Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

FEN BİLİMLERİ MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ II’NİN TÜRKÇE’YE VE FİZİĞE UYARLANMASI: FİZİK MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2, 126 - 141, 31.12.2019
https://doi.org/10.35346/aod.626185

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı,
Glynn, Brickman, Armstrong and Taasoobshirazi (2011) tarafından geliştirilen
“Fen Bilimleri Motivasyon Ölçeği II (Science Motivation Questionaire II,
SMQ-II)”nin Türkçeye uyarlanması; geçerlik ve güvenirlik analizlerinin
yapılmasıdır. Çalışmaya, 9., 10., 11. ve 12. sınıflara devam eden 752 öğrenci
katılmıştır. Ancak ölçek maddelerinin en az %5’ini boş bırakan öğrenci
verilerinin çalışmadan çıkarılması ile 712 öğrenciden elde edilen veriler ile
çalışma tamamlanmıştır. Ölçeğin dil eşdeğerliği sağlandıktan sonra yapı
geçerliliğini belirlemek amacıyla elde edilen veriler doğrulayıcı faktör
analizi ile incelenmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda büyük
örneklemlerde önerilen χ2 /sd= 3.28 değeri başta olmak üzere uyum indeks
değerleri iyi uyum gösterdiğini ortaya koymuştur. Güvenirlik için 5 alt boyut
ve ölçeğin tümü için Cronbachs’ α katsayıları hesaplanmıştır. Ölçeğin tümü için
.93 olarak hesaplanan güvenirlik katsayısı alt boyutlarda .81 ile .89 arasında
değişmektedir. Diğer yandan Pearson analizi ile madde-toplam ve madde-kalan
korelasyonları (.41 ve .71 arasında) ve t testi ile toplam puana göre
belirlenmiş üst ve alt %27’lik grupların madde ortalamaları arasındaki fark
hesaplanmış ve ölçek maddelerinin ve faktörlerin ayırt edici olduğu
saptanmıştır. Ayrıca Pearson analizi ile faktörler arasındaki korelasyonların
anlamlı olduğu belirlenmiştir (p<.01). Test-tekrar test güvenirliği ölçmek
için nihai ölçek 85 kişilik bir gruba üç hafta arayla iki kez aynı öğrencilere
uygulanmış ve elde edilen korelasyon katsayısı anlamlı bulunmuştur (r=.98;
p<.01). Sonuçlar Fizik Motivasyon Ölçeğinin Türkçe formunun güvenilir ve
geçerli bir ölçme aracı olduğunu ve lise öğrencilerinin fizik motivasyonlarını
ölçmek için kullanılabileceğini göstermektedir.

