Program Akreditasyonu Tutum Ölçeği: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1, 183 - 194, 30.04.2025

Okan Dede , Doğan Can Akçin

Öz

Araştırmanın amacı, yükseköğretim kurumlarındaki programların kalitesinin değerlendirilmesinde kullanılan önemli bir araç olan program akreditasyonuna yönelik öğrenci tutumlarının belirlenmesine ilişkin bir ölçek geliştirmektir. Ölçek geliştirilmesi sürecinde 40 maddelik bir madde havuzu oluşturularak bu madde havuzu için uzman görüşü alınmıştır. Amaçlı örnekleme yöntemi türlerinden maksimum çeşitlilik örneklemesinin tercih edildiği bu çalışmada veriler, yükseköğretim kurumlarının akredite olan programlarında eğitim alan öğrencilerden (n=913) elde edilmiştir. Analizler iki farklı öğrenci grubuyla birbirini takip eden iki aşamada yapılmıştır. Derinlemesine yapılan veri temizliği, normallik ve güvenilirlik varsayımlarına ilişkin ön analizlerin ardından faktör yapısının belirlenebilmesi amacıyla Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) yapılmıştır. Bu analizden sonra ortaya çıkan ölçek yapısının doğrulanması için Mplus 8.4 programı aracılığıyla Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu analizlerin ardından Program Akreditasyonu Tutum Ölçeği faktörlerinin güvenilirliği, model uyumu ve yapı geçerliliği doğrulanmıştır. Çok boyutlu bir ölçme aracı olan söz konusu ölçek; eğitim-öğretim, yönetim, fiziki altyapı ve tesisler, bilimsel ve sosyal etkinlikler ve sürekli gelişim olmak üzere beş faktörü ve 28 maddeyi içermektedir. Ölçeğin cevaplama süresi yaklaşık 30 dakikadır. Yapılan analizler sonucunda, ölçeğin yükseköğretim kurumları öğrencilerinin program akreditasyonuna ilişkin tutumlarının belirlenmesi bağlamında geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olarak kullanılabileceğine karar verilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Akreditasyon, Program Akreditasyonu, Tutum Ölçeği, Yükseköğretimde Kalite

Program Accreditation Attitude Scale: Validity and Reliability Study

Öz

The aim of this study is to develop a scale to assess student attitudes towards program accreditation, a critical tool for evaluating the quality of programs in higher education institutions. During the scale development process, an item pool consisting of 40 items was created, and expert opinions were solicited for review. The study utilized maximum diversity sampling, one of the purposive sampling methods, and data were collected from 913 students enrolled in accredited programs at higher education institutions. Data analysis occurred in two stages, involving two different student groups. After performing thorough data cleaning and preliminary checks for normality and reliability, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted to determine the scale’s factor structure. To validate the factor structure identified through EFA, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed using the Mplus 8.4 program. The results of these analyses confirmed the reliability, model fit, and construct validity of the Program Accreditation Attitude Scale factors. This multi-dimensional scale, which includes five factors and 28 items, covers the following areas: education and training, management, physical infrastructure and facilities, scientific and social activities, and continuous development. The scale has an approximate response time of 30 minutes. Based on the findings, it was concluded that the scale is a valid and reliable measurement tool for assessing student attitudes towards program accreditation in higher education institutions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Accreditation, Attitude Scale, Program Accreditation, Quality in Higher Education

Etik Beyan

The purposes and procedure of the current study were granted approval from the Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Committee of the Karabuk University (Ethics Committee Approval Issue Numbers: 277535).

