Adapting The Motivation Scale for PhD Studies to Turkish

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3, 107 - 120, 31.12.2024

Büşra Görkaş Kayabaşı , Semih Kaynak , Emrah Kayabaşı , Gürcü Erdamar

https://doi.org/10.53478/yuksekogretim.1261381

Öz

The main objective of this study is to adapt the MPhD scale (scale of motivation for PhD studies) developed by Litalien et al. (2015) to measure the levels of motivation of doctoral students in the culture of Canada to Turkish. Additionally, using the “Life Satisfaction Scale” developed by Diener et al. (1985) and adapted to Turkish by Dağlı and Baysal (2016), the relationship between scores obtained from the motivation scale for PhD studies and life satisfaction is investigated within the context of criterion-based validity. To achieve this goal, first, the items of the MPhD scale were adapted to Turkish using expert opinions and language validity was tested with 30 doctoral students studying in universities in Turkey. After the formation of the final Turkish form of the scale, a total of 335 doctoral students were administered the scale and psychometric evidence for its validity and reliability was determined. Confirmatory factor analysis and explanatory structural equation modeling were used to analyze the results, and it was found that the scale had satisfactory psychometric evidence. The Life Satisfaction Scale produced valid and reliable information on the study group included in the research. The scores obtained from the adapted scale were compared with the scores of the Life Satisfaction Scale and the relationship between the participants’ motivation for doctoral studies and life satisfaction was determined.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Doctorate, Motivation, Scale, Adaptation

Doktora Çalışmalarına Yönelik Motivasyon Ölçeği’nin Türkçeye Uyarlanması

Öz

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı Litalien ve diğerleri (2015) tarafından Kanada kültüründe doktora öğrencilerinin doktora çalışmalarına yönelik motivasyon düzeylerini belirlemek üzere geliştirilen MPhD ölçeği’ni (scale of motivation for PhD studies) Türkçe’ye uyarlamaktır. Ayrıca, Diener ve diğerleri (1985) tarafından geliştirilen, Dağlı ve Baysal (2016) tarafından Türkçe’ye uyarlaması yapılan “Yaşam Doyumu Ölçeği” kullanılarak ölçüte dayalı geçerlik kapsamında katılımcıların doktora çalışmalarına yönelik motivasyon ölçeğinden elde ettikleri puanlar ile yaşam doyumu arasındaki ilişki araştırılmıştır. Bu amaç kapsamında ilk olarak MPhD ölçeğinin maddeleri uzman görüşleri alınarak Türkçe’ye uyarlanmış ve Türkiye’deki üniversitelerde okuyan 30 doktora öğrencisi ile dil geçerliği yapılmıştır. Ölçeğin Türkçe nihai formunun oluşturulmasının ardından ölçek toplam 335 doktora öğrencisine uygulanarak ölçeğin geçerliği ve güvenirliğine ilişkin psikometrik kanıtlar tespit edilmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ve açımlayıcı yapısal eşitlik modellemesi kullanarak yapılan analizler sonucunda ölçeğin tatmin edici psikometrik kanıtlara sahip olduğu görülmüştür. Yaşam Doyumu ölçeğinin araştırmada yer alan çalışma grubu üzerinde geçerli ve güvenilir bilgiler ürettiği saptanmıştır. Katılımcıların uyarlaması yapılan ölçekten elde ettikleri puanlarla, Yaşam Doyumu Ölçeği puanları karşılaştırılmış ve doktora çalışmalarına yönelik motivasyonlarıyla yaşam doyumları arasındaki ilişkiler belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Doktora, Motivasyon, Ölçek, Uyarlama

