience in the prevention of youth violence. American journal of preventive medicine, 12(5 Suppl), 48-55.
  • Hambleton, R.K. & Bollwark, J. (1991). Adapting Tests for Use in Different Cultures: Technical İssues and Methods. Bulletin of the International Testing Commission, 18, 3-32.
  • Hambleton, R.K., & Kanjee, A. (1993). Enhancing the Validity of Cross-Cultural Studies: Improvements in Instrument Translation Methods. Annual Meetings of the American Educational Research Association, April 12-16, Atlanta.
  • Hawkins, J. D., & Weis, J. G. (1985). The social development model: An integrated approach to delinquency prevention. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 6(2), 73-97.
  • Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Hu, L. T, & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit ındexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.
  • Kann, L., Kinchen, S.A., Williams, B.I., Ross, J.G., Lowry, R., Hill, C.V.-G…Kolbe, L.J. (1998). Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance - United States, 1997. MMWR CDC Surveill Summ, 47(3):1-89.
  • Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (3nd Edition). New York London: The Guilford Press.
  • Krohn, M.D., Massey, J.L., Skinner, W.F., & Lauer, R.M. (1983). Social bonding theory and adolescent cigarette smoking: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 24, 337-349.
  • McBride, C. M., Curry, S. J., Cheadle, A., Anderman, C., Wagner, E. H., Diehr, P., & Psaty, B. (1995). School‐level application of a social bonding model to adolescent risk‐taking behavior. Journal of School Health, 65(2), 63-68.
  • McNeely, C., & Falci, C. (2004). School connectedness and the transition into and out of Health‐Risk behavior among adolescents: A comparison of social belonging and teacher support. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 284-292.
  • Oetting, E. R., & Donnermeyer, J. F. (1998). Primary socialization theory: The etiology of drug use and deviance. I. Substance use & misuse, 33(4), 995-1026.
  • Öner, N. (1987). Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarlamasında bir yöntem bilim modeli. Psikoloji Dergisi, 6 (21), 80-83.
  • Özgüven, İ.E. (1999). Psikolojik Testler. Ankara: PDREM Yayınları.
  • Patton, G. C., Bond, L., Carlin, J. B., Thomas, L., Butler, H., Glover, S., ... & Bowes, G. (2006). Promoting social inclusion in schools: a group-randomized trial of effects on student health risk behavior and well-being. American Journal of Public Health, 96(9), 1582-1587.
  • Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M., Jones, J., ... & Ireland, M. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. Jama, 278(10), 823-832.
  • Sağlık Bakanlığı (2007). Gençlik danışmanlık ve sağlık hizmet merkezleri csüs eğitim modülü katılımcı rehberi. Ana Çocuk Sağlığı ve Aile Planlaması Genel Müdürlüğü. GDSHM Eğitimi Modülü, Ankara.
  • Savaşır, I. (1994). Ölçek uyarlamasındaki bazı sorunlar ve çözüm yolları. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 33 (9), 27-32.
  • Simons‐Morton, B. G., & Crump, A. D. (2003). Association of parental involvement and social competence with school adjustment and engagement among sixth graders. Journal of School Health, 73(3), 121-126.
  • Simons-Morton, B. G., Crump, A. D., Haynie, D. L., & Saylor, K. E. (1999). Student–school bonding and adolescent problem behavior. Health education research, 14(1), 99-107.
  • Springer, A. E., McQueen, A., Quintanilla, G., Arrivillaga, M., & Ross, M. W. (2009). Reliability and validity of the Student Perceptions of School Cohesion Scale in a sample of Salvadoran secondary school students. BMC international health and human rights, 9(1), 30.
  • Şencan H. (2005). Sosyal ve Davranışsal Ölçümlerde Geçerlilik ve Güvenirlik. Ankara: Seçkin Matbaası.
  • Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics (6th International edition cover edn). New Jersey: Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
  • Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
  • WHO (1997). Coming of Age: From Facts to Action for Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health. Erişim tarihi 20.08.2017, http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/65895
  • WHO (2009). Adolescent Health and Development. Erişim tarihi 20.08.2017, www.searo.who.int
  • Yılmaz, V., & Çelik, E.H. (2009). Lisrel ile Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi-I: Temel Kavramlar, Uygulamalar, Programlama. Ankara: Pegem A.

