Development of the Life Science Anxiety Scale: A Validity and Reliability Study

Öz

The level of anxiety experienced by students in a life science course can shape not only their academic performance but also their emotional development. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a scale for examining primary school students' anxiety about life science lessons. The study was conducted using a survey model, and the data were collected face-to-face. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to analyze the data. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed with 470 and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with the participation of 437 primary school students. As a result of these analyses, a scale consisting of two factors and 15 items was obtained. In the EFA, the eigenvalues for the anxiety and comfort factors ranged between 4,278 and 2,251, explaining 43,528% of the total variance. Furthermore, the Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient value of the scale was calculated as 0.85. The two-factor structure of the scale was confirmed by the CFA (x²/sd=2.08; RMSEA=0.050; SRMR=0.045; NFI=0.94; NNFI=0.96; CFI=0.97; GFI=0.95; AGFI=0.93). The study found that the scale is valid and reliable. The research suggested that the scale can be used to examine primary school students' anxiety about life science lessons.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Life Science
• anxiety
• scale development
• primary school students

Hayat Bilgisi Kaygı Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Öz

Hayat bilgisi dersinde öğrencilerin yaşadığı kaygı düzeyi; yalnızca akademik performanslarını değil, aynı zamanda duygusal gelişimlerini de biçimlendirebilmektedir. Bu bağlamda çalışmanın amacı, ilkokul öğrencilerinin hayat bilgisi dersine yönelik kaygılarının incelenmesi için kullanılacak ölçek geliştirilmesidir. Çalışma tarama modeli ile yürütülmüş ve veriler yüz yüze olarak toplanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi kullanılmıştır. Açımlayıcı faktör analizi 470 ilkokul öğrencisinin katılımıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizinin örneklemini ise 437 ilkokul öğrencisi oluşturmuştur. Bu analizler sonucunda iki alt boyut ve 15 maddeden oluşan ölçek elde edilmiştir. Açımlayıcı faktör analizinde, endişe ve rahatlık alt boyutlarının öz değerlerinin 4,278 ile 2,251 olduğu görülüştür. Bu alt boyutlar, toplam varyansın %43,528’ini açıklamıştır. Ayrıca ölçeğin Cronbach Alfa güvenirlik değeri ,85 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Ölçeğin iki faktörlü yapısı doğrulayıcı faktör analiziyle doğrulanmıştır (x²/sd=2,08; RMSEA=,050; SRMR=,045; NFI=,94; NNFI=,96; CFI=,97; GFI=,95; AGFI=,93). Çalışma sonucunda, ölçeğin geçerli ve güvenilir olduğu belirlenmiştir. Araştırmada geliştirilen bu ölçeğin ilkokul öğrencilerinin hayat bilgisi dersine yönelik kaygılarının incelenmesi için kullanılabileceği önerilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Hayat bilgisi
• kaygı
• ölçek geliştirme
• ilkokul öğrencileri

Kaynakça

1. Akgül, İ., & Akgül, A. (2017). Scale development to measure students’ perceptions of social values in the Life Science course: A validity and reliability study. Uşak University Journal of Social Sciences., 10(Special Issue 2), 39-53. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/604625
2. Akyürek-Tay, B., Öztürk, D., Ergül, S., & Tay, B. (2023). Life science course belief scale: A validity and reliability study. Journal of Dokuz Eylul University Buca Faculty of Education, 57, 1694-1715. https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1282588
3. American Psychological Association [APA]. (2023). Anxiety. Retrieved July 1, 2025, from https://dictionary.apa.org/anxiety
4. Aykaç, N. (2011). An evaluation of the methods and techniques used in the life science course curriculum based on teachers’ views (The case of Sinop province). Kastamonu Education Journal, 19(1), 113-126. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefdergi/issue/49053/625825.
5. Bahçe, A. (2010). An evaluation of the extent to which values are acquired in life science teaching based on teachers’ views [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Selcuk University.
6. Baloğlu, M. (2010). An investigation of the validity and reliability of the adapted mathematics anxiety rating scale-short version (MARS-SV) among Turkish students. European Journal of Psychological Education, 25, 507-518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-010-0029-2
7. Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various χ2 approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Societ, Series B (Methodological), 296-298. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2984057
8. Baysal, Z. N., Tezcan, Ö., & Araç, K. E. (2018). A comparison of the life science course in Turkey and Hamburg, Germany: An overview. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 11(1), 117-134. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.380762

