Probing School Image at High Schools: Scale Development and a Discriminant Analysis

Abstract

This study aimed at developing a valid and reliable measurement tool to determine school image at high schools and investigating the discrimination level of the scale among the students from different high school types in Turkey. Two studies were conducted to a) develop a valid and reliable measurement tool and b) to examine the discrimination power of the scale among students. The research was conducted in a province in Southeastern Turkey, and 668 students from six different high schools participated in the research in the 2017-2018 academic year. The construct validity of the scale was probed via exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The findings indicated that the School Image Scale (SIS) incorporated six factors (school-parent interaction, art-sports activities, student profile, teacher-administrator characteristics, student support services, and physical conditions) and 28 items. Results of discriminant analysis carried out with 300 students from 5 different high schools revealed that the sub-dimensions of the scale were effective in distinguishing between high schools. The most effective independent variable in distinguishing students studying at different school types was student profile, physical conditions, art-sports activities, teacher-administrator characteristics, student support services, and school-parent interaction variables, respectively. The related independent variables were discussed in order of importance in light of the relevant literature.

Keywords

• School image,Scale development,Discriminant analysis,High schools,students

References

1. Akman, Y., & Özdemir, M. (2019). Examining the relations between organisational attraction, organisational image and organisational loyalty: An investigation with teachers. Education and Science, 44(198), 1-16. Doi: 10.15390/EB.2018.7928.
2. Alcaide-Pulido, P., Alves, H., & Gutiérrez-Villar, B. (2017). Development of a model to analyze HEI image: A case based on a private and a public university. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 27(2), 162-187.
3. Alikasifoglu, M., Erginoz, E., Ercan, O., Uysal, O., Kaymak, D. A., & Ilter, O. (2004). Violent behaviour among Turkish high school students and correlates of physical fighting. The European Journal of Public Health, 14(2), 173-177.
4. Allen, K., Kern, M. L., Vella-Brodrick, D., Hattie, J., & Waters, L. (2018). What schools need to know about fostering school belonging: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9389-8.
5. Aras, S., Günay, T., Özan, S., & Orcin, E. (2007). İzmir ilinde lise öğrencilerinin riskli davranışları [Risky behaviors among high school students in Izmir]. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 8(3), 186-196.
6. Arastaman, G. (2009). Lise birinci sınıf öğrencilerinin okula bağlılık (school engagement) durumlarına ilişkin öğrenci, öğretmen ve yöneticilerin görüşleri [Students’, teachers’ and administrators’ opinions about freshman high school students’ engagement]. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 26(26), 102-112.
7. Atabek, G. Ş., & Atabek, Ü. (2015). Images of Turkish universities: A study on university print advertisements. Education & Science, 40(180), 155-168.
8. Baker, J. A. (1999). Teacher-student interaction in urban at-risk classrooms: Differential behavior, relationship quality, and student satisfaction with school. The Elementary School Journal, 100(1), 57-70.

