Factor Structure, Reliability and Measurement Invariance of the Attitude Scale towards Sustainable Development for Prospective Teachers: Comparison of Their Attitudes Before and During the Covid-19 Pandemic

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 64, 2327 - 2345, 30.06.2025

İrfan Yurdabakan

https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1629338

Öz

This study has two purposes. The first of these is the adaptation of the Attitudes towards Sustainable Development (ASD) scale developed by Biasutti and Frate into Turkish and finding evidence of its factor structure, reliability and measurement invariance by gender. The second one is to examine teacher candidates' attitudes towards sustainable development before and during Covid-19. For this purpose, two applications were conducted. The first application was conducted on 412 participants in the 2018-2019 spring semester (before Covid-19), 291 of whom were female (70%) and 121 male (30%). The findings of the adaptation study have indicated that ASD is suitable to collect Turkish pre-service students’ attitudes towards sustainable development. The second application was conducted on 628 participants in the 2021-2022 spring semester (during Covid-19), of whom 421 were female (67%) and 207 were male (33%). The participants were students of the faculty of education. As a result, before Covid-19, the environment and economy sub-scale means of males were higher than females. Total ASD, economy, society and education sub-scale mean of the females were higher than males during Covid-19. Finally, females' total ASD, economy, society and education sub-scale mean during Covid-19 were higher than their pre-Covid-19 means. In all comparisons, no significant differences were found between the environmental sub-scale means of ASD.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sustainable development , attitude , pre-service teacher , covid-19

Etik Beyan

The ethics committee approval document for this research has been uploaded to the journal system.

Öğretmen Adayları İçin Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmaya Yönelik Tutum Ölçeğinin Faktör Yapısı, Güvenirliği ve Ölçüm Değişmezliği: Covid-19 Pandemisi Öncesi ve Sırasındaki Tutumlarının Karşılaştırılması

Öz

Bu çalışmanın iki amacı vardır. İlki, Biasutti ve Frate tarafından geliştirilen Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmaya Yönelik Tutum (SKT) ölçeğinin Türkçe'ye uyarlanması ve faktör yapısı, güvenirliği ve cinsiyete göre ölçme değişmezliğine dair kanıtlar bulunmasıdır. İkincisi ise öğretmen adaylarının Covid-19 öncesi ve sırasında sürdürülebilir kalkınmaya yönelik tutumlarını incelemektir. Bu amaçla iki uygulama yapılmıştır. İlk uygulama 2018-2019 bahar döneminde (Covid-19 öncesi) 291'i kadın (%70), 121'i erkek (%30) olmak üzere toplam 412 katılımcı üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Uyarlama çalışmasının bulguları, OSB'nin Türk öğretmen adaylarının sürdürülebilir kalkınmaya yönelik tutumlarını toplamak için uygun olduğunu göstermiştir. İkinci uygulama ise 2021-2022 bahar döneminde (Covid-19 döneminde) 421'i kadın (%67), 207'si erkek (%33) olmak üzere toplam 628 katılımcı üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, Covid-19 öncesinde erkeklerin çevre ve ekonomi alt ölçek araçları kadınlara göre daha yüksekti. Covid-19 döneminde kadınların toplam OSB, ekonomi, toplum ve eğitim alt ölçek ortalaması erkeklere göre daha yüksekti. Son olarak, kadınların Covid-19 sırasındaki toplam OSB, ekonomi, toplum ve eğitim alt ölçek ortalamaları, Covid-19 öncesi ortalamalarından daha yüksekti. Yapılan tüm karşılaştırmalarda OSB'nin çevresel alt ölçek ortalamaları arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunmamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sürdürülebilir kalkınma , tutum , öğretmen adayı , covid-19

Etik Beyan

Bu araştırmanın etik kurul izin belgesi dergi sistemine yüklenmiştir.

