BIG FISH LITTLE POND EFFECT IN HIGH SCHOOLS IN TURKEY

Öz

In this study, the Big Fish Little Pond Effect (BFLPE) has been tested in the high schools in Turkey. To test this hypothesis, the academic self-concept of the 9th and 10th-grade students at different success levels in Turkey was examined. The sample was composed of 4273 students in 12 different provinces randomly selected to represent Turkey. The data were collected by the personal information form developed by the researcher and the Academic Self Description Questionnaire -II (Marsh, 1990), which was adapted into Turkish. Direct comparison analyses and hierarchical regression analyses were used to testing the hypothesis. As a result, the BFLPE hypothesis is partially supported. It was found that all students were negatively affected by the average success level of the school. In contrast, students in high schools with high success levels were positively and negatively affected.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Big fish little pond effect (BFLPE)
• Self-concept
• Academic self-concept

TÜRKİYE’DEKİ LİSELERDE BÜYÜK BALIK KÜÇÜK GÖLET ETKİSİ

Öz

Bu çalışmada, Büyük Balık Küçük Gölet Etkisi (BBKGE) hipotezi Türkiye’deki liselerde test edilmiştir. BBKGE hipotezine göre, okulun ortalama başarı düzeyi öğrencinin akademik benlik algısına negatif katkı sağlarken, öğrencinin bireysel başarısı akademik benlik algısına pozitif katkı sağlar. Bu hipotezi test etmek amacıyla Türkiye’de farklı başarı düzeyindeki 9. ve 10.sınıf öğrencilerinin akademik benlik algıları incelenmiştir. Örneklem Türkiye’yi temsil edecek şekilde seçkisiz olarak atanan 12 farklı ildeki 4273 öğrenciden oluşturulmuştur. Veriler, araştırmacı tarafından geliştirilen kişisel bilgi formu ve Türkçe’ye uyarlanan Akademik Benlik Algısı Ölçeği-II (Marsh, 1990) ile toplanmıştır. Verilerin çözümlenmesinde, doğrudan karşılaştırma analizleri ve hiyerarşik regresyon analizleri kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada bireysel not ortalamasının her zaman akademik benlik algısını açıklayan en önemli değişken olduğu bulunmuştur. Bireysel başarı kontrol edildiğinde okulun genel not ortalamasının akademik benlik algısına negatif katkısı olduğu bulunmuş ve BBKGE hipotezine destek elde edilmiştir. Ancak yüksek başarı düzeyindeki okullarda bireysel başarı kontrol edildiğinde, okulun ortalama TEOG puanının akademik benlik algısına pozitif katkısı olması BBKGE hipoteziyle ters düşmektedir. Dolayısıyla bu çalışmada BBKGE hipotezinin destek bulduğu ve bulmadığı sonuçlar eş zamanlı olarak elde edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Büyük balık küçük gölet etkisi (BBKGE)
• Benlik algısı
• Akademik benlik algısı

Kaynakça

1. Akbulut, Y. (2010). Sosyal Bilimlerde SPSS Uygulamaları. İstanbul: İdeal Kültür Yayıncılık.
2. Bachman, J. G., & O'malley, P. M. (1986). Self-concepts, self-esteem, and educational experiences: The frog pond revisited (again). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(1), 35-46.doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.50.1.35
3. Başol, G. (2018). Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
4. Büyüköztürk, S., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgun, O. E., Karadeniz, S., Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi
5. Byrne, B. M. (1996). Measurement and İnstrumentation in Psychology. Measuring Self-Concept Across The Life Span: Issues and Instrumentation. Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association
6. Cheng, R. W. Y., & Lam, S. F. (2007). Self‐construal and social comparison effects. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 197-211.doi: 10.1348/000709905X72795
7. Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling.(EdG.a.Marcoulides.) Modern Methods for Business Research, içinde (s.295-336). NJ:Psyghology Press
8. Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical The Power Analysis For The Behaviroal Sciences. (2.baskı). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

9. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005). Practical assessment, research & evaluation. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 10(7), 1-9.
10. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (Vol. Pearson Education): Upper Saddle River
11. Çıngı, H. (1994). Örnekleme Kuramı. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Fen Fakültesi Basımevi.
12. Çivilidağ, A., & Şekercioğlu, G. (2017). Çok boyutlu iş motivasyonu ölçeğinin Türk kültürüne uyarlanması. Mediterranean Journal of Humanities, 6(1), 143-156
13. Dai, D. Y., Rinn, A. N., & Tan, X. (2013). When the big fish turns small: Effects of participating in gifted summer programs on academic self-concepts. Journal of Advanced Academics, 24(1), 4-26.doi: 10.1177/1932202X12473425
14. Davis, J. A. (1966). The campus as a frog pond: An application of the theory of relative deprivation to career decisions of college men. American Journal of Sociology, 72(1), 17-31.
15. De Fraine, B., Van Damme, J., & Onghena, P. (2007). A longitudinal analysis of gender differences in academic self-concept and language achievement: A multivariate multilevel latent growth approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(1), 132-150.doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.10.005
16. Eccles, J. S., & Midgley, C. (1990). Changes in academic motivation and self-perception during early adolescence. R. Montemayor, G. R. Adams, ve T. P. Gullotta (Ed.), Advances in adolescent development: An annual book series, Vol. 2. From childhood to adolescence: A transitional period. içinde (s.134-155). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
17. Erkuş, A. (2012). Psikolojide Ölçme ve Ölçek Geliştirme. Ankara: Pegem Yayınevi.
18. Demoulin, D. (1998). Giving kids a good emotional start. Children and Families, 17(4), 22-26. De Winter, J. C. F, Dodou, D., and P. A. Wieringa (2009). Exploratory factor analysis with small sample sizes. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44, 147-181.
19. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117-140.doi: 10.1177/001872675400700202
20. Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W (2012). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications. USA: Pearson Education, Inc.
21. Gibbons, F. X., Benbow, C. P., & Gerrard, M. (1994). From top dog to bottom half: Social comparison strategies in response to poor performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 638-652.doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.638
22. Guay, F., Marsh, H. W., & Boivin, M. (2003). Academic self-concept and academic achievement: Developmental perspectives on their causal ordering. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 124
23. Güngör, D. (2016). Psikolojide ölçme araçlarının geliştirilmesi ve uyarlanması kılavuzu. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 19(38), 104-112.
24. Hattie, J. (1992). Self-concept. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
25. Hu, L. T., & 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), 1-55.
26. Huck, S. W. (2000). Reading statistics and research . 3rd edition. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
27. Huck, S. W. (2008). Reading statistics and research . 5th edition. Boston: Pearson.
28. Jackson, D. L. (2001). Sample size and number of parameter estimates in maximum likeli-hood confirmatory factor analysis: A Monte Carlo investigation. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 205-223.
29. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modelling. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Kosir, K., Horvat, M., Aram, U., & Jurinec, N. (2016). Is being gifted always an advantage? Peer relations and self-concept of gifted students. High Ability Studies, 27(2), 129-148.doi: 10.1080/13598139.2015.1108186
30. Kulik, C. L. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1982). Effects of ability grouping on secondary school students: A meta- analysis of evaluation findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19(3), 415-428.doi: 10.3102/00028312019003415
31. Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1992). Meta-analytic findings on grouping programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(2), 73-77.doi: 10.1177/001698629203600204
32. Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the self.
33. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(1), 91.doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.91
34. Lüdtke, O., Koller, O., Marsh, H., & Trautwein, U. (2005). Teacher frame of reference and the big-fish- littlepond effect. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(3), 263-285.doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.10.002
35. Margas, N., Fontayne, P., & Brunel, P. C. (2006). Influences of classmates' ability level on physical self- evaluations. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7(2), 235-247.doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2005.08.008
36. Marsh, H. W. (1986). Verbal and math self-concepts: An internal/external frame of reference model. American Educational Research Journal, 23(1), 129-149.doi: 10.3102/00028312023001129
37. Marsh, H. W. (1987). The big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self- concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(3), 280-95.doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.79.3.280
38. Marsh, H. W. (1990). The structure of academic self-concept: The Marsh/Shavelson model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 623-636.doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.82.4.623
39. Marsh, H. W. (1992). Content specificity of relations between academic achievement and academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 35-42.doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.84.1.35
40. Marsh, H. W., Chessor, D., Craven, R., & Roche, L. (1995). The effects of gifted and talented programs on academic self-concept: The big fish strikes again. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 285-319.doi: 10.3102/00028312032002285
41. Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K. T. (2003). Big-fish--little-pond effect on academic self- concept: A cross- cultural (26-country) test of the negative effects of academically selective schools. American Psychologist, 58(5), 364-371.doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.5.364
42. Marsh, H. W., Kong, C. K., & Hau, K. T. (2000). Longitudinal multilevel models of the big-fish-little- pond effect on academic self-concept: Counterbalancing contrast and reflected-glory effects in Hong Kong schools. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(2), 337-349.doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.337
43. Marsh, H. W., Kuyper, H., Morin, A. J., Parker, P. D., & Seaton, M. (2014). Big-fish- little-pond social comparison and local dominance effects: Integrating new statistical models, methodology, design, theory and substantive implications. Learning and Instruction, 33(1), 50-66
44. Marsh, H. W., & Parker, J. W. (1984). Determinants of student self-concept: Is it better to be a relatively large fish in a small pond even if you don't learn to swim as well? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(1), 213-231.doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.47.1.213
45. Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. J. (2006). Data screening. Thousand Oaks (Ed.) Applied Multivariate Research-Design and Interpretation içinde (s.43-73), California: Sage Publications, Inc.
46. McClave, J. T., & Sincich, T. (2003). Statistics, Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.
47. Mulkey, L. M., Catsambis, S., Steelman, L. C. and Crain, R. L. (2005). The long-term effects of ability grouping in mathematics: A national investigation. Social Psychology of Education, 8(2), 137-177.doi:10.1007/s11218-005-4014-6
48. Özdamar, K. (2004). Paket Programlarda İstatistiksel Veri Analizi. Eskişehir: Kaan Kitabevi.
49. Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS survival manual. Maidenhead., PA: Open University Press.
50. Pinxten, M., Marsh, H. W., De Fraine, B., Van Den Noortgate, W., & Van Damme, J. (2014). Enjoying mathematics or feeling competent in mathematics? Reciprocal effects on mathematics achievement and perceived math effort expenditure. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 152-174
51. Preckel, F., & Brüll, M. (2010). The benefit of being a big fish in a big pond: Contrast and assimilation effects on academic self-concept. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(5), 522-531.doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2009.12.007
52. Preckel, F., Zeidner, M., Goetz, T., & Schleyer, E. J. (2008). Female ‘big fish’swimming against the tide: The ‘big-fish-little-pond effect’and gender-ratio in special gifted classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(1), 78-96.doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.08.001
53. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods California: Sage.
54. Rindermann, H. & Heller, K. A. (2005). The benefit of gifted classes and talent schools for developing students' competences and enhancing academic self- concept. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 19(3), 133-136.doi: 10.1024/1010-0652.19.3.133.
55. Rinn, A. N., & Boazman, J. (2014). Locus of control, academic self-concept, and academic dishonesty among high ability college students. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 14(4), 88-114.doi: 10.14434/v14i4.12770
56. Rogers, C. (2002). Teacher expectations: implications for school improvement. C. Desforges R. Fox (Ed.) Teaching and Learning: The Essential Readings içinde (s. 152-170 ), Oxford, Blackwell.
57. Rosenberg M, (1979). Conceiving the self. New York, Basic Books.
58. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: L. L. Erlbaum Associates
59. Sedikides, C., & Skowronski, J. J. (1995). On the sources of self-knowledge: The perceived primacy of self-reflection. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 14(3), 244-270.
60. Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 407-441. doi: 10.3102/00346543046003407
61. Suls, J., Martin, R., & Wheeler, L. (2002). Social comparison: Why, with whom, and with what effect? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 159-163. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00191
62. Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3(6), 49-74.
63. Şeker, H., & Gençdoğan, B. (2006). Psikolojide ve Eğitimde Ölçme Aracı Geliştirme. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
64. Tabacknick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. New York: Harper.
65. Televantou, I., Marsh, H. W., Dicke, T., & Nicolaides, C. (2021). Phantom and big-fish-little-pond- effects on academic self-concept and academic achievement: Evidence from English early primary schools. Learning and Instruction, 71(2021), 101399.
66. Tokmak, F., Sak, U., & Akbulut (2021). Big-fish-little-pond effect on gifted students’ academic self- concepts: what if the big fish has adaptable academic self-concepts? Education and Science, 46, 1-16. Doi: 10.15390/EB.2021.9303.
67. Tracey, D. K., Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. G. (2003). Self-concepts of preadolescent students with mild intellectual disabilities: Issues of measurement and educational placement. In H.W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), International Advances in Self Research (Vol. 1, pp. 203–230). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing. TÜİK, Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, İstatistiksel Bölge Birimleri (2017).
68. http://www.planlama.org/index.php/tuerkiyede-boelgesel kalknmaajanslar/tuerkiyedeki-statistiksel-boelge-birimleri-bb (Erişim Tarihi:.01/02/2019)
69. Wicklund, R. A., & Brehm, J. W. (2004). Internalization of multiple perspectives or dissonance reduction?. Theory & Psychology, 14(3), 355-371
70. Wolff, F., Lüdtke, O., Helm, F., & Möller, J. (2021). Integrating the Big-Fish-Little-Pond Effect, the Basking-in-Reflected-Glory Effect, and the Internal/External Frame of Reference Model Predicting Students’ Individual and Collective Academic Self-Concepts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 101952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.101952.