Kaynakça

• Ahmed, W., & Bruinsma, M. (2006). A structural model of self-concept, autonomous motivation and academic performance in cross-cultural perspective. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 4(3), 551–576.
• Bair, C. R., & Haworth, J. G. (2004). Doctoral student attrition and persistence: A meta-synthesis of research. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 19, pp. 481–534). Kluwer Academic. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-40202456-8_11
• Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
• Bozanoğlu, İ. (2004). Akademik güdülenme ölçeği: Geliştirmesi, geçerliği, güvenirliği. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 37(2), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000094
• Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (1st ed.). Guilford.
• Castelló, M., Pardo, M., Sala-Bubaré, A., & Suñé-Soler, N. (2017). Why do students consider dropping out of doctoral degrees? Institutional and personal factors. Higher Education, 74, 1053–1068. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0106-9
• Dağlı, A., & Baysal, N. (2016). Yaşam doyumu ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15(59), 1250–1262. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.263229
• De Clercq, M., Frenay, M., Azzi, A., Klein, O., & Galand, B. (2021). All you need is self-determination: Investigation of PhD students’ motivation profiles and their impact on the doctoral completion process. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 16, 189–209. https://doi.org/10.28945/4702
• Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
• Dünya Bankası. (2022). Educational attainment, doctoral or equivalent, population 25+. World Bank Data. (Erişim Tarihi: 12 Aralık 2022).
• Eğmir, E., Ödemiş, İ. S., Bayar, V., Bayar, A., & Kayır, G. (2013). Lisansüstü eğitim gören öğrencilerin akademik güdülenme düzeyleri. Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. VI. Ulusal Lisansüstü Eğitim Sempozyumu Bildiri Kitabı, 95(6), 97–103.
• Erdem, A. R. (2013). Bilgi toplumunda üniversitenin değişen rolleri ve görevleri. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 3(2), 109–120.
• Eurostat. (2022). Pupils and students enrolled by education level, sex and age. Eurostat Data Browser. (Erişim Tarihi: 12 Aralık 2022).
• Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
• Franke, G., & Sarstedt, M. (2019). Heuristics versus statistics in discriminant validity testing: A comparison of four procedures. Internet Research, 29(3), 430–447. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0515
• Gardner, S. K. (2009). Student and faculty attributions of attrition in high and low-completing doctoral programs in the United States. Higher Education, 58(1), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9184-7
• Gjersing, L., Caplehorn, J. R., & Clausen, T. (2010). Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: Language, setting, time and statistical considerations. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-13
• Gomes, C. M. A., Almeida, L. S., & Núñez, J. C. (2017). Rationale and applicability of exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) in psychoeducational contexts. Psicothema, 29(3), 396–401. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2016.369
• Griffin, G. (2023). Doing a Ph.D. in a low-income country: Motivations and prospects. Higher Education Studies, 13(4), 136–148. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v13n4p136
• Grover, V. (2007). Successfully navigating the stages of doctoral study. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 2, 9–20. https://doi.org/10.28945/54
• Haybron, D. M. (2004). Happiness and the importance of life satisfaction. University of Arizona.
• Hegarty, N. (2010). Application of the academic motivation scale to graduate school students. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, 6(2), 48–55.
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
• Hina Batool, S., Ali, A. F., & Safdar, M. (2022). What Pakistani doctoral students want? A qualitative exploration of their research experiences. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, 71(4/5), 355–369. https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-04-2021-0074
• Hoskins, C. M., & Goldberg, A. D. (2005). Doctoral student persistence in counselor education programs: Student–program match. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44(3), 175–188.
• 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.
• Ivankova, N. V., & Stick, S. L. (2007). Students’ persistence in a distributed doctoral program in educational leadership in higher education: A mixed methods study. Research in Higher Education, 48(1), 93–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-006-9025-4
• Jablonski, A. M. (2001). Doctoral studies as professional development of educators in the United States. European Journal of Teacher Education, 24(2), 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619760120095606
• Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289343
• Kalaycı, N., & İlhan, E. (2017). Yükseköğretimde çekirdek program. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 1, 118-131. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2017.190
• Karataş, H., & Erden, M. (2012). Akademik motivasyon ölçeğinin dilsel eşdeğerlik, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Education Sciences, 7(4), 983-1003. https://doi.org/10.12739/10.12739
• Kärner, A., Kukemelk, H., & Herdlein, R. J. (2005). Motivation for obtaining the doctor of philosophy degree in the post-soviet era: The case of Estonia. International Education, 35, 24–34.
• Kline, R. B. (2008). Convergence of structural equation modeling and multilevel modeling. In M. Williams & W. P. Vogt (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of innovation in social research methods (pp. 562–589). Sage.
• Lei, M., & Lomax, R. G. (2005). The effect of varying degrees of nonnormality in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 12(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1201_1
• Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2002.12086158