Kaynakça

• Alon, T. M., M. Doepke, J. Olmstead-Rumsey and M. Tertilt. (2020). The Impact of COVID-19 on Gender Equality. NBER Working Paper, 26947.
• Atasoy, E. (2005). “Çevre İçin Eğitim: İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Çevresel Tutum ve Çevre Bilgisi Üzerine Bir Çalışma.” Doktora Tezi. Bursa: Uludağ Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Biasutti, M. and S. Frate. (2017). “A Validity and Reliability Study of the Attitudes toward Sustainable Development Scale.” Environmental Education Research, 23(2): 214-230, DOI: 10.1080/13504622.2016.1146660
• Calò, X., R. Occhiuzzi and P. Profeta. (2021). COVID-19 and its economic impact on women and women’s poverty. FEMM European Parliament.
• Collin, P.H. (2004). Dictionary of Environment & Ecology. EISBN-13: 978-1-4081-0222-0, 265 s, Bloomsbury Publishing plc, London.
• Cotton, D. R. E., M. F. Warren, O. Maiboroda, and I. Bailey. (2007). “Sustainable Development, Higher Education and Pedagogy: A Study of Lecturers’ Beliefs and Attitudes.” Environmental Education Research. 13 (5): 579–597.
• Cronbach, L. 1951. “Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests.” Psychometrika, 16: 297–334. doi:10.1007/BF02 310555
• Demirbaş, Ç., Ö. (2015). “Öğretmen adaylarının sürdürülebilir kalkınma farkındalık düzeyleri.” Marmara Coğrafya Dergisi. 31: 300-316
• Derman, A and E., Hacıeminoğlu. (2017). “In the Context of Education for Sustainable Development: Determining the Environmental Literacy Level of In-Service Classroom Teachers.” Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Education Faculty. 36(2): 81-103
• Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). “From Alpha to Omega: A Practical Solution to the Pervasive Problem of Internal Consistency Estimation.” Br. J. Psychol, 105: 399–412. doi:10.1111/bjop.12046
• Evans, N. (Snowy), L. Tomas & C. Woods. 2016. “Impact of Sustainability Pedagogies on Pre-service Teachers’ Self-efficacy.” Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 10(2): 243–261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973408216650953
• Gürbüz, H., Çakmak, M., & Derman, M. (2013). “Biyoloji Öğretmen Adaylarının Sürdürülebilir Çevreye Yönelik Tutumları (Biology Teachers’Attitudes towards Sustainable Environment).” Türk Bilimsel Derlemeler Dergisi, 6(1): 144-149.
• Gürlük, S. (2010). “Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Gelişmekte Olan Ülkelerde Uygulanabilir Mi?” Osman Gazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi. 5(2): 85-99.
• Haigh, E. A. P., Moore, M. T., Kashdan, T. B., & Fresco, D. M. (2011). “Examination of the Factor Structure and Concurrent Validity of the Langer Mindfulness/Mindlessness Scale.” Assessment, 18: 11-26. doi: 10.1177/1073191110386342
• Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). “Cut off Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternations.” Structural Equation Modeling, 6: 1-55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
• Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy, J. A. Jr., & Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009). “Reporting Practices in Confirmatory Factor Analysis: An Overview and Some Recommendations.” Psychological Methods, 14: 6–23. doi: 10.1037/a0014694
• Järvinen, M. (1995). “Ympäristöystävä vai Yapaamatkustaja? Tutkimus Nuorten Ympäristöasenteista.” In Suomen ympäristö. Ympäristöpolitiikka 1. Helsinki: Suomen Ympäristökeskus
• Jöroskog, K.G., & Sörbom, D. (2004). LISREL 8.71. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International Inc. Kaya, F., M. 2013. “Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmaya Yönelik Tutum Ölçeği Geliştirme Çalışması.” Marmara Coğrafya Dergisi. 28: 175-193
• Keleş, Ö. (2017). “Investigation of Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Attitudes towards Sustainable Environmental Education.” Higher Education Studies, 7(3): 171-180
• Khan, N., & Trivedi, P. (2015). “Gender Differences and Sustainable Consumption Behaviour.” British Journal of Marketing Studies, 3(3): 29-35.
• Krywult-Albanska, M. And L. Albanski, (2021). “Gender and Educational Inequalities during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Preliminary Insights from Poland.” Sustainability.13(12403): 2-15
• Meredith, W. (1993), Measurement invariance, factor analysis, and factorial invariance. Pyschometrika, 58, 525-543.
• Meredith, W., & Teresi, J. A. (2006). An essay on measurement and factorial invariance. Medical Care, 44, S69–S77. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000245438.73837.89
• Michalos, A. C., H. Creech, N. Swayze, P. M. H. Kahlke, C. Buckler, and K. Rempel. (2012). “Measuring Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviours Concerning Sustainable Development among Tenth Grade Students in Manitoba.” Social Indicators Research. 106: 213–238
• Nolet, V. (2009). “Preparing Sustainability-literate Teachers.” Teachers College Record, 111(2): 409-442.
