Kaynaştırma Ortamında Zorbalık (KOZ) Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlilik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 65, 123 - 138, 19.09.2025

Tansu İnce Çakan , Gülşah Selin Tümkaya , Abbas Ertürk

https://doi.org/10.9779/pauefd.1499845

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, genel eğitim sınıflarına devam eden özel gereksinimli öğrencilerin maruz kaldıkları akran zorbalıklarını tespit etmeye yönelik bir ölçek geliştirmektir. Seçilen çalışma grubu ilk ve ortaokullarda görev yapan öğretmenlerden oluşmuştur. Taslak ölçek, literatür incelemesi, madde havuzu oluşturulması ve uzman görüşü sonrasında geliştirilmiştir. Kaynaştırma ortamında zorbalık (KOZ) ölçeğinin yapı geçerliliğinin belirlenmesi için aynı evrenden alınmış iki farklı örneklem grubuna açımlayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) uygulanmıştır. AFA için Türkiye genelinde 451 öğretmenden veri toplanmıştır. Bu analiz sonucunda fiziksel zorbalık, duygusal zorbalık, sosyal zorbalık, hedef alma ve sözel zorbalık olarak adlandırılan beş faktörden oluşan 30 maddelik bir yapı elde edilmiştir. Bu beş faktörün açıkladığı toplam varyans 55.5 olduğu saptanmıştır. Bu yapı DFA ile doğrulanmıştır. Bu analiz için farklı bir örneklemden veri toplanmıştır. Bu örneklemde 455 öğretmen çalışmaya dahil edilmiştir. Bu analiz sonucunda elde edilen uyum iyilik indeksleri χ2/df =2.52, RMSEA=.060, CFI=.980, SRMR=.066, NFI=.967, NNFI=.978, IFI=.980 ve PNFI=.880 dir. Ölçeğin beş faktörü için hesaplanan Cronbach alfa iç tutarlılık katsayıları .73 ile .85 aralığındadır. Bu bağlamda bu sonuçlar geliştirilmiş olan bu ölçeğin geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçek olduğunu göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Özel gereksinimli öğrenci , Kaynaştırma ortamı , Akran zorbalığı , KOZ ölçeği

Etik Beyan

Bu araştırma, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma ve Yayın Etiği Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler kurulunun 01/02/2023. tarihli 18 sayılı kararı ile alınan izinle yürütülmüştür.

Destekleyen Kurum

Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı

Development of the Bullying in Inclusive Settings (BIS) Scale: A Validity and Reliability Study

Öz

The aim of this study is to develop a scale to identify peer bullying experienced by students with special needs who attend regular education classrooms. The participants consisted of teachers working in primary and secondary schools. The draft scale was developed through a literature review, item pool creation, and expert opinions. To determine the construct validity of the Bullying in Inclusive Settings (BIS) scale, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were applied to two different sample groups drawn from the same population. The data for the EFA were collected from 451 teachers across Türkiye. As a result of the analysis, a 30-item structure comprising five factors—physical bullying, emotional bullying, social bullying, targeting, and verbal bullying—was obtained. These five factors explained 55.5% of the total variance. This structure was confirmed through CFA, for which data were collected from a different sample consisting of 455 teachers. The fit indices obtained from this analysis were χ2/df = 2.52, RMSEA = .060, CFI = .980, SRMR = .066, NFI = .967, NNFI = .978, IFI = .980, and PNFI = .880. The Cronbach's alpha internal consistency coefficients for the five factors of the scale ranged from .73 to .85. These results indicate that the developed scale is a valid and reliable measurement tool.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Student with special needs , Inclusive setting , Peer bullying , BIS scale

Etik Beyan

This research was conducted with the permission obtained by the Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Social and Human Sciences Board's decision dated 01/02/2023 and numbered 18.

