STEM Motivasyon Ölçeğinin Türkçeye Uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Year 2020, Volume: 17 Issue: 1, 486 - 510, 25.12.2020

İsmail Dönmez

https://doi.org/10.33711/yyuefd.693825

Cited By: 16

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı orijinali İngilizce olan STEM (Bilim-Teknoloji-Mühendislik-Matematik) devam eden motivasyon ölçeğini Türkçeye uyarlayarak geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışmasını yapmaktır. İki İngilizce dil uzmanına ölçeği İngilizceden Türkçeye çevirmesi istenmiştir. Çevirinin Türkçeye uyarlanmasından sonra iki Türk dil uzmanına ölçeğin Türkçe hali verilmiş, anlaşırlığına ilişkin yapılan düzenlemeden sonra karşılaştırılma yapılarak, geçerliliği sağlanmıştır. Örneklemi 438 (%54,1) kız, 372 (%45,9) ‘si erkek öğrenci oluşturmaktadır. Verilerin analizi için ölçeğin güvenirliği, doğrulayıcı faktör analizine, STEM motivasyon ölçeği ve alt boyutlarının ilişkisine yer verilmiştir. Analiz sonuçlarına göre, kabul edilebilir uyum değerleri hesaplamıştır (RMSEA=0,076, SRMR=0,01, CFI=0.89). Ölçeğin Cronbach Alpha güvenirlik katsayısı 0,84 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlar bilim, teknoloji, mühendislik ve matematik olmak üzere 4 boyuttan ve 25 maddeden oluşan STEM motivasyon ölçeğinin ortaokul öğrencilerine yönelik motivasyon STEM alanları çalışmalarında kullanılabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir bir araç olduğuna işaret etmektedir.

