BibTex RIS Cite

Öz Kavram Envanteri-I’in Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Year 2008, Volume: 5 Issue: 2, 209 - 232, 01.06.2008

Abstract

References

  • Alpas, B. ve Akçakın, M. (2003). Vineland uyum davranış ölçeği- Araştırma formu’nun doğumdan 47 aylığa kadar olan türk bebekleri için uyarlama, güvenirlik ve geçerlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 18(52), 57-76.
  • Aşkar, P. ve Dönmez, O. (2004). Eğitim yazılımı geliştirme öz-yeterlik algısı ölçeği. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 3(6), 259-268.
  • Boersma, F.J. & Chapman, J.W. (1979). Student's perception of ability scale. Manual. Edmonton, Canada: University of Alberta.
  • Bracken, B.A. & Lamprecht, S.M. (2003). Pozitive self-concept: an equal opportunity construct. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 103-121.
  • Bryman, A. & Cramer, D. (1997). Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS for Windows:A Guide for Social Scientists. New York: Routledge .
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Byrne, B.M. (1984). The general/academic self-concept nomological network: A review of construct validation research. Review of Educational Research, 54, 427-456.
  • Coopersmith, S. (1967). The Antecedents of Self-Esteem. San Francisco: Freeman.
  • Dağ, İ. (2002). Kontrol odağı ölçeği: Ölçek geliştirme, güvenirlik ve geçerlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 17 (49), 77-90.
  • Ergin, D.Y. (1995). Ölçeklerde geçerlik ve güvenirlik. M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 7,125-148.
  • Gecas, V. & Mortimer, J.T. (1987). Stability and change in the self-concept from adolescence to adulthood. In T. Honess & K. Yardley (Eds.) Self and Identity. London : Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  • Guay, F., Marsh, H. W., Boivin, M. (2003). Akademic self-concept and academic achievement: Developmental perspectives on their causal ordering. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 124-136.
  • Hamachek, D. E. (1971). Encounters with the Self. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
  • _______. 1990. Evaluating self-concept and ego status in Erickson’s last three
  • psychosocial stages. Journal of Counseling and Development, 68(6), 677.
  • Harter, S. (1982). The perceived competence scale for children. Child Development, 53, 87-97.
  • _______. (1999). The Construction of the Self: A Developmental Perspective. The Guilford Pres. A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc, New York.
  • Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS(R) system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Cary, NC: SAS Institute
  • Hay, I. (2000). Cognitive strategies in the secondary school: Investigating process based instruction and students’ perceptions of effective teaching strategies. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 1, 164–176.
  • Hay, I., Ashman, A. & Van Kraayenoord, C. (1998). The educational characteristics of students with high or low self-concept. Psychology in the Schools, 35, 391–400.
  • Karasar, N. (1994). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: 3A Araştırma Danışmanlık Limited.
  • Kulaksızloğlu, A., Dilmaç, B., Ekşi, H., ve Otrar M. (2003). Uyum ölçeği-üniversite formu’nun dilsel eşdeğerlik, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 2 (3), 49-63.
  • Liu, W. C., Wang, C. K. J., Parkins, E. J. (2005). A longitudinal study of students’ academic self-concept in a streamed setting: The Singapore context. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(4), 567-586.
  • Marsh, H.W. (1986). The bias of negatively worded items in rating scales for young children: A cognitive developmental phenomena. Developmental Psychology, 22,37-49.
  • _______. (1988). Self description questionnaire: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of preadolescent self-concept: A test manual and a research monograph. San Antonio TX: The Psychological Corporation.
  • _______. (1990a). A multidimensional, hierarchical model of self-concept: Theoretical and empirical justification. Educational Psychology Review, 2, 77–172.
  • _______. (1990b).Causal ordering of academic self concept and academic achievement: A multiwave, longitudinal panel analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 646-656.
  • _______. (1992). Self description qustionnaire (SDQ) I: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of preadolescent self- concept. An interim test manual and research monograph. Macarthur, New South Wales, Australia: University of Western Sydney, Faculty of Education. http://self.uws.edu.au/Research%20Focus/self_instruments.htm. 3/5/2007 tarihinde alınmıştır Kaynaktan
  • Marsh, H. W., Iain W., Holmes, M. (1990). Multidimensional self-concept: Conctruct Validation of Responses by Children. American Educational Research Journal. Spring, 27, 89-117.
  • Marsh, H. W. & Shavelson, R. J. (1985). Self-concept: Its multifaceted, hierarchical structure. Educational Psychologist. 20, 107–125.
  • Marsh, H. W. & Hacover, D. (1985). The application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self concept: First and higher order factor structure and their invariance across age groups. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 562-582.
  • Marsh, H. W., Byrne, B. M. & Shavelson, R.J. (1988). A Multifaceted academic self- concept: Its hierarchical structure and its relation to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 366-380.
  • Marsh, H. W. & Craven, R. G. (1997). Academic self-concept: Beyond the dustbowl. In G. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of Classroom Assessment: Learning, Achievement and Adjustment (131–198). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
  • Marsh, H.W. & Yeung, A.S. (1997). Causal effects of academic self-concept on academic achievement: Structural equation models of longitudinal data. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 41-54.
  • Marsh, H.W. & Ayotte, V. (2003). Do multiple dimensions of self-concept become more differentiated with age? The differential distinctiveness hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 687–706.
  • Marsh, H. W., Hau K.T. (2004). Explaining paradoxical relations between academic self-concepts and achievements: Cross-cultural generalizability of the internal/external frame of reference predictions across 26 countries. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 56-67.
  • Mead, G. H. (1967). Mind, Self and Society. Chicago. Phoenix. (Original work published 1934).
  • Mertens, D. M. (1998). Research Methods in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. London: Sage Publications.
  • Nunually, J.C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. (2nd ed.)New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • O’Mara, A. J., Marsh H. W., Craven, R. G. & Debus, R. L. (2006). Do self-concept interventions make a difference? A synergistic blend of construct validation and meta-analysis. Educational Psychologist, 41(3), 181-206.
  • Osborne, J.W. & Costello, A.B. (2004). Sample size and subject to item ratio in principal components analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 9(11). http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=11 April 12, 2005 from
  • Özgüven, İ.E. (1994). Psikolojik Testler. Ankara: Yeni Doğuş Matbaası.
  • Pervin, L. A. (1993). Personality: Theory and Research. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Preacher, K.J. & MacCallum, R.C. (2002). Exploratory factor analysis in behavior genetics research: Factor recovery with small sample size. Behavior Genetics.,32 (2), 153-161.
  • Rice, F.P. (1975). The Adolescent Development, Relationships and Culture. Boston: Ally and Bacon, Inc.
  • Rosenberg, M. (1975). Self-concept and self-esteem. In P. F. Rice(Ed.) The Adolescent Development, Relationships and Culture. Boston: Ally and Bacon, Inc.
  • Sapnas, K.G. (2004). Letters to the editor: Determining adequate sample size. Journal of Nursing Scholarship. 36(1), 4, www. Retrieved August 03, 2004 from blackwell synergy.com.
  • Shavelson, R.J., Hubner, J.J. & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Validation of construct interpretations of test scores. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-441.
  • Shavelson, R. J., Bolus, R. (1982). Self-concept: The interplay of theory and methods. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(1), 3-17.
  • Skaalvik, E. M., Hagtvet K. A. (1990). Academic achievement and self-concept: An analysis of casual predominance in a developmental perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(1), 292-307.
  • Tavşancıl, E. (2002). Tutumların Ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Tekin, H. (1996). Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme. Ankara: Yargı yayınları, no: 17.
  • Turgut, M. F. (1997). Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Metodları. Ankara: Gül Yayınevi
  • Vispoel, W. P. (1995). Self-concept in the arts: An extension of the Shavelson Model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 134-145.
  • Wylie, R. C. (1989). Measures of Self-Concept. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
  • Yeung, A. S., Chui H. S., Lau I. C, McInerney, D. M, Russell-Bowie, D., & Suliman, R. (2000). Where is the hierarchy of academic self-concept? Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 556-567.