Kaynakça

  • Andressa, H., Mavrikaki, E., & Dermitzaki, I. (2015). Adaptation of the students' motivation towards science learning questionnaire to measure Greek students’ motivation towards biology learning. International Journal Of Biology Education, 4(2).
  • Angell, C., Guttersrud, Ø., Henriksen, E. K., ve Isnes, A. (2004). Physics: Frightful, but fun. Pupils' and teachers' views of physics and physics teaching. Science Education, 88(5), 683-706.
  • Ardura, D., & Pérez-Bitrián, A. (2018). The effect of motivation on the choice of chemistry in secondary schools: adaptation and validation of the Science Motivation Questionnaire II to Spanish students. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 905-918.
  • Austin, A. C., Hammond, N. B., Barrows, N., Gould, D. L., & Gould, I. R. (2018). Relating motivation and student outcomes in general organic chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 331-341.
  • Aycan, Ş. ve Yumuşak, A. ,(2002), Lise fizik müfredatındaki konuların anlaşılma düzeyleri üzerine bir araştırma, V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, ODTÜ, Ankara, s.96.
  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
  • Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Second Edition. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı, Ankara:Pegem Yayınları.
  • Cavas, P. (2011). Factor affecting the motivation of Turkish primary students for science learning. Science Education International, 22(1), 31-42.
  • Chan, Y. L., ve Norlizah, C. H. (2017). Students’ motivation towards science learning and students’ science achievement. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 6(4), 2226-6348.
  • Cleveland, L. M., Olimpo, J. T., & DeChenne-Peters, S. E. (2017). Investigating the relationship between instructors’ use of active-learning strategies and students’ conceptual understanding and affective changes in introductory biology: A comparison of two active-learning environments. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 16(2), ar19.
  • Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. ve Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2014). Sosyal Bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
  • Dindar, A. Ç., & Geban, Ö. (2015). Fen bilimleri motivasyon ölçeğinin Türkçe'ye ve Kimya'ya uyarlanması: Geçerlilik çalışması. Pegem Egitim ve Ögretim Dergisi= Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 5(1), 15.
  • Druger, M. (2006). Experiential learning in a large introductory biology course. In J. J. Mintzes ve W. H. Leonard (Eds.), Handbook of college science teaching (pp. 37–43). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
  • Ersoy, A. F., & Aliçka, Y. (2016). The Albanian adaptation of the Science Motivation. European Journal of Language and Literature, 2(1), 149-156.
  • Glynn S. M. and Koballa T. R. Jr., (2006), Motivation to learn in college science. in Mintzes J. J. and Leonard W. H. (eds.), Handbook of College Science Teaching. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press, pp. 25–32.
  • Glynn, S.M., Taasoobshirazi, G., Brickman, P. (2009). Science Motivation Questionnaire: Construct validation with nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46 (2), 127-146.
  • Glynn S.M., Brickman, P., Armstrong, N., Taasoobshirazi G. (2011) Science Motivation Questionnaire II:Validation with science majors and nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1159–1176.
  • Guido, R. M. D. (2018). Attitude and motivation towards learning physics. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.02293.
  • Hadzigeorgiou, Y., ve Schulz, R. (2017). What really makes secondary school students “want” to study physics?. Education Sciences, 7(4), 84.
  • Hammer,D., (1994), Epistemological beliefs in introductory physics, Cognition and Instruction, 12(2), 151-183.
  • İlhan, N., Yıldırım, A., & Yılmaz, S. S. (2012). Kimya Motivasyon Anketi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(18), 297-310.
  • Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy Jr, J. A., ve Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009). Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations. Psychological Methods, 14(1), 6.
  • Karabenick, S. A., Woolley, M. E., Friedel, J. M., Ammon, B. V., Blazevski, J., Bonney, C. R., ... ve Kelly, K. L. (2007). Cognitive processing of self-report items in educational research: Do they think what we mean?. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 139-151.
  • Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 4th Edition. Guilford publications.
  • Ng, B. L., Liu, W. C., ve Wang, J. C. (2016). Student motivation and learning in mathematics and science: A cluster analysis. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(7), 1359-1376.
  • Pintrich, P.R., ve Schunk, D.H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). upper Saddle River: NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Redish, E. F., Saul, J. M., ve Steinberg, R. N. (1998). Student expectations in introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 66(3), 212-224.
  • Rachmatullah, A., Roshayanti, F., Shin, S., Lee, J., Ha, M. (2018). The Secondary-student science learning motivation in Korea and Indonesia. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(7), 3123-3141. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/91665
  • Salta, K., ve Koulougliotis, D. (2015). Assessing motivation to learn chemistry: adaptation and validation of Science Motivation Questionnaire II with Greek secondary school students. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(2), 237-250.
  • Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R. ve Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research and application.Upper Saddle River, NJ and Columbus, OH: Pearson
  • Seçer, İ. (2015) Psikolojik test geliştirme ve uyarlama süreci: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları Ankara: Anı Yayınları.
  • Schumm, M. F., & Bogner, F. X. (2016). Measuring adolescent science motivation. International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 434-449.
  • Schunk, D. H. (2014) Eğitimsel bir bakışla öğrenme teorileri. (M. Şahin, Çev.) Ankara:Nobel Yayınları.
  • Taasoobshirazi, G., ve Carr, M. (2009). A structural equation model of expertise in college physics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 630.
  • Tosun, C. (2013). Adaptation of chemistry motivation questionnaire-II to Turkish: A validity and reliability study. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(1), 173-202.
  • Tröbst, S., Kleickmann, T., Lange-Schubert, K., Rothkopf, A., ve Möller, K. (2016). Instruction and students’ declining interest in science: An analysis of German fourth-and sixth-grade classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 53(1), 162-193.
  • Trumper, R., (2006), Factors affecting junior high school students’ interest in physics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 47-58.
  • Vasques, D. T., Yoshida, L., Ellinger, J., & Solomon, J. (2018, March). Validity and reliability of the science motivation questionnaire II (SMQ II) in the context of a japanese university. In Conference proceedings (p. 80). libreriauniversitaria. it Edizioni.
  • Vedder-Weiss, D. ve Fortus, D. (2011). Adolescents’ declining motivation to learn science: Inevitable or not?. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48 (2), 199-216. doi: 10.1002/tea.20398
  • Veloo, A., Nor, R., ve Khalid, R. (2015). Attitude towards physics and additional mathematics achievement towards physics achievement. International Education Studies, 8(3), 35-43.
  • Visser, Y. L. (2007). Convergence and divergence in children’s attitudes toward the sciences and science education. Learning Development Institute, Florida Atlantic University.
  • Wild, D., Grove, A., Martin, M., Eremenco, S., McElroy, S., Verjee‐Lorenz, A., ve Erikson, P. (2005). Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient‐reported outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value in Health, 8(2), 94-104.

