Kapsayıcı Liderlik Ölçeğinin Eğitim Örgütleri için Türkçeye Uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Hollander (2008) tarafından geliştirilmiş olan "Kapsayıcı Liderlik Ölçeği’ni" Türkçe’ye uyarlamaktır. Ölçeğin ingilizce ve Türkçeye çeviri çalışmaları, ingilizce ve Türkçe alanında uzman gruplar tarafından gerçekleştirilmiştir. Türkçeye çevrilen ölçek dil anlaşırlığını belirlemek amacıyla asıl uygulamaya geçmeden önce ön pilot uygulama çalışması yapılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde SPSS 21ve AMOS 22 paket program kullanılmıştır. Ölçeğin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmaları, 2019-2020 eğitim-öğretim yılında Diyarbakır ili Kayapınar ilçesinde görev yapan 330 öğretmenin görüşleri alınarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Elde edilen verilerle Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) ve Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) ile elde edilen sonucun, özgün Kapsayıcı Liderlik Ölçeğinin modeli ile benzer olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Güvenirlik çalışmaları kapsamında yapılan Cronbach alfa ve madde toplam korelasyon değerlerine ilişkin sonuçlar da beklenen değerler üzerinde çıkarak ölçeğin güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğunu göstermiştir. Böylelikle kapsayıcı liderlik ölçeğinin geçerli ve güvenilir olduğu ve uygun bir veri toplama aracı olduğu genel sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kapsayıcı Liderlik
• ÖLÇEK
• ÖĞRETMEN
• KAPSAYICI

Turkish Adaptation of The Inclusive Leadership Scale For Educational Organizations: A Validity and Reliability Study

Öz

The aim of this research is to adapt the "Inclusive Leadership Scale" developed by Hollander (2008) to Turkish language. English and Turkish translation studies were carried out by groups of experts in the original scale, English and Turkish. In order to determine the scale language agreement translated into Turkish, pre-pilot studies was made before proceeding to the original application. SPSS 21 and AMOS 22 package program was used to analyze the data. Validity and reliability studies of the scale were carried out in the 2019-2020 academic year with the participation of 330 teachers working in Kayapınar District of Diyarbakır province. The results obtained by explanatory factor analysis (AFA) and confirmatory Factor Analysis (DFA) were found to be similar to the model of the original Inclusive Leadership Scale. The results of Cronbach alpha and substance total correlation values conducted within the scope of reliability studies also showed that the scale is a reliable measurement tool based on expected values. Thus, the overall conclusion is reached that the inclusive leadership scale adapted to Turkish is valid and reliable and is an appropriate data collection tool for education organizations.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Inclusive leadership,
• Scale adaptation,
• Principal,
• Teacher,

Kaynakça

1. Argyris, C. (1976). Increasing leadership effectiveness. New York: Wiley.
2. Avery, D. R., McKay, P. F., Wilson, D. C., & Volpone, S. (2008). Attenuating the effect of seniority on intent to remain:The role of perceived inclusiveness. In meeting of the Academy of Management, Anaheim, CA.
3. Aydın, İ. (2016). Eğitim ve öğretimde etik. (8. Baskı). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık. Bayram, N. (2010). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş:AMOS uygulamaları. Bursa:Ezgi Yayıncılık.
4. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
5. Büyüköztürk. Ş. (2011). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara:Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş. Şekercioğlu G. ve Çokluk, Ö. (2018). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
7. Byrne, B. M. & Campbell, T. L. (1999). Cross-cultural comparisons and the presumption of equıvalent measurement and theoretical structure: a look beneath the surface. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 555-574.
8. Can, A. (2017). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.