ÖZ KAVRAM ENVANTERİ-I’İN GEÇERLİK VE GÜVENİRLİK ÇALIŞMASI

Year 2008, Volume: 5 Issue: 2, 209 - 232, 01.06.2008

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Shavelson, Hubner ve Stanton’un (1976) öz kavram modeli çalışmalarına
dayanan ve Marsh (1992) tarafından geliştirilen “Öz Kavram Envanteri-I” (ÖKE-I) Türkçe formunun
dilsel eşdeğerliğinin, geçerliğinin ve güvenirliğinin incelenmesidir. Betimsel araştırma yöntemlerinden
genel tarama modeli ile yapılan bu araştırmada, ÖKE-I, İstanbul ili, Beşiktaş ilçesinde bulunan yedi farklı
ilköğretim okulundan 345 kişilik 7. sınıf öğrencisinden oluşan çalışma grubuna uygulanmıştır. Ölçeğin
dilsel eşdeğerliği için yapılan Türkçe ve İngilizce uygulama arasındaki Pearson korelasyon katsayılarında
0.47 ile 0.97 arasında değişen ve 0.01 düzeyinde pozitif ve anlamlı değerlere ulaşılmıştır. Ölçeğin yapı
geçerliğini saptamak için yapılan faktör analizi, yedi faktörlü, 60 maddeli yapı ortaya koymuştur. Ölçeğin
bütünü için hesaplanan iç tutarlık güvenirlik katsayısı 0.95’tir. Bulgular, faktör maddelerinin iç tutarlık
güvenirliğinin 0.17 ile 0.65 arasında değişen madde-toplam korelasyon katsayısına sahip olduğunu
göstermiştir. Sonuçlar, envanterin Türkçe formunun geçerliği ve güvenirliği bakımından tartışılmıştır.