Kaynakça

• Atik, G. (2011). Assessment of school bullying in Türkiye: A critical review of self report instruments. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3232-3238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.277
• Ayaş, T., & Pişkin, M. (2015). Peer bullying identification scale: Adolescent form. Akademik Bakış Uluslararası Hakemli Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 50, 316-324. http://www.akademikbakis.org
• Beaty, L. A., & Alexeyev, E. B. (2008). The problem of school bullies: What the research tells us. Adolescence, 43(169), 1-11. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18447077
• Blake, J. J., Lund, E. M., Zhou, Q., Kwok, O.-M., & Benz, M. R. (2012). National prevalence rates of bully victimization among students with disabilities in the United States. School Psychology Quarterly, 27(4), 210–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000008
• Bučar Ručman, A., & Šulc, A. (2025). Bullying of students with disabilities in inclusive educational settings. International Journal of Bullying Prevention. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-025-00298-1
• Burnukara, P. (2009). A descriptive study on traditional and cyber peer bullying in early and middle adolescence [Master’s thesis, Hacettepe University]. National Thesis Center.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2024). Handbook of data analysis for social sciences (31st ed.). Pegem Akademi.
• Carter, B. B., & Spencer, V. G. (2006). The fear factor: Bullying and students with disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 21(1), 11-23.
• Cattell, R. B. (Ed.). (2012). The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. Springer Science & Business Media.
• Craig, W. M., & Pepler, D. J. (2003). Identifying and targeting risk for involvement in bullying and victimization. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48(9), 577-582. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370304800903
• Çınkır, Ş., & Kepenekçi, Y. K. (2003). Bullying among students. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 34(34), 236-253.
• Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2025). Multivariate statistics for social sciences: SPSS and LISREL applications (8th ed.). Pegem Akademi.
• Dake, J. A., Price, J. H., & Telljohann, S. K. (2003). The nature and extent of bullying at school. Journal of School Health, 73(5), 173-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2003.tb03599.x
• DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Doğan, S., & Keleş, O. (2023). Peer bullying in the context of causes, consequences and solution proposals: A phenomenological study. Pamukkale University Journal of Education Faculty, 59, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.9779.pauefd.1053832
• Elliot, M. (1997). 101 ways of dealing with bullying. London: Hodder Children’s Books.
• Erbiçer, E. S. (2020). Cyberbullying and cyber-victimization: Effects on social adjustment and demographic correlates. Pamukkale University Journal of Education Faculty, 49, 190-222. https://doi.org/10.9779/pauefd.559831
• Erkuş, A. (2012). Measurement and scale development in psychology. Pegem Akademi.
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272
• Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
• Glumbić, N., & Žunić Pavlović, V. (2010). Bullying behavior in children with intellectual disability. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2784-2788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.415
• Gomes, A. M., Martins, M. C., Farinha, M., Silva, B., Ferreira, E., Caldas, A. C., & Brandão, T. (2020). Bullying’s negative effect on academic achievement. International Journal of Educational Psychology, 9(3), 243-268.
• Gültekin, Z., & Sayıl, M. (2005). A study of the reliability and validity of the Peer Victimization Scale. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları Dergisi, 8(15), 47-61.
• Hair, J. F., Jr., Anderson, R. E., Black, B. J., Babin, B. J., & Black, W. C. (2009). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education Limited.
• Huesmann, L. R., & Eron, L. D. (1984). Cognitive processes and the persistence of aggressive behaviour. Aggressive Behaviour, 10(3), 243-251.
• Kabasakal, Z., Girli, A., Okun, B., Çelik, N., & Vardarlı, G. (2008). Disabled students, coequal relations and their abuse. Dokuz Eylül University Buca Faculty of Education Journal, 23, 169–176.
• Kalaycı, Ş. (2010). Applied multivariate statistical techniques with SPSS (5th ed., p. 359). Asil Publishing & Distribution.
• Kapçı, E. G. (2004). Bullying type and severity among elementary school students and its relationship with depression, anxiety and self esteem. Ankara University Journal of Educational Sciences Faculty, 37(1), 1-13.
• Kargın, T. (2004). Inclusion: Definition, development, and principles. Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences Special Education Journal, 5(2), 1–1.