ADAPTATION OF SCIENCE MOTIVATION QUESTIONNAIRE II (SMQ-II) TO THE TURKISH LANGUAGE AND PHYSICS: PHYSICS MOTIVATION SCALE

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2, 126 - 141, 31.12.2019
https://doi.org/10.35346/aod.626185

Öz

This
purpose of this study is to adapt Science Motivation Questionaire II scale
developed by Glynn, Brickman, Armstrong and Taasoobshirazi to the Turkish
language. A sample of 712 students (grades 9-12) participated in the study.
After language equivalency, the construct validity of the scale was examined
with confirmatory factor analysis. Goodness of fit indices of confirmatory
factor analysis indicated good fit between the original model and data.
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was found to be .93 for the scale and between .81
and .89 for sub-scales and item-total correlation coefficients were between .41
and .71. According to t-test results, differences between each item’s means of
upper 27% and lower 27% points were significant. In addition, the correlations
between the factors were found to be significant by Pearson analysis (p
<.01). For the test-retest reliability coefficient, the scale was applied to
a group of 85 students at three-week intervals, and the correlation coefficient
was significant (r = .98; p <.01).The results of this study confirmed that
the Turkish form of the Physics Motivation Scale II is valid and reliable to be
used in assessing high school students’ physics motivation.