References

  • Alpas, B. ve Akçakın, M. (2003). Vineland uyum davranış ölçeği- Araştırma formu’nun doğumdan 47 aylığa kadar olan türk bebekleri için uyarlama, güvenirlik ve geçerlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 18(52), 57-76.
  • Aşkar, P. ve Dönmez, O. (2004). Eğitim yazılımı geliştirme öz-yeterlik algısı ölçeği. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 3(6), 259-268.
  • Boersma, F.J. & Chapman, J.W. (1979). Student's perception of ability scale. Manual. Edmonton, Canada: University of Alberta.
  • Bracken, B.A. & Lamprecht, S.M. (2003). Pozitive self-concept: an equal opportunity construct. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 103-121.
  • Bryman, A. & Cramer, D. (1997). Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS for Windows:A Guide for Social Scientists. New York: Routledge .
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Byrne, B.M. (1984). The general/academic self-concept nomological network: A review of construct validation research. Review of Educational Research, 54, 427-456.
  • Coopersmith, S. (1967). The Antecedents of Self-Esteem. San Francisco: Freeman.
  • Dağ, İ. (2002). Kontrol odağı ölçeği: Ölçek geliştirme, güvenirlik ve geçerlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 17 (49), 77-90.
  • Ergin, D.Y. (1995). Ölçeklerde geçerlik ve güvenirlik. M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 7,125-148.
  • Gecas, V. & Mortimer, J.T. (1987). Stability and change in the self-concept from adolescence to adulthood. In T. Honess & K. Yardley (Eds.) Self and Identity. London : Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  • Guay, F., Marsh, H. W., Boivin, M. (2003). Akademic self-concept and academic achievement: Developmental perspectives on their causal ordering. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 124-136.
  • Hamachek, D. E. (1971). Encounters with the Self. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
  • _______. 1990. Evaluating self-concept and ego status in Erickson’s last three
  • psychosocial stages. Journal of Counseling and Development, 68(6), 677.
  • Harter, S. (1982). The perceived competence scale for children. Child Development, 53, 87-97.
  • _______. (1999). The Construction of the Self: A Developmental Perspective. The Guilford Pres. A Division of Guilford Publications, Inc, New York.
  • Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS(R) system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Cary, NC: SAS Institute
  • Hay, I. (2000). Cognitive strategies in the secondary school: Investigating process based instruction and students’ perceptions of effective teaching strategies. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 1, 164–176.
  • Hay, I., Ashman, A. & Van Kraayenoord, C. (1998). The educational characteristics of students with high or low self-concept. Psychology in the Schools, 35, 391–400.
  • Karasar, N. (1994). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: 3A Araştırma Danışmanlık Limited.
  • Kulaksızloğlu, A., Dilmaç, B., Ekşi, H., ve Otrar M. (2003). Uyum ölçeği-üniversite formu’nun dilsel eşdeğerlik, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 2 (3), 49-63.
  • Liu, W. C., Wang, C. K. J., Parkins, E. J. (2005). A longitudinal study of students’ academic self-concept in a streamed setting: The Singapore context. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(4), 567-586.
  • Marsh, H.W. (1986). The bias of negatively worded items in rating scales for young children: A cognitive developmental phenomena. Developmental Psychology, 22,37-49.
  • _______. (1988). Self description questionnaire: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of preadolescent self-concept: A test manual and a research monograph. San Antonio TX: The Psychological Corporation.
  • _______. (1990a). A multidimensional, hierarchical model of self-concept: Theoretical and empirical justification. Educational Psychology Review, 2, 77–172.
  • _______. (1990b).Causal ordering of academic self concept and academic achievement: A multiwave, longitudinal panel analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 646-656.
  • _______. (1992). Self description qustionnaire (SDQ) I: A theoretical and empirical basis for the measurement of multiple dimensions of preadolescent self- concept. An interim test manual and research monograph. Macarthur, New South Wales, Australia: University of Western Sydney, Faculty of Education. http://self.uws.edu.au/Research%20Focus/self_instruments.htm. 3/5/2007 tarihinde alınmıştır Kaynaktan
  • Marsh, H. W., Iain W., Holmes, M. (1990). Multidimensional self-concept: Conctruct Validation of Responses by Children. American Educational Research Journal. Spring, 27, 89-117.
  • Marsh, H. W. & Shavelson, R. J. (1985). Self-concept: Its multifaceted, hierarchical structure. Educational Psychologist. 20, 107–125.