Okula Uyum Ölçeği’nin Türk Kültürüne Uyarlanması

Year 2018, Volume: 8 Issue: 3, 115 - 127, 15.12.2018
https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.357548

Abstract

Bu çalışmada öğrencilerin okula uyumları ve destekleyici okul ilişkileri hakkındaki algılarını değerlendirebilmek amacıyla Springer, McQueen, Quintanilla, Arrivillaga & Ross (2009) tarafından geliştirilen ölçeğin uyarlaması yapılmıştır. Ölçek, açımlayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) için 311 ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) için farklı 220 öğrenciye uygulanarak faktör yapısı sınanmıştır. DFA sonucunda bazı maddelerin .05 düzeyinde anlamlı olmadığı tespit edilmiş ve  AFA yapılmasına karar verilmiştir. AFA öncesi toplam madde korelasyonuna bakılarak 8 ve 9. maddeler ölçekten çıkarılmıştır. Kalan maddelerle yapılan AFA sonucunda tek alt boyutlu bir yapı elde edilmiştir.  Farklı veri grubuyla DFA yapılarak bu faktör yapısının kabul edilebilir düzeyde olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ölçeğin tek alt boyutlu yapısına “öğrenci bağlılığı” ismi verilmiştir. Güvenirlik çalışması kapsamında iç tutarlık katsayısı.80 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Test–tekrar test güvenirlik çalışması için hesaplanan Pearson Momentler Çarpımı Korelasyon katsayısının anlamlı olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ölçek, Türk Kültüründe kullanılabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir bir araçtır.