Kaynakça

  • Andressa, H., Mavrikaki, E., & Dermitzaki, I. (2015). Adaptation of the students' motivation towards science learning questionnaire to measure Greek students’ motivation towards biology learning. International Journal Of Biology Education, 4(2).
  • Angell, C., Guttersrud, Ø., Henriksen, E. K., ve Isnes, A. (2004). Physics: Frightful, but fun. Pupils' and teachers' views of physics and physics teaching. Science Education, 88(5), 683-706.
  • Ardura, D., & Pérez-Bitrián, A. (2018). The effect of motivation on the choice of chemistry in secondary schools: adaptation and validation of the Science Motivation Questionnaire II to Spanish students. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 905-918.
  • Austin, A. C., Hammond, N. B., Barrows, N., Gould, D. L., & Gould, I. R. (2018). Relating motivation and student outcomes in general organic chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 331-341.
  • Aycan, Ş. ve Yumuşak, A. ,(2002), Lise fizik müfredatındaki konuların anlaşılma düzeyleri üzerine bir araştırma, V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, ODTÜ, Ankara, s.96.
  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
  • Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Second Edition. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı, Ankara:Pegem Yayınları.
  • Cavas, P. (2011). Factor affecting the motivation of Turkish primary students for science learning. Science Education International, 22(1), 31-42.
  • Chan, Y. L., ve Norlizah, C. H. (2017). Students’ motivation towards science learning and students’ science achievement. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 6(4), 2226-6348.
  • Cleveland, L. M., Olimpo, J. T., & DeChenne-Peters, S. E. (2017). Investigating the relationship between instructors’ use of active-learning strategies and students’ conceptual understanding and affective changes in introductory biology: A comparison of two active-learning environments. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 16(2), ar19.
  • Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. ve Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2014). Sosyal Bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
  • Dindar, A. Ç., & Geban, Ö. (2015). Fen bilimleri motivasyon ölçeğinin Türkçe'ye ve Kimya'ya uyarlanması: Geçerlilik çalışması. Pegem Egitim ve Ögretim Dergisi= Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 5(1), 15.
  • Druger, M. (2006). Experiential learning in a large introductory biology course. In J. J. Mintzes ve W. H. Leonard (Eds.), Handbook of college science teaching (pp. 37–43). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
  • Ersoy, A. F., & Aliçka, Y. (2016). The Albanian adaptation of the Science Motivation. European Journal of Language and Literature, 2(1), 149-156.
  • Glynn S. M. and Koballa T. R. Jr., (2006), Motivation to learn in college science. in Mintzes J. J. and Leonard W. H. (eds.), Handbook of College Science Teaching. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press, pp. 25–32.
  • Glynn, S.M., Taasoobshirazi, G., Brickman, P. (2009). Science Motivation Questionnaire: Construct validation with nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46 (2), 127-146.
  • Glynn S.M., Brickman, P., Armstrong, N., Taasoobshirazi G. (2011) Science Motivation Questionnaire II:Validation with science majors and nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1159–1176.
  • Guido, R. M. D. (2018). Attitude and motivation towards learning physics. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.02293.
  • Hadzigeorgiou, Y., ve Schulz, R. (2017). What really makes secondary school students “want” to study physics?. Education Sciences, 7(4), 84.
  • Hammer,D., (1994), Epistemological beliefs in introductory physics, Cognition and Instruction, 12(2), 151-183.
  • İlhan, N., Yıldırım, A., & Yılmaz, S. S. (2012). Kimya Motivasyon Anketi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(18), 297-310.
  • Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy Jr, J. A., ve Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009). Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations. Psychological Methods, 14(1), 6.
  • Karabenick, S. A., Woolley, M. E., Friedel, J. M., Ammon, B. V., Blazevski, J., Bonney, C. R., ... ve Kelly, K. L. (2007). Cognitive processing of self-report items in educational research: Do they think what we mean?. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 139-151.
  • Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 4th Edition. Guilford publications.
  • Ng, B. L., Liu, W. C., ve Wang, J. C. (2016). Student motivation and learning in mathematics and science: A cluster analysis. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(7), 1359-1376.
  • Pintrich, P.R., ve Schunk, D.H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). upper Saddle River: NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Redish, E. F., Saul, J. M., ve Steinberg, R. N. (1998). Student expectations in introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 66(3), 212-224.
  • Rachmatullah, A., Roshayanti, F., Shin, S., Lee, J., Ha, M. (2018). The Secondary-student science learning motivation in Korea and Indonesia. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(7), 3123-3141. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/91665
  • Salta, K., ve Koulougliotis, D. (2015). Assessing motivation to learn chemistry: adaptation and validation of Science Motivation Questionnaire II with Greek secondary school students. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(2), 237-250.
  • Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R. ve Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research and application.Upper Saddle River, NJ and Columbus, OH: Pearson
  • Seçer, İ. (2015) Psikolojik test geliştirme ve uyarlama süreci: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları Ankara: Anı Yayınları.
  • Schumm, M. F., & Bogner, F. X. (2016). Measuring adolescent science motivation. International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 434-449.
  • Schunk, D. H. (2014) Eğitimsel bir bakışla öğrenme teorileri. (M. Şahin, Çev.) Ankara:Nobel Yayınları.
  • Taasoobshirazi, G., ve Carr, M. (2009). A structural equation model of expertise in college physics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 630.
  • Tosun, C. (2013). Adaptation of chemistry motivation questionnaire-II to Turkish: A validity and reliability study. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(1), 173-202.
  • Tröbst, S., Kleickmann, T., Lange-Schubert, K., Rothkopf, A., ve Möller, K. (2016). Instruction and students’ declining interest in science: An analysis of German fourth-and sixth-grade classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 53(1), 162-193.
  • Trumper, R., (2006), Factors affecting junior high school students’ interest in physics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 47-58.
  • Vasques, D. T., Yoshida, L., Ellinger, J., & Solomon, J. (2018, March). Validity and reliability of the science motivation questionnaire II (SMQ II) in the context of a japanese university. In Conference proceedings (p. 80). libreriauniversitaria. it Edizioni.
  • Vedder-Weiss, D. ve Fortus, D. (2011). Adolescents’ declining motivation to learn science: Inevitable or not?. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48 (2), 199-216. doi: 10.1002/tea.20398
  • Veloo, A., Nor, R., ve Khalid, R. (2015). Attitude towards physics and additional mathematics achievement towards physics achievement. International Education Studies, 8(3), 35-43.
  • Visser, Y. L. (2007). Convergence and divergence in children’s attitudes toward the sciences and science education. Learning Development Institute, Florida Atlantic University.
  • Wild, D., Grove, A., Martin, M., Eremenco, S., McElroy, S., Verjee‐Lorenz, A., ve Erikson, P. (2005). Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient‐reported outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value in Health, 8(2), 94-104.
Toplam 43 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Alan Eğitimleri
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Erol Süzük 0000-0001-5520-5597