9. Bakioğlu, A., & Bahçeci, M. (2010). Velilerin okul imajına ilişkin görüşlerinin incelenmesi [Analysis of parents’ perceptions in relation with school image]. M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 31, 25-55.
10. Beerli Palacio, A., Díaz Meneses, G., & Pérez Pérez, P. J. (2002). The configuration of the university image and its relationship with the satisfaction of students. Journal of Educational Administration, 40(5), 486-505.
11. Bentler, P. M. (2006). EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
12. Bernardi, R. A. (1994). Validating research results when Cronbach’s alpha is below .70: A methodological procedure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 766-775.
13. Brown, R. M., & Mazzarol, T. W. (2009). The importance of institutional image to student satisfaction and loyalty within higher education. Higher Education, 58(1), 81-95.
14. Cattell, R. B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. New York: Plenum.
15. Cemalcılar, Z. (2010). Schools as socialisation contexts: Understanding the impact of school climate factors on students’ sense of school belonging. Applied Psychology, 59(2), 243-272.
16. Cerit, Y. (2006). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin üniversitenin örgütsel imaj düzeyine ilişkin algıları [Organizational image perceptions of the university by undergraduate students of school of education]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 12(3), 343-365.
17. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları [Multivariate statistics for the social sciences: SPSS and LISREL applications]. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
18. da Costa, F. R., & Pelissari, A. S. (2016). Factors affecting corporate image from the perspective of distance learning students in public higher education institutions. Tertiary Education and Management, 22(4), 287-299.
19. da Costa, F. R., Pelissari, A. S., & Gonzalez, I. V. (2018). Corporate image of public higher education institutions: Relevant factors to distance learning students. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 117-135.
20. Danışman, Ş. (2017). The effect of expectation on student achievement. In E. Karadağ (Ed.), The factors effecting student achievement: Meta-analysis of empirical studies (pp. 227-245). New York, NY: Springer.
21. Demir, Ü. (2017). Mesleki ve teknik Anadolu lisesi algısı: Ortaokul 8. sınıf öğrencileri üzerine bir araştırma [Perception of vocational and technical Anatolian high school: A research on the secondary school 8th-grade students]. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 13(2), 316-342.
22. Diekhoff, G. (1992). Statistics for the social and behavioral sciences: Univariate, bivariate, multivariate. Washington, D.C.: Brown Publishers.
23. Eger, L., Egerová, D., & Pisoňová, M. (2018). Assessment of school image. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 8(2), 97-122.
24. Elmore, G. M., & Huebner, E. S. (2010). Adolescents’ satisfaction with school experiences: Relationships with demographics, attachment relationships, and school engagement behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 47(6), 525-537.
25. Ereş, F. (2011). Image of Turkish basic schools: A reflection from the province of Ankara. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(6), 431-441.
26. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272-299.
27. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
28. Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N. & Hyun, H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. 8th ed., New York: McGraw-Hill.
29. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
30. Hanushek, E. A., Lavy, V., & Hitomi, K. (2008). Do students care about school quality? Determinants of dropout behavior in developing countries. Journal of Human Capital 2(1), 69-105. doi: 10.1086/529446.
31. Hesapçıoğlu, M., & Nohutçu, A. (1999). Velilerin özel okul tercihlerini etkileyen faktörler ve özel okulların reklam stratejileri [Factors affecting parents’ private school choice and private schools’ advertisement strategies]. M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 11, 183-202.
32. Hilbe, J. (1992). Regression based dichotomous discriminant analysis. Stata Technical Bulletin, STB-5, January, 13-17. Retrieved from http://www.stata.com/products/stb/journals/stb5.pdf on 30.01.2015.
33. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55.
34. Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (2000). LISREL [Computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software, Inc.
35. Kalaycı, Ş. (2016). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri [Multivariate statistical techniques with SPSS applications]. Ankara: Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
36. Karacabey, M. F., Özdere, M., & Bozkuş, K. (2016). Üniversite öğrencilerinin örgütsel imaj algıları [University students’ organizational image perceptions]. Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 4(33), 459-473.
37. Karaosmanoglu, E., & Melewar, T. C. (2006). Corporate communications, identity and image: A research agenda. Journal of Brand Management, 14(1-2), 196-206.
