GENÇLİK DENEYİMLERİ ÖLÇEĞİ (GDÖ) 3.1’İN TÜRKÇEYE UYARLAMA ÇALIŞMASI

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 1, 75 - 91, 01.04.2016

Bijen Filiz Gıyasettin Demirhan

https://doi.org/10.1501/Sporm_0000000286

Öz

Bu araştırmada, Hansen ve Crawford (2011) tarafından modifiye edilen Gençlik Deneyimleri Ölçeği(GDÖ) 3.1’i Türkçeye uyarlayarak, gençlere yönelik hazırlanan spor programlarının gençler üzerindeki olumlu ve olumsuz deneyimlerini değerlendirmek için bir tanı aracı elde etmek amaçlanmıştır. Ölçme aracından veri toplayabilmek için öğrencilerden 2014-2015 eğitim-öğretim yılı güz ve bahar döneminde ders dışı faaliyet olarak katıldıkları spor programlarını değerlendirmeleri istenmiştir. Ölçek, Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) için 350sporcu öğrenciye, Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) için farklı 265 sporcu öğrenciye uygulanmıştır. Analizler sonucunda, uyarlanan ölçek maddelerinin faktör boyutundaki dağılımlarında özgün hali ile karşılaştırıldığında farklılık olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ölçeğin özgün halinde,olumlu gelişim alanından altı faktör ve olumsuz deneyim alanından bir faktör olmak üzere toplam 21 alt faktörlü bir yapı sergilenmiştir. AFA’dan elde edilen bulgular, uyarlanan ölçeğin 13 alt faktörden oluştuğunu ve faktör yapısının kabul edilebilir düzeyde olduğunu göstermiştir. Güvenirlik çalışması kapsamında iç tutarlık katsayısı ,942 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Test–tekrar test güvenirlik çalışması için hesaplanan Pearson Momentler Çarpımı Korelasyon Katsayısınınanlamlı olduğu belirlenmiştir. DFA’dan elde edilen bulgular, AFA’da oluşan yapının kabul edilebilir düzeyde olduğunu göstermiştir. Uyarlanan ölçek 70 maddeden oluşmaktadır ve 7’li Likert tipindedir. Ölçek Türk kültüründe kullanılabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir bir araçtır

Anahtar Kelimeler

Spor programı, gençlik deneyimi, geçerlik, güvenirlik

THE ADAPTATION STUDY OF YOUTH EXPERIENCES SCALE (YES) 3.1 INTO TURKISH

Öz

In this study, it is aimed to develop a diagnostic tool to assess the positive and negative experiences of the sport programs prepared for young people on youth by adapting the Youth Experiences Scale (YES) 3.1 modified by Hansen and Crawford (2011) to Turkish. In order to collect data, it was requested from students to evaluate sports programs they participate in during the fall and spring terms of 2014-2015 academic years as extracurricular activities. The scale was applied to 350 athlete-students for Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), and 265 different athlete-students for Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). According to the results, it has been determined that there are differences, compared to the original scale, regarding the distribution of items in terms of factors in the adapted scale. The original scale has 21 sub-factor structures in total, including six factors from positive experience and one negative experience in the field development. The findings obtained from EFA have shown that the adapted scale consists of 13 sub-factors and its factor structure is at the acceptable level. Within the scope of reliability study, the internal consistency coefficient was calculated as .942. The Correlation Coefficient of Pearson Moments Multiplication calculated for test-retest reliability study was determined as significant. Findings obtained from CFA indicate that the structure formed in EFA is at an acceptable level. The adapted scale consists of 70 items and is a7 point Likert-type. The scale is a valid and reliable tool that can be used in Turkish culture

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sport program, youth experience, validity, reliability