References

  • Anderson, J. C, & Gerbing, D. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49, 155-173.
  • Baş, T. (2006). Anket. Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Battistich, V., & Hom, A. (1997). The relationship between students' sense of their school as a community and their involvement in problem behaviors. American journal of public health, 87(12), 1997-2001.
  • Baykul, Y. (2000). Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme: Klasik Test Teorisi ve Uygulaması. Ankara: ÖSYM Yayınları.
  • Bernard, B. (1991). Fostering resiliency in kids: Protective factors in the family, school, and community Portland, Oregon: Western Center for Drug- Free Schools and Communities.
  • Bond, L., Butler, H., Thomas, L., Carlin, J., Glover, S., Bowes, G., & Patton, G. (2007). Social and school connectedness in early secondary school as predictors of late teenage substance use, mental health, and academic outcomes. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40(4), 357-e9.
  • Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Brownlow, C. (2004). SPSS Explained. London: Routledge.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: istatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum. (12. bs.). Ankara: Pegem A.
  • Coker, J. K., & Borders, L. D. (2001). An analysis of environmental and social factors affecting adolescent problem drinking. Journal of Counseling & Development, 79(2), 200-208.
  • Cole, D. A. (1987). Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy¬chology, 55, 1019-1031.
  • Erkuş, A. (2003). Psikometri Üzerine Yazılar. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
  • Gabriel, R. M., Hopson, T., Haskins, M., & Powell, K. E. (1996). Building relationships and resilience in the prevention of youth violence. American journal of preventive medicine, 12(5 Suppl), 48-55.
  • Hambleton, R.K. & Bollwark, J. (1991). Adapting Tests for Use in Different Cultures: Technical İssues and Methods. Bulletin of the International Testing Commission, 18, 3-32.
  • Hambleton, R.K., & Kanjee, A. (1993). Enhancing the Validity of Cross-Cultural Studies: Improvements in Instrument Translation Methods. Annual Meetings of the American Educational Research Association, April 12-16, Atlanta.
  • Hawkins, J. D., & Weis, J. G. (1985). The social development model: An integrated approach to delinquency prevention. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 6(2), 73-97.
  • Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Hu, L. T, & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit ındexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.
  • Kann, L., Kinchen, S.A., Williams, B.I., Ross, J.G., Lowry, R., Hill, C.V.-G…Kolbe, L.J. (1998). Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance - United States, 1997. MMWR CDC Surveill Summ, 47(3):1-89.
  • Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (3nd Edition). New York London: The Guilford Press.
  • Krohn, M.D., Massey, J.L., Skinner, W.F., & Lauer, R.M. (1983). Social bonding theory and adolescent cigarette smoking: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 24, 337-349.
  • McBride, C. M., Curry, S. J., Cheadle, A., Anderman, C., Wagner, E. H., Diehr, P., & Psaty, B. (1995). School‐level application of a social bonding model to adolescent risk‐taking behavior. Journal of School Health, 65(2), 63-68.
  • McNeely, C., & Falci, C. (2004). School connectedness and the transition into and out of Health‐Risk behavior among adolescents: A comparison of social belonging and teacher support. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 284-292.
  • Oetting, E. R., & Donnermeyer, J. F. (1998). Primary socialization theory: The etiology of drug use and deviance. I. Substance use & misuse, 33(4), 995-1026.
  • Öner, N. (1987). Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarlamasında bir yöntem bilim modeli. Psikoloji Dergisi, 6 (21), 80-83.
  • Özgüven, İ.E. (1999). Psikolojik Testler. Ankara: PDREM Yayınları.
  • Patton, G. C., Bond, L., Carlin, J. B., Thomas, L., Butler, H., Glover, S., ... & Bowes, G. (2006). Promoting social inclusion in schools: a group-randomized trial of effects on student health risk behavior and well-being. American Journal of Public Health, 96(9), 1582-1587.
  • Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M., Jones, J., ... & Ireland, M. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. Jama, 278(10), 823-832.
  • Sağlık Bakanlığı (2007). Gençlik danışmanlık ve sağlık hizmet merkezleri csüs eğitim modülü katılımcı rehberi. Ana Çocuk Sağlığı ve Aile Planlaması Genel Müdürlüğü. GDSHM Eğitimi Modülü, Ankara.
  • Savaşır, I. (1994). Ölçek uyarlamasındaki bazı sorunlar ve çözüm yolları. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 33 (9), 27-32.
  • Simons‐Morton, B. G., & Crump, A. D. (2003). Association of parental involvement and social competence with school adjustment and engagement among sixth graders. Journal of School Health, 73(3), 121-126.
  • Simons-Morton, B. G., Crump, A. D., Haynie, D. L., & Saylor, K. E. (1999). Student–school bonding and adolescent problem behavior. Health education research, 14(1), 99-107.
  • Springer, A. E., McQueen, A., Quintanilla, G., Arrivillaga, M., & Ross, M. W. (2009). Reliability and validity of the Student Perceptions of School Cohesion Scale in a sample of Salvadoran secondary school students. BMC international health and human rights, 9(1), 30.
  • Şencan H. (2005). Sosyal ve Davranışsal Ölçümlerde Geçerlilik ve Güvenirlik. Ankara: Seçkin Matbaası.
  • Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics (6th International edition cover edn). New Jersey: Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
  • Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
  • WHO (1997). Coming of Age: From Facts to Action for Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health. Erişim tarihi 20.08.2017, http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/65895
  • WHO (2009). Adolescent Health and Development. Erişim tarihi 20.08.2017, www.searo.who.int
  • Yılmaz, V., & Çelik, E.H. (2009). Lisrel ile Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi-I: Temel Kavramlar, Uygulamalar, Programlama. Ankara: Pegem A.
There are 39 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Mehmet Durnalı

Bijen Filiz

Elif Aydın

Publication Date December 15, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 8 Issue: 3

Cite

APA Durnalı, M., Filiz, B., & Aydın, E. (2018). Okula Uyum Ölçeği’nin Türk Kültürüne Uyarlanması. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 8(3), 115-127. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.357548