Öğretmen – Öğrenci İlişki Ölçeği’nin (ÖÖİÖ) Uyarlanması

Year 2016, Volume: 7 Issue: 2, 407 - 418, 25.12.2016

Selen Demirtaş-zorbaz , Arif Özer , Dilek Gençtanırım-kurt , Tuncay Ergene

Abstract

Öğretmen – öğrenci ilişkisi, çocuğun okulla tanıştığı ilk andan itibaren sosyal ve duygusal gelişimini belirleyen bir unsurdur. Söz konusu ilişkinin niteliği birçok önleyici ve müdahale edici çalışmaya yol gösterebilecektir. Bu çalışmanın amacı Pianta (2001) tarafından Amerika’da geliştirilen ve İtalya, Hollanda, Yunanistan,  Norveç ve Çin’de de uyarlama çalışması yapılan Öğretmen – Öğrenci İlişki Ölçeğinin Türkiye uyarlamasını gerçekleştirmektir. Araştırma, 46 öğretmenin 560 öğrenci için doldurdukları ölçekten elde edilen veriler üzerinde yürütülmüştür. Ölçeğin geçerlik çalışması kapsamında doğrulayıcı ve açımlayıcı faktör analizi yapılmış ve ölçeğin iki faktör ve 23 maddeden oluştuğu belirlenmiştir. Güvenirlik çalışmaları kapsamında Cronbach Alfa katsayıları yakınlık alt boyutu için .83; çatışma alt boyutu için .86 olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Yapılan bu çalışmalar ile ölçeğin, Türkiye’de kullanımı için gerekli geçerlik ve güvenirlik kanıtları sağlanmış ve ölçek farklı çalışmalar için kullanılmak üzere alana kazandırılmıştır.  