Kaynakça

• Anshel MH (2004):Sources of disordered eating patterns between ballet dancers and non-dancers. Journal of Sport Behavior, 27, 115-133.
• Anderson, JC, Gerbing DW (1984): The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit in- dices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis.Psychometrika, 49, 155-173.
• Baş T (2006):Anket. Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
• Baykul Y (2000):Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme: Klasik Test Teorisi ve Uygulaması. ÖSYM Yayınları, Ankara.
• Benson PL, Scales PC, Hamilton SF, et al (2006):Positive youth development: theory, research, and applications. 894-941. In: W Damon, RM. Lerner(Eds), Handbook of Child Psychology (6th edition). John Wiley & Sons Inc, Hoboken, NJ.
• Bentler PM (1990):Comparative fit indexes in structural equation models.Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
• Bredemeier B, Shields D (2006):Sport and character development.Research Digest: President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports, 7, 1-8.
• Brown TA (2006):Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. Guilford Press, New York.
• Brownlow C (2004):SPSS Explained. Rout- ledge, London.
• Bryman A, Cramer D (1999):Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS Release 8 for Windows. Taylor& Francis e-Library, Rout- ledge, London and New York.
• Burton D, Weiss C (2008): The fundamental goal concept: The path to process and per- formance Horn(Ed), Advances in Sport Psycho- logy(3rd edition). Human Kinetics, Cham- paign, IL. 340-375.In: TS
• Büyüköztürk Ş (2002):Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı. Pegem A, Ankara.
• Camiré M, Trudel P (2010):High school athlete’ perspectives on character develop- ment through sport participation.Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy,15, 193-207.
• Coatsworth JD, Conroy DE (2009):The effect of autonomy-supportive coaching, need satisfaction, and self-perceptions on initiative and identity in youth swim- mers.Developmental Psychology, 45, 320- 328.
• Cole DA (1987):Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation rese- arch.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy- chology, 55, 1019-1031.
• Danish SJ, Fazio RJ, Nellen VC, et al(2002): Teaching life skills through sport: community-based programs to enhance ado- lescent development. 269-288. In: JL Van Raalte, BW Brewer(Eds), Exploring Sport and Exercise Psychology (2nd edition). APA, Washington, DC.
• Dunn, JGH, Dunn JC (1999):Goal orientati- ons, perceptions of aggression, and sports- personship in elite male youth ice hockey players.The Sport Psychologist,13, 183-200.
• Eccles JS, Barber BL (1999):Student coun- cil, volunteering, basketball, or marching band: what kind of extracurricular involve- ment matters?Journal ofAdolescent Rese- arch, 14, 10-43.
• Erkuş A (2003):Psikometri Üzerine Yazılar. Türk Psikologlar Derneği, Ankara. No:24.
• Field A (2005):Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. SAGE, London.
• Ford DH, Lerner RM (1992):Developmental Systems Theory: An Integrative Approach. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
• Fraser-Thomas JL, Côté J, Deakin J (2005):Youth sport programs: An avenue to fosterpositive youth development. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy,10,19-40.
• Fraser-Thomas J, Côté J, Deakin J (2008):Understanding dropout and pro- longed engagement in adolescent competiti- ve sport. Psychology of Sport andExercise, 9, 645-662.
• Gould D, Carson S (2008):Life skill deve- lopment through sport: current status and fu- ture directions. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1, 58-78.
• Guèvremont A, Findlay L, Kohen D (2008):Organized Extracurricular Activities of Canadian Children and Youth,Health Re- ports, 19. Statistics Canada.. Catalogue no.82-003-XPE.
• Hansen DM, Crawford MJ (2011):The Yo- uth Experience Survey, 3.1. Unpublished manuscript. University of Kansas.
• Hansen DM, Larson R (2002):The Youth Experience Survey 1.0: Instrument Devel- opment http://youthdev.illinois.edu/wp- content/uploads Instrument.pdf. (15 Mayıs 2015). Testing. /2013/11/YES-1.0
• Hansen DM, Larson R (2005):The Youth Experience Survey 2.0: Instrument Revisi- ons ting.http://youthdev.illinois.edu/wp- content/uploads/ Instrument.pdf. (15 Mayıs 2015). Tes- 2013/11/YES-2.0
• Hansen DM, Larson RW (2007):Amplifiers of developmental and negative experiences in organized activities: Dosage, motivation, lead roles, and adult-youth ratios.Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28, 360-374.
• Hansen DM, Larson RW, Dworkin JB (2003):What adolescents learn in organized youth activities: A survey of self-reported developmental experiences.Journal of Rese- arch on Adolescence, 13, 25-55.
• Hellison D (2014):Fiziksel Aktivite Yoluyla Bireysel ve Sosyal Sorumluluk Öğretimi. (B Filiz, Çev. Ed.). Nobel Akademi, Ankara.
• Hu LT, Bentler PM (1999):Cutoff criteria for fit ındexes in covariance structure analy- sis: Conventional criteria versus new alter- natives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.
• Jelicic H, Bobek DL, Phelps E, et al (2007):Using positive youth development to predict contribution and risk behaviors in early adolescence: Finding from the first two waves of the 4-H study of positive yo- uth development.International Journal of Behavioral Development,31, 263-273.
• Kline RB (2011):Principles and Practice of Structural EquationModeling. (3nd edition). The Guilford Press, New York London.
• Larson RW (2000):Toward a psychology of positive Psychologist, 55, 170-183.
• Larson RW, Hansen DM, Moneta G (2006):Differing profiles of developmental experiences across types of organized youth activities. DevelopmentalPsychology, 42, 849-863.
• Locke EA, Latham GP (1985):The applica- tion of goal setting to sports.Journal of Sport Psychology, 7, 205-222.
• Martens R (1993): Psychological perspecti- ves. 9-18. In: BR Cahill, AJ Pearl (Eds). In- tensive Participation in Children’s Sports. Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL.
• Öner N (1987):Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarla- masında bir yöntem bilim modeli.Psikoloji Dergisi, 6(21), 80-83.
• Özgüven İE (1999):Psikolojik Testler. PDREM Yayınları, Ankara:
• Savaşır I (1994):Ölçek uyarlamasındaki bazı sorunlar ve çözüm yolları.Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 33(9), 27-32.
• Shields D, Bredemeier B (1995):Character Development and Physical Activity. Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL.
• Smith AL, Ullrich-French S, Walker E, et al (2006):Peer relationship profiles and moti- vation in youth sport.Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,28, 362-382. 44. Strachan L, Côté (2009):“Specializers” versus “samplers” in youth sport: Comparing experiences and outcomes. The Sport Psychologist, 23, 77- 92. J, Deakin J
• Sümer N (2000):Yapısal eşitlik modelleri: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulama- lar.Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3(6), 49-74.
• Şencan H (2005):Sosyal ve Davranışsal Ölçümlerde Geçerlilik ve Güvenirlik. Seç- kin Matbaası, Ankara.
• Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (1996):Using Multivariate Statistics. HarperCollins Colle- ge, New York.
• Tavşancıl E (2002):Tutumların Ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi. Nobel Akademi, Ankara.
• Thelen E, Smith LB (1998):Dynamic sys- tems theories. 1, 563-634. In: PH Mussen, RM Lerner(Eds).Theoretical Models of Human tion).Handbook of Child Psychology.John Wiley & Sons, New York. edi- WN, DuCharme KA (1997):Team building through team goal setting.Journal of Applied Sport Psycho- logy, 9, 97-113.
• Wright AD, Côté J (2003):A retrospective analysis of leadership development through sport. The Sport Psychologist, 17, 268-291.
• Yılmaz V, Çelik EH (2009):Lisrel ile Yapı- sal Eşitlik Modellemesi-I:Temel Kavramlar, Uygulamalar, Programlama. Pegem A, An- kara.