  • Marsh, H. W. & Hacover, D. (1985). The application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self concept: First and higher order factor structure and their invariance across age groups. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 562-582.
  • Marsh, H. W., Byrne, B. M. & Shavelson, R.J. (1988). A Multifaceted academic self- concept: Its hierarchical structure and its relation to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 366-380.
  • Marsh, H. W. & Craven, R. G. (1997). Academic self-concept: Beyond the dustbowl. In G. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of Classroom Assessment: Learning, Achievement and Adjustment (131–198). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
  • Marsh, H.W. & Yeung, A.S. (1997). Causal effects of academic self-concept on academic achievement: Structural equation models of longitudinal data. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 41-54.
  • Marsh, H.W. & Ayotte, V. (2003). Do multiple dimensions of self-concept become more differentiated with age? The differential distinctiveness hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 687–706.
  • Marsh, H. W., Hau K.T. (2004). Explaining paradoxical relations between academic self-concepts and achievements: Cross-cultural generalizability of the internal/external frame of reference predictions across 26 countries. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 56-67.
  • Mead, G. H. (1967). Mind, Self and Society. Chicago. Phoenix. (Original work published 1934).
  • Mertens, D. M. (1998). Research Methods in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. London: Sage Publications.
  • Nunually, J.C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. (2nd ed.)New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • O’Mara, A. J., Marsh H. W., Craven, R. G. & Debus, R. L. (2006). Do self-concept interventions make a difference? A synergistic blend of construct validation and meta-analysis. Educational Psychologist, 41(3), 181-206.
  • Osborne, J.W. & Costello, A.B. (2004). Sample size and subject to item ratio in principal components analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 9(11). http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=11 April 12, 2005 from
  • Özgüven, İ.E. (1994). Psikolojik Testler. Ankara: Yeni Doğuş Matbaası.
  • Pervin, L. A. (1993). Personality: Theory and Research. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Preacher, K.J. & MacCallum, R.C. (2002). Exploratory factor analysis in behavior genetics research: Factor recovery with small sample size. Behavior Genetics.,32 (2), 153-161.
  • Rice, F.P. (1975). The Adolescent Development, Relationships and Culture. Boston: Ally and Bacon, Inc.
  • Rosenberg, M. (1975). Self-concept and self-esteem. In P. F. Rice(Ed.) The Adolescent Development, Relationships and Culture. Boston: Ally and Bacon, Inc.
  • Sapnas, K.G. (2004). Letters to the editor: Determining adequate sample size. Journal of Nursing Scholarship. 36(1), 4, www. Retrieved August 03, 2004 from blackwell synergy.com.
  • Shavelson, R.J., Hubner, J.J. & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Validation of construct interpretations of test scores. Review of Educational Research, 46, 407-441.
  • Shavelson, R. J., Bolus, R. (1982). Self-concept: The interplay of theory and methods. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(1), 3-17.
  • Skaalvik, E. M., Hagtvet K. A. (1990). Academic achievement and self-concept: An analysis of casual predominance in a developmental perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(1), 292-307.
  • Tavşancıl, E. (2002). Tutumların Ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Tekin, H. (1996). Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme. Ankara: Yargı yayınları, no: 17.
  • Turgut, M. F. (1997). Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Metodları. Ankara: Gül Yayınevi
  • Vispoel, W. P. (1995). Self-concept in the arts: An extension of the Shavelson Model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 134-145.
  • Wylie, R. C. (1989). Measures of Self-Concept. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
  • Yeung, A. S., Chui H. S., Lau I. C, McInerney, D. M, Russell-Bowie, D., & Suliman, R. (2000). Where is the hierarchy of academic self-concept? Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 556-567.
There are 56 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Göksel Yıldız This is me

Doç. Dr. Seval Fer This is me

Publication Date June 1, 2008
Published in Issue Year 2008 Volume: 5 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Yıldız, G., & Fer, D. D. S. (2008). ÖZ KAVRAM ENVANTERİ-I’İN GEÇERLİK VE GÜVENİRLİK ÇALIŞMASI. Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2), 209-232.