Keywords

STEM, Motivasyon, Ölçek, Kariyer

References

• Abraham, J., & Barker, K. (2014). Sustaining young people’s enrolment intentions in relation to Physics: Development and validation of a tool. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 14, 93–116. Akgündüz, D., Aydeniz, M., Çakmakçı, G., Çavaş, B., Çorlu, M., Öner, T., & Özdemir, S. (2015). STEM Eğitimi Türkiye Raporu: “Günümüz Modası mı Yoksa Gereksinim mi?”. http://www.aydin.edu.tr/belgeler/IAU-STEM-Egitimi-Turkiye-Raporu-2015.pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir. Auger, R. W., Blackhurst, A. & Herting Wahl, K. (2005). The development of elementaryaged children’s career aspirations and expectations. Professional School Counseling, 8(4), 322-329. Baird J. R. & Penna C. (1992). Shared adventure: a view of quality teaching and learning Second report of the teaching and learning science in schools Project. Monash University, Melbourne, pp. 185–274. Bøe, M. V., Henriksen, E. K., Lyons, T., & Schreiner, C. (2011). Participation in science and technology: Young people’s achievement-related choices in late-modern societies. Studies in Science Education, 47, 37–72. Briggs, A. R. J., Clark, J., & Hall, I. (2012). Building bridges: understanding student transition to university. Quality in Higher Education, 18(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1343822.2011.614468. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Sosyal bilimler için veri ve analizi el kitabı: istatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum, Anı Yayıncılık: Ankara. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2011). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi. Carreira, J. M. (2011). Relationship between motivation for learning EFL and intrinsic motivation for learning in general among Japanese elementary school students. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 39(1), 90–102. Cerasoli, C. P., Nicklin, J. M., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: a 40-year meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 980–1008. https://doi.org/10.1037 /a0035661. Christensen, R., Knezek, G., (2015). Active learning approaches to integrating technology into middle school science classrooms: reconceptualizing a middle school science curriculum based on 21st century skills. Spector, J. M. (eds). Full steam ahead: emerging technologies for STEAM. Springer Academic, New York. Christie, H., Tett, L., Cree, V. E., Hounsell, J., & McCune, V. (2008). ‘A real rollercoaster of confidence and emotions’: learning to be a university student. Studies in Higher Education, 33(5), 567–581. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802373040. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamalar. Ankara: Pegema Deci, E., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media Doll, W. J. Weidong, X., Gholamreza, T. (1994). A confirmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument, MIS Quarterly, 18 (4), 453-461. Elliot, A. J., & Covington, M. V. (2001). Approach and avoidance motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 73–92. Rosenzweig, E. Q. & Wigfield, A. (2016). STEM motivation interventions for adolescents: a promising start, but further to go, Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 146-163, DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2016.1154792 Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C. ve Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Pscyhological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. Falk, J. H., Staus, N., Dierking, L. D., Penuel, W., Wyld, J. & Bailey, D. (2016). Understanding youth STEM interest pathways within a single community: the Synergies project, International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 6(4), 369-384,DOI: 10.1080/21548455.2015.1093670 Fortus, D., & Vedder-Weiss, D. (2014). Measuring students’ continuing motivation for science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(4), 497–522. doi:10.1002/tea.21136 Gomez, A. ve Albrecht, B. (2014). True STEM education. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 73 (4), 8-16. Özcan, H., & Koca, E. (2019). STEM’e yönelik tutum ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34(2), 387-401. doi: 10.16986/HUJE.2018045061 Lacey A. L. & Wright B. (2008). Occupational employment projection. Monthly Labor Review,(132)82, 82-132. Fend, H. (2006). Neue Theorie der Schule. Einführung in das Verstehen von Bildungssystemen. Wiesbaden, DE: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften Keeley, P. (2009). Elementary science education in the K-12 system. NSTA Reports. http://nsta.org/publications/news/ story.aspx?id=55954 adresinden, 1 Ocak 2017 tarihinde alınmıştır. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press. Linnenbrink, E., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Achievement goal theory and affect: An asymmetrical bi-directional model. Educational Psychologist, 37, 69–78. Luo, T., Wang, J., Liu, X., & Zhou, J. (2019). Development and application of a scale to measure students’ STEM continuing motivation. International Journal of Science Education, 41(14), 1885-1904. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2019.1647472 Pan, Y., & Gauvain, M. (2012). The continuity of college students’ autonomous learning motivation and its predictors: a three-year longitudinal study. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(1), 92–99. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.010 Pinxten, M., Van Soom, C., Peeters, C., De Laet, T., & Langie, G. (2017). At-risk at the gate: Prediction of study success of first-year science and engineering students in an open-admission university in Flanders—Any incremental validity of study strategies? European Journal of Psychology of Education, 34, 45–66. Ratelle, C. F., Guay, F., Larose, S., & Senécal, C. (2004). Family correlates of trajectories of academic motivation during a school transition: a semiparametric group-based approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 743–754. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.4.743. Reider, D., Knestis, K. & Malyn-Smith, J. (2016). Workforce education models for K-12 STEM education programs: Reflections on, and implications for, the NSF ITEST program. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(6), 847–858. Maehr, M. L. (1976). Continuing motivation: An analysis of a seldom considered educational outcome. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 443–462. doi:10.3102/ 00346543046003443 Maltese A.V., Tai R.H., (2011). Pipeline persistence: examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among U.S. students. Science Education,95(5):877–907. Manolopoulou-Sergi, E. (2004). Motivation within the information processing model of foreign language learning. System, 32(3), 427–441. Master, A., Cheryan, S., Moscatelli, A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2017). Programming experience promotes higher STEM motivation among first-grade girls. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 160, 92-106. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2018). Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programı. Ankara. National Research Council [NRC]. (2011). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy. Neuman, W. L. & Robson, K. (2014). Basics Of Social Research. Toronto: Pearson Canada. Osborne, J., Simon, S., and Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049 - 1079. Osborne, J., Simon, S. & Tytler, R. (2009). Attitudes toward science: An update. Paper presented in Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, California. Restivo, T., Chouzal, F., Rodrigues, J., Menezes, P. and Bernardino Lopes, J. “Augmented reality to improve stem motivation,” in IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, April 2014, pp. 803–806. Segars, A. H. & Grover, V. (1993). Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: a confirmatory factor analysis, MIS Quarterly, 17 (4), 517-525. Schick, H., & Phillipson, S. N. (2009). Learning motivation and performance excellence in adolescents with high intellectual potential: What really matters? High Ability Studies, 20(1), 15–37. Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research and application. Columbus, OH: Pearson. Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765–781. Super, D. E. (1990). A Life Span, Life Space Approach to Career Development. In D. Brown & L. Brooks (Edit.) Career Choice and Development: Applying Contemporary Theory to Practice (s.197-261). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Tsupros, N., Kohler, R., & Hallinen, J. (2009). STEM education: A project to identify the missing components. Intermediate Unit 1 and Carnegie Mellon. Tuan, H. L., Chin, C. C., & Shieh, S. H. (2005). The development of a questionniare to measure students' motivation toward science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 639-654. Vansteenkiste, M., Smeets, S., Soenens, B., Lens, W., Matos, L., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Autonomous and controlled regulation of performance-approach goals: their relations to perfectionism and educational outcomes. Motivation and Emotion, 34(4), 333–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031- 010-9188-3 Vanthournout, G., Gijbels, D., Coertjens, L., Donche, V., & Van Petegem, P. (2012). Students’ persistence and academic success in a first year professional bachelor program: the influence of students’ learning strategies and academic motivation. Education Research International, 2012, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/152747. Wang, Y.-L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2016). Taiwanese students’ science learning self-efficacy and teacher and student science hardiness: A multilevel model approach. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31(4), 537–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0285-2. Wu, T. Y., Tuan, H. L., Hsieh, C. H., & Chin, C. C. (2013). The validation of the questionnaire of science teacher's perception on low-achiever's need. Paper presented at the Third International Conference of East-Asian Association for Science Education, Hong-Kong, China. Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 12–19. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2012.00101.x.