9. Binbaşıoğlu, C. (2003). Life science teaching. Ankara: Nobel Akademi.
10. Bindak, R. (2005). İlköğretim öğrencileri için matematik kaygı ölçeği. Fırat Üniversitesi Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 17(2), 442-448. Retrieved from https://search.trdizin.gov.tr/tr/yayin/detay/51641
11. Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (1999). Quantitative data analysis with SPSS release 8 for window. Routledge.
12. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2015). Data analysis handbook for the social sciences. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
13. Çelik, H. E., & Yılmaz, V. (2016). Structural equation modeling: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Anı Publishing.
14. Çelik, Ö. (2020). The scope, aims, and content of the life science course. In V. Aktepe & M. Gündüz (Eds.), Life science teaching from theory to practice (pp. 2–21). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
15. Çeliktürk, Z., & Yamaç, A. (2015). Development of a reading anxiety scale for primary and middle school students: A validity and reliability study. Elementary Education Online, 14(1), 97-107. https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2015.03320
16. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2021). Research in education. (E. Dinç & K. Kıroğlu, Trans. Ed.). Pegem Akademi.
17. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Multivariate statistics for the social sciences: SPSS and LISREL applications (5th ed.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
18. Comrey, A. L. (1988). Factor-analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 56(5), 754-761. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-006X.56.5.754
19. Costa, V., & Sarmento, R. (2019). Confirmatory factor analysis: A case study. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1905.05598
20. Creswell, J. W. (2016). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (S. B. Demir, Trans. Ed.). Eğiten Kitap.
21. Cronbach, L. J. (1990). Essentials of psychological testing. Happer and Row Publishers.
22. Davcik, N. (2014). The use and misuse of structural equation modeling in management research: A review and critique. Journal of Advances in Management Research, 11(1), 47-81. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-07-2013-0043
23. Demir, T., Eralp-Demir, D., Türksoy, N. Özmen, E., & Uysal, Ö. (2000). The validity and reliability of the social anxiety scale for children. The Journal of Psychiatry and Neurological Sciences., 13(1), 42-48. Retrieved from https://dusunenadamdergisi.org/storage/upload/pdfs/1588684503-tr.pdf
24. Demirtaş-Şenel, G., & Buluç, B. (2023). A scale development study on attitudes toward the life science course. Journal of Gazi University Gazi Faculty of Education, 43(1), 183-209. https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.1202004
25. Deryakulu, D., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). A validity and reliability study of the epistemological beliefs scale. Educational Research, 8, 111-125. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ejaes/issue/50702/623604
26. DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development (T. Totan, Trans. Ed.). Ankara: Nobel Akademi.
27. Erkuş, A. (2014). Measurement and scale development in psychology. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
28. Ersoy, E. (2005). Primary school students’ levels of computer anxiety [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Ankara University.
29. Esen-Aygün, H. (2021). The mediating role of reading habits in the relationship between primary school students’ reading comprehension skills and reading anxiety. Journal of National Education, 50(231), 91-109. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.746081
30. Field, A. (2000). Discovering statistics using spss for windows. Sage Publications.
31. Good, L. R., & Good, K. C. (1974). A preliminary measure of existential anxiety. Psychological Reports, 34(1), 72-74. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1974.34.1.72
32. Güven, S., & Kaymakçı, S. (2016). Life science teaching. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
33. Hacıömeroğlu, G., & Kutluca, T. (2016). Validity and reliability study of the revised fennema–sherman mathematics anxiety scale for primary school students. Electronic Journal of Education Sciences, 5(10), 95-100. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ejedus/issue/26454/278551
34. Harrington, D. (2009). Confirmatory factor analysis. Oxford University Press.
35. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02291575
36. Katrancı, M., & Temel, S. (2018). A writing anxiety scale for primary school students: A validity and reliability study. International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research (JSHSR), 5(24), 1544-1555. https://doi.org/10.26450/jshsr.516
37. Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (5th ed.). Guilford Press.
38. Köseoğlu, E. (2023). Digital storytelling practices aimed at developing students’ basic life skills in the life science course [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Anadolu University.
39. Loehlin, J. C. (2004). Latent variable models: An introduction to factor, path, and structural equation analysis. Psychology Press.
40. MoNE. (2018). Life science course curriculum (Grades 1–3). Ministry of National Education.
41. MoNE. (2024). Life science course curriculum (Grades 1–3). Ministry of National Education.
42. Munro, B. H. (2005). Statistical methods for health care research. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