• Litalien, D., Guay, F., & Morin, A. J. (2015). Motivation for PhD studies: Scale development and validation. Learning and Individual Differences, 41, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.05.006
• Litalien, D., & Guay, F. (2015). Dropout intentions in PhD studies: A comprehensive model based on interpersonal relationships and motivational resources. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 41, 218-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.03.004
• Lynch, M. F., Salikhova, N. R., & Salikhova, A. (2018). Internal motivation among doctoral students: Contributions from the student and from the student’s environment. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 255-272.
• Marcoulides, G. A., & Schumacker, R. E. (Eds.). (2001). New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling. Psychology Press.
• Mason, M. M. (2012). Motivation, satisfaction, and innate psychological needs. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 259-277. https://doi.org/10.28945/1596
• McGee, E. O., White, D. T., Jenkins, A. T., Houston, S., Bentley, L. C., Smith, W. J., & Robinson, W. H. (2016). Black engineering students’ motivation for PhD attainment: Passion plus purpose. Journal for Multicultural Education, 10(2), 167-193. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-01-2016-0007
• Munyengebe, S., Haiyan, H., Yiyi, Z., & Jeifei, S. (2017). Factors and levels associated with lecturers’ motivation and job satisfaction in a Chinese university. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(10), 6416-6428. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/77946
• Muszynski, S. Y. (1988). The relationship between demographic/situational factors, cognitive/affective variables, and needs and time to completion of the doctoral program in psychology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, OH, USA.
• Naylor, R., Chakravarti, S., & Baik, C. (2016). Differing motivations and requirements in PhD student cohorts: A case study. Issues in Educational Research, 26(2), 351-367.
• Neumann, R., & Tan, K. K. (2011). From PhD to initial employment: The doctorate in a knowledge economy. Studies in Higher Education, 36(5), 601-614. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.594596
• Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. Sage.
• Papalia, D. E., Olds, S. W., & Feldman, R. D. (2007). Human development. McGraw-Hill.
• Perry, J. L., Nicholls, A. R., Clough, P. J., & Crust, L. (2015). Assessing model fit: Caveats and recommendations for confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory structural equation modeling. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 19(1), 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2014.952370
• Pintrich, P. R. (2003). Motivation and classroom learning. In W. M. Reynolds & G. E. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Educational psychology (pp. 103–122). John Wiley & Sons.
• Powers, C. L. (2008). Academic achievement and social involvement as predictors of life satisfaction among college students. Psi Chi Journal of Undergraduate Research, 13(3), 128-135.
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
• Saracaloğlu, A. S. (2008). Lisansüstü öğrencilerin akademik güdülenme düzeyleri, araştırma kaygıları ve tutumları ile araştırma yeterlikleri arasındaki ilişki. Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2), 179-208.
• Seçer, B. (2021). Akademisyen olmayanlar açısından doktora eğitimi. İzmir İktisat Dergisi, 36(2), 295-313.
• Scott, D., Brown, A., Lunt, I., & Thorne, L. (2004). Professional doctorates: Integrating academic and professional knowledge. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Kasser, T. (2004). The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: It’s both what you pursue and why you pursue it. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(4), 475-486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203261883
• Soliemanifar, O., Shaabani, F., & Morovati, Z. (2013). The relationship between academic achievement motivation and academic burnout in postgraduate students of Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz. Journal of Life Science and Biomedicine, 3(3), 233-236.
• Sternberg, R. J., & Williams, W. M. (2009). Educational psychology (2nd ed.). Pearson.
• Tarvid, A. (2014). Motivation to study for a PhD degree: Case of Latvia. Procedia Economics and Finance, 14, 585-594. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00747-3
• Vallerand, R. J., & Thill, E. E. (1993). Introduction à la psychologie de la motivation. Montréal: Éditions Études Vivantes.
• Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Brière, N. M., Senécal, C., & Vallières, E. F. (1992). The academic motivation scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52(4), 1003-1017. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164492052004025
• Varış, F. (1972). Türkiye'de lisansüstü eğitim: Pozitif bilimlerin temel ve uygulamalı alanlarında. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 5(1), 51-74. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000336
• Veenhoven, R. (1996). The study of life satisfaction. In W. E. Saris, R. Veenhoven, A. C. Scherpenzeel, & B. Bunting (Eds.), A comparative study of satisfaction with life in Europe (pp. 11-48). Eötvös University Press.
• Wellington, J., & Sikes, P. (2006). ‘A doctorate in a tight compartment’: Why do students choose a professional doctorate and what impact does it have on their personal and professional lives? Studies in Higher Education, 31(6), 723-734. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070601004358
• Turan, Y. (2023). Amerika Birleşik Devletleri ve Türkiye'deki doktora öğrencilerinin çalışma süreçlerine etki eden faktörlerin bireyci ve toplumcu özellikler açısından incelenmesi (Bir karşıt kültür çalışması). [Doktora Tezi, İnönü Üniversitesi].
• Yurt, E., & Bozer, E. N. (2015). Akademik motivasyon ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 14(3), 669-685. https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.256759
• Yüksek Öğretim Kurulu (2016). Lisansüstü eğitim ve öğretim yönetmeliği.