Yayımlanma Tarihi 31 Aralık 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2019 Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Süzük, E. (2019). FEN BİLİMLERİ MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ II’NİN TÜRKÇE’YE VE FİZİĞE UYARLANMASI: FİZİK MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ. Anadolu Öğretmen Dergisi, 3(2), 126-141. https://doi.org/10.35346/aod.626185
AMA Süzük E. FEN BİLİMLERİ MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ II’NİN TÜRKÇE’YE VE FİZİĞE UYARLANMASI: FİZİK MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ. AOD. Aralık 2019;3(2):126-141. doi:10.35346/aod.626185
Chicago Süzük, Erol. “FEN BİLİMLERİ MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ II’NİN TÜRKÇE’YE VE FİZİĞE UYARLANMASI: FİZİK MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ”. Anadolu Öğretmen Dergisi 3, sy. 2 (Aralık 2019): 126-41. https://doi.org/10.35346/aod.626185.
EndNote Süzük E (01 Aralık 2019) FEN BİLİMLERİ MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ II’NİN TÜRKÇE’YE VE FİZİĞE UYARLANMASI: FİZİK MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ. Anadolu Öğretmen Dergisi 3 2 126–141.
IEEE E. Süzük, “FEN BİLİMLERİ MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ II’NİN TÜRKÇE’YE VE FİZİĞE UYARLANMASI: FİZİK MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ”, AOD, c. 3, sy. 2, ss. 126–141, 2019, doi: 10.35346/aod.626185.
ISNAD Süzük, Erol. “FEN BİLİMLERİ MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ II’NİN TÜRKÇE’YE VE FİZİĞE UYARLANMASI: FİZİK MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ”. Anadolu Öğretmen Dergisi 3/2 (Aralık 2019), 126-141. https://doi.org/10.35346/aod.626185.
JAMA Süzük E. FEN BİLİMLERİ MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ II’NİN TÜRKÇE’YE VE FİZİĞE UYARLANMASI: FİZİK MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ. AOD. 2019;3:126–141.
MLA Süzük, Erol. “FEN BİLİMLERİ MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ II’NİN TÜRKÇE’YE VE FİZİĞE UYARLANMASI: FİZİK MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ”. Anadolu Öğretmen Dergisi, c. 3, sy. 2, 2019, ss. 126-41, doi:10.35346/aod.626185.
Vancouver Süzük E. FEN BİLİMLERİ MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ II’NİN TÜRKÇE’YE VE FİZİĞE UYARLANMASI: FİZİK MOTİVASYON ÖLÇEĞİ. AOD. 2019;3(2):126-41.