• Kartal, H., & Bilgin, A. (2008). Bullying in the elementary schools: From the aspects of the students, the teachers and the parents. İlköğretim Online, 7(2), 485–495. http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr
• Kline, P. (2014). An easy guide to factor analysis. Routledge.
• Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (5th ed.). Guilford Publications.
• Kutlu, F., & Aydın, G. (2010). Preliminary study of the bully scale development: Self-report form. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 13(25), 1-12.
• Limber, S. P. (2002). Bullying among children and youth. Proceedings of the Educational Forum on Adolescent Health: Youth Bullying. American Medical Association.
• Longmore, P. K., & Umansky, L. (2001). The new disability history: American perspectives. NYU Press.
• Mynard, H., & Joseph, S. (2000). Development of the multidimensional peer-victimization scale. Aggressive Behavior, 26(2), 169-178. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(2000)26:2<169::AID-AB3>3.0.CO;2-A
• Nabuzoka, D., & Smith, P. K. (1993). Sociometric status and social behaviour of children with and without learning difficulties. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 34(8), 1435-1448. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1993.tb02101.x
• Nayır, F., & Karaman Kepenekçi, Y. (2013). Opinions of primary school teachers on mainstreaming students’ rights. Journal of Policy Analyses and Strategic Educational Research, 3(2), 69-89.
• Newman Carlson, D., & Horne, A. M. (2004). Bully busters: A psychoeducational intervention for reducing bullying behavior in middle school students. Journal of Counseling & Development, 82(3), 259–267. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6678.2004.tb00309.x
• Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.10114
• Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (7th ed.). Routledge.
• Rigby, K. (2003a). Consequences of bullying in schools. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48(9), 583-590. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370304800904
• Rigby, K. (2003b). Stop the bullying: A handbook for schools (Rev. & updated ed.). Australian Council for Educational Research.
• Scarpaci, R. T. (2006). Bullying: Effective strategies for its prevention—Put a halt to the name calling, teasing, poking, and shoving, and make way for learning. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 42(4), 170–174.
• Stevens, J. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Sucuoğlu, B., & Kargın, T. (2006). Inclusive education practices in early childhood education: Approaches, methods, and techniques. Morpa Publishing.
• Şahbaz, Ü. (2004). Determination of social acceptance levels of mentally handicapped students attending inclusive classes. [Paper presented at the 13th National Special Education Congress (pp. 141-151)], Eskişehir.
• Şimşek, Ö. F. (2020). Introduction to structural equation modeling: Basic principles and LISREL applications. Ömer Faruk Şimşek.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
• Terzioğlu, N. K. (2022). Peer bullying in special education: A qualitative study based on teachers’ opinions. Turkish Journal of Special Education Research and Practice, 4(1), 64-90. https://doi.org/10.37233/TRSPED.2022.0123
• Tezbaşaran, A. (1997). A guide to developing Likert-type scales (1st ed.). Turkish Psychologists Association Publications.
• Thompson, D., Whitney, I., & Smith, P. K. (1994). Bullying of children with special needs in mainstream schools. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(3), 122–125. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.1994.tb00168.x
• Tıpırdamaz Sipahi, H., & Karababa, A. O. (2018). Adoption of Olweus bully victim questionnaire to Turkish and Tuürkiye and analysis of its validity and reliability. Ege Medical Journal, 57(4), 222-227.
• Turhan, C. (2007). Views of typically developing students attending inclusive primary schools regarding inclusion practices [Master’s thesis, Anadolu University]. National Thesis Center..
• UNICEF. (2018). UNICEF: Half of young people worldwide experience peer violence at school and school settings. https://www.unicefturk.org/yazi/siddeteson
• Vuran, S. (2005). The sociometric status of students with disabilities in elementary level integration classes in Türkiye. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, (18), 217-235.
• Whitney, I., Smith, P. K., & Thompson, D. (1994). Bullying and children with special educational needs. In P.K. Smith and S. Sharp (Eds.), School bullying: Insights and perspectives (pp. 213-240). Routledge.
• Yazıcıoğlu, Y., & Erdoğan, S. (2011). Scientific research methods with SPSS: An applied guide. Detay Publishing.
• Yeşilyaprak, B., & Balanuye, İ. D. (2012). A scale for teacher attitudes toward school bullying. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal, 4(37), 38-48.
• Yoneyama, S., & Naito, A. (2003). Problems with the paradigm: The school as a factor in understanding bullying (with special reference to Japan). British Journal of Sociology of Education, 24(3), 315-330. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690301894