43. Mutlu, Y., & Söylemez, İ. (2018). The mathematics anxiety scale for 3rd- and 4th-grade primary school children: A validity and reliability study. EKEV Academy Journal, 73, 429-440. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/sosekev/issue/71391/1148057
44. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
45. OECD. (2019). Future of education and skills 2030. OECD Publishing.
46. Oker, D., & Tay, B. (2020). Development of the life science course attitude scale and students’ attitudes toward the life science course. Kalem International Journal of Education and Human Sciences, 10(2), 731-756. https://doi.org/10.23863/kalem.2020.173
47. Özcan, B. (2022). A mixed-methods ınvestigation of the relationship between trauma-ınformed distance education practices and children’s psychological well-being during the covıd-19 pandemic: The soyac case [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Maltepe University.
48. Özdemir, C. (2025). The implementation of creative drama method in life science course from the perspective of primary school teachers. The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 23(2), 1375-1399. https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.1559545
49. Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS. McGraw-Hill Education.
50. Pirinççi, L. N. (2009). An examination of the relationship between high school students’ levels of perfectionism and anxiety [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Maltepe University.
51. Polat, O. (2018). An examination of pre-service science teachers’ professional anxiety levels and their professional anxiety in relation to various variables [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Gaziosmanpaşa University.
52. Roos, J. M., & Bauldry, S. (2021). Confirmatory factor analysis. Sage Publications.
53. Salvucci, S., Walter, E., Conley, V., Fink, S., & Mehrdad, S. (1997). Measurement error studies at the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES 97-464). National Center for Education Statistics.
54. Sarıçam, H., & Çetintaş, K. (2015). The Turkish adaptation of the school anxiety scale–teacher form: A validity and reliability study. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 4(2), 41-50. https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.321368
55. Sarıkaya, İ., Özgöl, M., & Yılar, R. (2017). Development of the life science teaching attitude scale: A validity and reliability study. Elementary Education Online, 16(3), 992-1006. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2017.330237
56. Saucier, G. & Goldberg, L. R. (1996). The language of personality: Lexical perspectives on the five-factor model. In J. S. Wiggins (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality (pp. 21-50). Guilford Press.
57. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax R. G. (2004). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
58. Şencan, H. (2005). Reliability and validity in social and behavioral measurement. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.
59. Sönmez, V. (2005). Life science teaching and teacher’s guide. National Education Printing House.
60. Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., & Lushene, R. E. (1970). Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory. Consulting Psychologists Press.
61. Stevens, J. P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Lawrance Erlbaum Association.
62. Sun, J. (2005). Assessing goodness of fit in confirmatory factor analysis. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 37(4), 240–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2005.11909764
63. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
64. Tatlıdil, H. (1992). Applied multivariate statistical analysis. Engin Publishing.
65. Tavşancıl, E. (2004). Measurement of attitudes and data analysis using SPSS. Nobel Akademi.
66. Uluçınar, U., Gündoğan, A., & Akar, C. (2020). A scale to determine enjoyment levels in the life science course: A validity and reliability study. Journal of History School, 47, 2564-2581. http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/Joh.39924
67. UNESCO. (2022). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. UNESCO Publishing.
68. Ural, A., & Kılıç, İ. (2006). The scientific research process and data analysis using SPSS. Ankara: Detay Publishing.
69. Üredi, P. (2024). To guide teacher training programs: The levels of implementation of holistic assessment and evaluation practices in curriculum programs. Journal of Education and New Approaches, 7(2), 10-30. https://izlik.org/JA78RK24ST
70. Waltz, C. F., Strcikland, O. L., & Lenz, E. R. (2010). Measurement in nursing and health research. Springer Publishing Company.
71. Wang, J., & Wang. X. (2012). Structural equation modeling: Applications using Mplus: Methods and applications. John Wiley & Sons.
72. Williams, B., Onsman, A., & Brown, T. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 8(3), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.8.3.93
73. Yıldırım, Y. (2018). Middle school students’ anxiety toward the social studies course: A scale development study [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Usak University.
74. Yılmaz, F. (2022). Development of a self-efficacy scale toward the life science course. Kocaeli University Journal of Education, 5(2), 391-410. http://doi.org/10.33400/kuje.1059310
75. Zayimoğlu-Öztürk, F., & Coşkun, M. (2015). Development of an attitude scale toward the life science course: A validity and reliability study. International Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 2015(4), 239-251. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/goputeb/issue/34518/381530
76. Zeidner, M. (1998). Test Anxiety: The state of the art. New York: Plenum Press.