References

• Ahnert, L., Harwardt-Heinecke, E., Kappler, G., Eckstein-Madry, T., & Milatz, A. (2012). Student–teacher relationships and classroom climate in first grade: how do they relate to students’ stress regulation?. Attachment & human development, 14(3), 249-263.
• Akgün, E., Yeşilyaprak, B. (2010). Çocuk Anababa İlişki Ölçeği Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Balıkesir University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 13(24), 44-53.
• Asparouhov, T., ve Muthén, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16(3), 397-438.
• Bowlby, J. (2012). Bağlanma. (Çev. Tuğrul Veli Soylu). İstanbul: Pinhan Yayıncılık.
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives, Developmental Psychology, 22(6), 723-742.
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development. Sage Publication.
• Brown, T. A., (2006). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research (1st. Edition). New York: The Guilford Press.
• Curby, T. W., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Ponitz, C. C. (2009). Teacher–child interactions and children’s achievement trajectories across kindergarten and first grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 912.
• Decker, D. M., Dona, D. P., Christenson, S. L. (2007). Behaviorally at-risk African American students: The importance of student–teacher relationships for student outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 45(1), 83-109.
• Demirkaya, P. N. (2013). Anasınıflarına özel gereksinimi olan ve olmayan öğrencilerin öğrenci-öğretmen ilişkisinin incelenmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi.
• Dolan, C. V. (1994), Factor analysis of variables with 2, 3, 5, and 7 response categories: A comparison of categorical variable estimators using simulated data. British journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 47, 309-326
• Drugli, M. B., & Hjemdal, O. (2013). Factor structure of the student–teacher relationship scale for Norwegian school-age children explored with confirmatory factor analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57(5), 457-466.
• Eisenhower, A. S., Baker, B. L., & Blacher, J. (2007). Early student–teacher relationships of children with and without intellectual disability: Contributions of behavioral, social, and self-regulatory competence. Journal of School Psychology, 45(4), 363-383.
• Fraire, M., Longobardi, C., Sclavo, E. (2008). Contribution to validation of the student-teacher relationship scale (STRS Italian Version) in the italian educational setting. European Journal of Education and Psychology, 1(3), 49-59.
• Frankel, J., & Wallen, T. (2006). Cross-cultural on organizational commitment: a further review and application of hofstede’s value survey module. Journal of International Business and Entrepreneurship, 10(1), 1-26.
• Gregoriadis, A., & Tsigilis, N. (2008). Applicability of the Student—Teacher Relationship Scale (STRS) in the Greek Educational Setting. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 26(2), 108-120.
• Griggs, M. S., Gagnon, S. G., Huelsman, T. J., Kidder-Ashley, P., & Ballard, M. (2009). Student-teacher relationships matter: Moderating influences between temperament and preschool social competence. Psychology in the Schools, 46(6), 553-567.
• Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson College Division.
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010) Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Company.
• Hambleton, R.K. & Patsula, L. (1999). Increasing the validity of adapted tests: Myths to be avoided and guidelines for improving test adaptation practices. Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 1(1), 1-30.
• Hamre, B. K., Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eight grade. Child Development, 72(2), 625-638.
• İpek, C., Terzi, A. R. (2010). İlk ve ortaöğretim kurumlarında öğretmen-öğrenci ilişkilerinin öğretmen görüşlerine göre belirlenmesi: Van ili örneği. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 16(3), 433-456.
• Jamieson, S. (2004). Likert scales: how to (ab) use them. Medical education, 38(12), 1217-1218.
• Kolburan-Geçer, A. (2002). Öğretmen yakınlığının öğrencilerin başarıları, tutumları ve güdülenme düzeyleri üzerindeki etkisi. Doktora tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Koomen, H. M., Verschueren, K., van Schooten, E., Jak, S., Pianta, R. C. (2012). Validating the Student-Teacher Relationship Scale: Testing factor structure and measurement invariance across child gender and age in a Dutch sample. Journal of School Psychology, 50(2), 215-234.
• Lubke, G. H., & Muthén, B. O. (2004). Applying multigroup confirmatory factor models for continuous outcomes to Likert scale data complicates meaningful group comparisons. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(4), 514-534.
• Marsh, H. W. 2007. “Application of confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling in sport and exercise psychology”, Handbook of Sport Psychology (3rd Edition). 774-798.
• McIntyre, L. L., Blacher, J., & Baker, B. L. (2006). The transition to school: Adaptation in young children with and without intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50(5), 349-361.
• Mi-young, L. W., Neuharth-Pritchett, S. (2011). Examining factorial validity and measurement invariance of the Student–Teacher Relationship Scale. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(2), 205-215.
• Muller, C. (2001). The role of caring in the teacher-student relationship for at-risk students. Sociological inquiry, 71(2), 241-255.
• Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus User's Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen; 1998-2010.
• Murray, C., & Zvoch, K. (2011). Teacher—student relationships among behaviorally at-risk African American youth from low-income backgrounds: student perceptions, teacher perceptions, and socioemotional adjustment correlates. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 19(1), 41-54.
• Murray, C., & Murray, K. M. (2004). Child level correlates of teacher–student relationships: An examination of demographic characteristics, academic orientations, and behavioral orientations. Psychology in the Schools, 41(7), 751-762.
• Murray, C., Waas, G. A., & Murray, K. M. (2008). Child race and gender as moderators of the association between teacher–child relationships and school adjustment. Psychology in the Schools, 45(6), 562-578.
• NICHD Study of Early Child Care. (2000). Teacher's relationship with child; first grade student-teacher relationship scale. Child Care Data Report - 309. Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute.
• O’Connor, E., & McCartney, K. (2007). Examining teacher–child relationships and achievement as part of an ecological model of development. American Educational Research Journal, 44(2), 340-369.
• Ogelman, H. G., Ersan, C. (2014). Okul Öncesi Öğretmenlerinin Sınıf Yönetimi Stratejilerinin 5-6 Yaş Çocuklarının Akran İlişkilerini Yordayıcıları. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(2), 63-84. Doi: 10.14686/BUEFAD. 201428172
• Pianta R. C. (2001). Student-Teacher Relationship Scale: Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc
• Pianta, R. C., Nimetz, S. L. (1991). Relationships between children and teachers: Associations with classroom and home behavior. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 12(3), 379-393.
• Pianta, R. C., Steinberg, M. (1992). Teacher‐child relationships and the process of adjusting to school. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 57, 61-80.
• Pianta, R. C., Steinberg, M. S., Rollins, K. B. (1995). The first two years of school: Teacher-child relationships and deflections in children's classroom adjustment. Development and Psychopathology, 7(02), 295-312.
• Pomeroy, E. (1999). The teacher-student relationship in secondary school: Insights from excluded students. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(4), 143-148.
• Rudasill, K. M., Reio, T. G., Stipanovic, N., Taylor, J. E. (2010). A longitudinal study of student–teacher relationship quality, difficult temperament, and risky behavior from childhood to early adolescence. Journal of School Psychology, 48(5), 389-412.
• Saft, E. W., Pianta, R. C. (2001). Teachers' perceptions of their relationships with students: Effects of child age, gender, and ethnicity of teachers and children. School Psychology Quarterly, 16(2), 125.
• Silver, R. B., Measelle, J. R., Armstrong, J. M., Essex, M. J. (2005). Trajectories of classroom externalizing behavior: Contributions of child characteristics, family characteristics, and the teacher–child relationship during the school transition. Journal of School Psychology, 43(1), 39-60.
• Skalická, V., Belsky, J., Stenseng, F., Wichstrøm, L. (2015). Preschool‐Age Problem Behavior and Teacher–Child Conflict in School: Direct and Moderation Effects by Preschool Organization. Child Development, 86(3), 955-964.
• Spilt, J. L., Koomen, H. M., Thijs, J. T. (2011). Teacher wellbeing: The importance of teacher–student relationships. Educational Psychology Review,23(4), 457-477.
• Tatar, K. (2004). Sınıf içi öğretmen öğrenci iletişiminin öğrenci başarısı üzerine etkileri ve bir uygulama. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek lisans Tezi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kütahya.
• Thijs, J., Westhof, S., & Koomen, H. (2012). Ethnic incongruence and the student–teacher relationship: The perspective of ethnic majority teachers. Journal of School Psychology, 50(2), 257-273.
• Trentacosta, C. J., & Izard, C. E. (2007). Kindergarten children's emotion competence as a predictor of their academic competence in first grade. Emotion, 7(1), 77.
• Verschueren, K., & Koomen, H. M. (2012). Teacher–child relationships from an attachment perspective. Attachment & human development, 14(3), 205-211.
• Wentzel, K. (2009). Students’ relationships with teachers as motivation contexts. In K. Wentzel A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation in school (pp. 301–322). Malwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Whitaker, R. C., Dearth-Wesley, T., Gooze, R. A. (2015). Workplace stress and the quality of teacher–children relationships in Head Start. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 30, 57-69. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.08.008
• Wu, Y., Wu, J., Chen, Y., Han, L., Han, P., Wang, P., Gao, F. (2015). Shyness and School Adjustment Among Chinese Preschool Children: Examining the Moderating Effect of Gender and Teacher–Child Relationship. Early Education and Development, 26(2), 149-166.
• Yapıcı, M. (2004). İlköğretim birinci sınıfa başlayan öğrencilerin hazır bulunuşluk düzeyleri. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(1), 1-8.