• Olsson, D., N. Gericke, and S.-N. Chang Rundgren. (2016). “The Effect of Implementation of Education for Sustainable Development in Swedish Compulsory Schools – Assessing Pupils’ Sustainability Consciousness.” Environmental Education Research. 22(2): 176-202. doi:10.1080/ 13504622.2015.1005057
• Özdemir, O. (2007). “A New Environmental Education Perspective: Education for Sustainable Development”. Education and Science. 32(145): 23-39
• Özoğul, S.Ç. (1993). “Yaygın Eğitim Düzeyinde Çevre İçin Eğitim,” Çevre Eğitimi, Türkiye Çevre Vakfı Yayınları, 65-80 , Ankara.
• Öztürk, M. (2017). “Education for Sustainable Development: Theoretical Framework, Historical Development, and Implications for Practice.” Elementary Education Online. 16(4): 1-11
• Pedikayil, J., V., Vilayan, V. and Kaliappan, T. (2023). “Teachers’ Attitude towards Education for Sustainable Development: A Descriptive Research.” International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education. 12(1): 86-95
• Profeta, P. (2021). “Gender Equality and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Labour Market, Family Relationships and Public Policy.” Intereconomics. 56(5): 270-273
• Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review, 41, 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004
• Revelle, W., & Zinbarg, R. (2009). “Coefficients Alpha, Beta, Omega, and the glb: Comments on Sijtsma.” Psychometrika, 74: 145–154. doi:10.1007/s11336-008-9102-z
• Svetina, D., Rutkowski, L., & Rutkowski, D. (2019). Multiple-group invariance with categorical outcomes using updated guidelines: An illustration using M plus and the lavaan/semtools packages. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 27(1), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2019.1602776
• Şahin, H. and S. Erkal, (2017). “An Investigation of University Students’ Attitudes toward Environmental Sustainability”. European Journal of Sustainable Development. 6(4): 147-154, Doi: 10.14207/ejsd.2017.v6n4p147 Teksöz, G. 2016. “Geçmişten Ders Almak: Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma İçin Eğitim.” Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi. 3(2): 73-97.
• Tekgöz, G., E. Şahin and H. Ertepınar, (2017). “Environmental Literacy, Pre-Service Teachers, and A Sustainable Future.” Hacettepe University Journal of Education. 39: 307-320
• Uitto, A., Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., & Meisalo, V. (2003). “Who Is Responsible for Sustainable Development? In Attitudes to Environmental Challenges: A survey of Finnish 9th Grade Comprehensive School Students.” Retrieved July 11, 2022, from http://roseproject.no/network/countries/finland/fin-uitto-2003.pdf
• UNESCO, (1992). Agenda 21. “Promoting Education, Public Awareness and Training (Chapter 36).” Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, June 3–14
• UNESCO, (2014). “What is the Purpose of the Decade?” Accessed January 18, 2016. http:// www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/extras/desd.html?panel=1#top
• Vandenberg, R. J. (2002). Toward a further understanding of and improvement in measurement invariance methods and procedures. Organizational Research Methods, 5(2), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428102005002001
• WCED (1987). World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future. Oxford: OUP.
• West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation models with non-normal variables: Problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modelling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 56–75). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Yurdabakan, I. (2008). Egitimde Olcme ve Degerlendirme [Measurement and evaluation in education]. Egitimde Kullanılan Olcme Araclarının Nitelikleri [The reliability and validity of measurement tools]. In S. Erkan & M. Gomleksiz (Eds.), (pp. 38-66). Ankara, Turkey: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım [Nobel Puplisher].
• Yurdabakan, I., & Çum, (2017). “Scale Development in Behavioral Sciences (Based on Exploratory Factor Analysis).” Turkish Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. 11(2): 108-126.
• Yurdabakan, I. (2018). Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmaya Yönelik Tutum Ölçeğinin Faktör Yapısı ve Güvenirliği: Öğretmen Adayları için Bir Uyarlama Çalışması. 9th International Congress on New Trends in Education. Antalya, May 10-12.
• Zinbarg, R. E., Revelle, W., Yovel, I., & Li, W. (2005). “Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and Mcdonald’s ω: The Irrelations with Each Other and Two Alternative Conceptualizations of Reliability.” Psychometrika, 70:123–133. doi: 10.1007/s11336-003-0974-7
• Zinbarg, R. E., Yovel, I., Revelle, W., & McDonald, R. (2006). “Estimating Generalizability to a Latent Variable Common to all of a Scale’s Indicators: A Comparison of Estimators for h.” Appl. Psychol. Meas. 30:121–144. doi: 10.1177/0146621605278814