38. Kazoleas, D., Kim, Y., & Moffitt, M. A. (2001). Institutional image: A case study. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 6(4), 205-216.
39. Kennedy, S. H. (1977). Nurturing corporate images: Total communication or ego trip? European Journal of Marketing, 11(3), 120-164.
40. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
41. Köybaşı, F., Uğurlu, C. T., & Ceylan, N. (2017). Okullarda örgütsel bağlılık yaratan bir öncül olarak imaj [Organizational image as a predictor of organizational commitment at schools]. Atatürk Üniversitesi Kazım Karabekir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34, 155-172.
42. Küçüksüleymanoğlu, R. (2015). Organizational image perceptions of higher education students. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(20), 2667-2673.
43. Lafuente-Ruiz-de-Sabando, A., Zorrilla, P., & Forcada, J. (2018). A review of higher education image and reputation literature: Knowledge gaps and a research agenda. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 24, 8-16.
44. Lee, C. K., & Chen, H. C. (2018). Configuring school image assets of colleges in Taiwan. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(1), 195-200.
45. Li, C. K., & Hung, C. H. (2009). Marketing tactics and parents’ loyalty: The mediating role of school image. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(4), 477-489.
46. Malik, S.A., Mushtaq, A., Jaswal, L.H., & Malik, S.A. (2015). Survey on marketing tactics used to build private school image and increase parents’ loyalty. Int. J. Management in Education, 9(2), 180-199.
47. Marič, M., Pavlin, J., & Ferjan, M. (2010). Educational institution’s image: A case study. Organizacija, 43(2), 58-65.
48. Nartgün, Ş., & Kaya, A. (2016). Özel okul velilerinin beklentileri doğrultusunda okul imajı oluşturma [Creating school image in accordance with private school parents’ expectations]. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 5(2), 154-167.
49. Pampaloni, A. M. (2010). The influence of organizational image on college selection: What students seek in institutions of higher education. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 20(1), 19-48.
50. Pérez, J. P., & Torres, E. M. (2017). Evaluation of the organizational image of a university in a higher education institution. Contaduría y administración, 62(1), 123-140.
51. Polat, S. (2011). The relationship between university students’ academic achievement and perceived organizational image. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 11(1), 257-262.
52. Sarı, M., & Özgök, A. (2014). Ortaokul öğrencilerinde okula aidiyet duygusu ve empatik sınıf atmosferi algısı [The sense of school belonging and emphatic classroom atmosphere among secondary school students]. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 13(2), 479- 492.
53. Schuler, M. (2004). Management of the organizational image: A method for organizational image configuration. Corporate Reputation Review, 7(1), 37-53.
54. Sipahi, B., Yurtkoru, S., & Çinko, M. (2010). Sosyal bilimlerde SPSS’le veri analizi [Data analysis using SPSS in the social sciences]. İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım. Şeker, H. (2011). Developing a questionnaire on attitude towards school. Learning Environments Research, 14(3), 241-261.
55. Şencan, H. (2005). Sosyal ve davranışsal ölçümlerde güvenilirlik ve geçerlilik [Reliability and validity in social and behavioral measurements]. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.
56. Sever, M., Soğuksu, A. F., Türe, E., Koçmar, Y., Olğun, M., Üçüncü, N., & Öztürk, İ. (2016). What does it mean to be a student in different types of high schools in Turkey through the eyes of students? Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16, 231-259.
57. Şişli, G., & Köse, S. (2015). Kurum kültürü ve kurumsal imaj ilişkisi: Devlet ve vakıf üniversiteleri üzerinde bir uygulama [The relationship between corporate culture and corporate image: An application on public and foundation universities]. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 41, 165-193.
58. Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571-581.
59. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, Pearson Education, Inc.
60. Uluçay, D. M. (2018). Üniversitelerde kurumsal imaj ölçümü [Measurement of corporate image at universities]. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 55, 17-36.
61. Uslu, F., & Gizir, S. (2017). School belonging of adolescents: The role of teacher-student relationships, peer relationships and family involvement. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 17, 63-82.
62. Van Wyk, A., & Bisschoff, C. (2012). 'n Meetinstrument om die beeld van'n sekondêre skool te bepaal: navorsings-en oorsigartikel [A measuring instrument to determine the image of a high school]. Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe, 52(3), 415-434.
63. Wilkins, S., & Huisman, J. (2013). Student evaluation of university image attractiveness and its impact on student attachment to international branch campuses. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(5), 607-623.
64. Wong, A., Woo, A., & Tong, C. (2016). Student satisfaction and school reputation: The moderating role of student loyalty and school image. Journal of Marketing and HR, 2(1), 113-125.