9. Carmeli, A., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Ziv, E. (2010). Inclusive leadership and employee involvement in creative tasks in the workplace: The mediating role of psychological safety. Creativity Research Journal, 22(3), 250- 260.
10. Costello, A.B. & Osborne, J.W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9.
11. Çelik, H. E. ve Yılmaz, V. (2013). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesi temel kavramlar uygulamalar programlama. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
12. Den Hartog, D. N., & Belschak, F. D. (2012). Work engagement and Machiavellianism in the ethical leadership process. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(1), 35-47.
13. Doll, W. J., Xia, W. & Torzadeh, G. ( 1994). A confirmatory factor analysis of theend-user computing satisfaction instrument. MİS Quarterly, 18(4), 453-461.
14. Fletcher, J. K. (2007). Leadership, power, and positive relationships. exploring positive relationships at work: building a theoretical and research foundation. Dutton J.E., Ragins, B.R. (eds). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, 347-373.
15. Fraenkel, J. R.,Wallen, N. E. & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGrawHill.
16. Hirak, R., Peng, A. C., Carmeli, A., and Schaubroeck, J. M. (2012). Linking leader inclusiveness to work unit performance: the importance of psychological safety and learning from failures. Leadership Quartely, 23, 107-117.
17. Hollander, E. P. (1992). The essential interdependence of leadership and followership. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 71-75.
18. Hollander, E. P. (2004). Idiosyncrasy credit; upward influence. In G. R. Goethals, G. J. Sorenson, & J.M. Burns (Eds.). Encyclopedia of leadership (pp. 695-700; 1605-1609). Great Barrington, MA: Berkshire/SAGE.
19. Hollander, E. P. (2008). Inclusive leadership: The essential leader-follower relationship. New York: Routledge/Psychology Press.
20. Hollander, E. P., Park, B. B., & Elman, B. (2008). Inclusive leadership and leader-follower relations: Concepts, research, and applications. The Member Connector, International Leadership Association, 5.
21. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
22. Hu, L. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit ındexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives.Structural Equation Modeling,6(1),1-55.
23. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practices of structural equation modelling. New York: The Guilford.
24. Luthans, F. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organization behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(6), 695-706.
25. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J. & Peschar, J. L. (2006). OECD’s brief self- report measure of educational psychology’s most useful affective constructs:Cross- cultural, psychometric comparisons across 25 countries. International Journal of Testing, 6(4), 311- 360.
26. Martin, C. R. & Newell, R. J. (2004). Factor structure of the hospital anxiety and depression scale in ındividuals with facial disfigurement.Psychology Health and Medicine, 9(3),327- 336.
27. Meydan, C. H. ve Şeşen, H. (2011). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesi AMOS uygulamaları. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
28. Mitchell, R., Boyle, B., Parker, V., Giles, M., Chiang, V., and Joyce, P. (2015). Managing inclusiveness and diversity in teams: how leader inclusiveness affects performance through status and team identity. Human Resource Management, 54, 217-239.
29. Najmaei, A. (2018). Revisiting the strategic leadership paradigm:A gender inclusive perspective. In Inclusive Leadership (pp. 203-228). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
30. Nembhard, I. M., ve Edmondson, A. C. (2006). Making it safe: The effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 27(7), 941-966.
31. Nishii, L. H., ve Mayer, D. M. (2009). Do inclusive leaders help to reduce turnover in diverse groups? The moderating role of leader-member exchange in the diversity to turnover relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1412-1426.
32. Nunnaly, J. C. & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw Hill.
33. Okçu, V. ve Anık, S. (2017). Okul yöneticilerinin otantik liderlik davranışları ile öğretmenlerin motivasyon ve mobbing yaşama düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi. Anadolu Eğitim Liderliği ve Öğretim Dergisi,5(2), 63-85.
34. Randel, A. E., Galvin, B. M., Shore, L. M., Ehrhart, K. H., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., & Kedharnath, U. (2018). Inclusive leadership: Realizing positive outcomes through belongingness and being valued for uniqueness. Human Resource Management Review, 28(2), 190-203.
35. Raykov, T. & Markoulides, G. A. (2006). A first course in structural equation modeling. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
36. Ryan, J. (2014). Promoting inclusive leadership in diverse schools. In I. Bogotch & C. M. Shields (Eds.). International handbook of educational leadership and social (in) justice (Vol. 29, pp. 359-380). Heidelberg: Springer.
37. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H. & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
38. Schriesheim, C.A. & Eisenbach, R. J. (1995). An exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic investigation of item wording effects on obtained factor structures of survey questionnaire measures. Journal of Management, 21(6), 1177-1193.
39. Segars, A. H. & Grover, V. (1993). Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: A confirmatory factor analysis. MIS Quarterly, 17(4), 517-525.
40. Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Holcombe Ehrhart, K., and Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work groups:A review and model for future research. Journal Management, 37, 1262-1289.
41. Starrat, R. J. (2001). Democratic leadership theory in late modernity: An oxymoron or ironic possibility? International Journal of Leadership in Education, 4(4), 333-352.
42. Steiger, J.H. (2007). Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 893-898.
43. Suk, C. B., Hanh, T. B. T., and Byungll, P. (2015). Inclusive leadership and work engagement: mediating roles of affective organizational commitment and creativity. Social Behavior and Personality, 43, 931-943.
44. Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri:Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3(6), 49-74.
45. Şen, R. ve Yılmaz, V. (2013). Model belirlemesi, örneklem hacmi ve tahmin yönteminin yapısal eşitlik modelleri uyum ölçütlerine etkisi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 38, 239-252.
46. Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş (Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları). Ankara:Ekinoks Yayınları.
47. Tabachnick, B. G. and Fidell, L. S. (2011). Using multivariate statistics. USA: Pearson Education.
48. Tangirala, S., and Ramanujam, R. (2012). Ask and you shall hear (but not always): examining the relationship between manager consultation and employee voice. Personnel Psycholology, 65, 251-282.
49. Walumbwa, F. O., & Schaubroeck, J. (2009). Leader personality traits and employee voice behavior: mediating roles of ethical leadership and work group psychological safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1275.
50. Wuffli, P. A. (2016). Inclusive leadership:A framework for the global ERA. Cham:Springer.