Kaynakça

• Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2009). Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution. UNESCO.
• Bakioğlu, A., & Can, E. (2014). Quality and accreditation in distance education. Vize Yayıncılık.
• Beecham, R. (2009). Teaching quality and student satisfaction: Nexus or simulacrum?. London Review of Education, 7(2), 135–146.
• Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge.
• Can, E. (2012). Açık ve uzaktan eğitimde akreditasyon yeterlilik düzeylerinin incelenmesi [Doktora Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi]. Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
• Can, E. (2016). Open and distance education accreditation standards scale: Validity and reliability studies. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(14), 6444–6455.
• Coffey, K. R., & Millsaps, E. M. (2004). A handbook to guide educational institutions through the accreditation process: The ABCs of accreditation. Edwin Mellen Press.
• CoHE (2019). Yükseköğretimde akreditasyon, tanıma ve denklik hizmetleri daire başkanlığı. Retrieved November 14, 2023, from https://denklik.yok.gov.tr/akreditasyontanima-denklik-nedir
• Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (2013). A first course in factor analysis. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315827506
• Dill, D. D. (2000). Is there an academic audit in your future? Reforming quality assurance in US higher education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 32(4), 34–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380009601746
• Doğan, İ. (1999). Eğitimde kalite ve akreditasyon sorunu: Eğitim fakülteleri üzerine bir deneme. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 5(4), 503–519.
• Eaton, J. S. (2003). Is accreditation accountable? The continuing conversation between accreditation and the federal government. CHEA Monograph Series 2003, Number 1. Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
• Feigenbaum, A. V. (1956). Total quality control. Harvard Business Review, 93–101.
• Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics: and sex and drugs and rock “n” roll (4th Edition). Sage.
• Frank-Stromborg, M., & Olsen, S. J. (Eds.). (2004). Instruments for clinical health-care research. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
• George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update (10th Edition). Pearson.
• Hair, J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th Edition). Pearson Educational International.
• Hämäläinen, K. (2003). Common standards for programme evaluations and accreditation?. European Journal of Education, 38(3), 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-3435.00148
• Harman, H. H. (1976). Modern factor analysis. University of Chicago Press.
• Harvey, L. (2004). The power of accreditation: Views of academics. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 26(2), 207–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080042000218267
• Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9–34.
• Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organisations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967–988.
• Hou, A. Y. C. (2011). Quality assurance at a distance: international accreditation in Taiwan higher education. Higher Education, 61, 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9331-9
• Ishikawa, K. (1984). Quality control in Japan. In The Japanese approach to product quality (pp. 1–5). Pergamon.
• Johnson, D. M. (2018). Accreditation: How it works and is it working? In D. M. Johnson (Eds.), The uncertain future of American public higher education (pp. 175–191). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
• Juran, J. M. (1954). Universals in management planning and controlling. Management Review, 43(11), 748–761.
• Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–46.
• Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling. The Guilford Press.
• Kline, P. (2014). An easy guide to factor analysis. Routledge.
• Knight, J. (2007). Cross-border higher education: Issues and implications for quality assurance and accreditation. In GUNI Series on the Social Commitment of Universities 2: Higher Education in the World (2007), Accreditation for Quality Assurance – What is at Stake? (pp. 134–146). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Kumar, P., Shukla, B., & Passey, D. (2020). Impact of accreditation on quality and excellence of higher education institutions. Investigación Operacional, 41(2), 151–167.
• Mandavkar, P. (2019). Reform process in higher education and need of assessment and accreditation. Research Journal of India, 6(2), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3472356
• Ngoc, N. M., Hieu, V. M., & Tien, N. H. (2023). Impact of accreditation policy on quality assurance activities of public and private universities in Vietnam. International Journal of Public Sector Performance Management, 10, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPSPM.2022.10052573
• Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21(2), 173–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216970212006
• Schwarz, S., & Westerheijden, D. F. (2007). Accreditation and evaluation in the European higher education area (Vol. 5). Springer Science & Business Media.
• Semerci, Ç. (2017). Akreditasyon algısı (AA) ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(3), 1093–1104. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.332383
• Shrestha, N. (2021). Factor analysis as a tool for survey analysis. American Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, 9(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajams-9-1-2
• Skolnik, M. L. (2010). Quality assurance in higher education as a political process. Higher Education Management and Policy, 22(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1787/hemp-22-5kmlh5gs3zr0
• Staub, D. (2019). Another accreditation? What’s the point?’ Effective planning and implementation for specialised accreditation. Journal Quality in Higher Education, 25(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2019.1634342
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2018). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
• Veneziano, L., & Hooper, J. (1997). A method for quantifying content validity of health-related questionnaires. American Journal of Health Behavior, 21(1), 67–70.
• Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127
• Yamamoto, G. T., & Can, E. (2013). An analysis of distance education applications in Turkey. International Journal of Global Education, 2(1), 14–20.
• Yorke, M. (1999). Assuring quality and standards in globalised higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 7(1), 14–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684889910252496
• Zeller, R. A., & Carmines, E. G. (1978). Statistical analysis of social data. Rand McNally College Publishing Company.