ADAPTATION OF FACULTY ETHICAL BEHAVIORS SCALE INTO TURKISH

Yıl 2012, , 345 - 376, 01.12.2012

Kenan Özcan Aydın Balyer

https://doi.org/10.14520/adyusbd.411

Cited By: 1

Öz

The quality of communication and interaction between faculty and students has vital importance for students’ learning and research process. Faculty and students are together at classrooms, laboratories, offices and other places and rarely outside the school. Their relationships at each place mentioned here are supposed to be within ethical principles. However, it is necessary to discover how students perceive faculty ethical behaviors. This study was carried out to adapt “Faculty Ethical Behaviors Scale” developed by Schnake, Fredenberger ve Dumler (2004) into Turkish. In the original scale, there were 4 sub dimensions and 29 items while there are 24 items below 4 sub dimensions. In this study, 352 students participated in Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and 402 students for Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) process. As a result of the analysis made here, it can be concluded that the scale can be used in the Turkish culture. It can also be used to obtain comparable research results from other cultures.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Faculty, ethical behavior, university student, higher education.

ÖĞRETİM ELEMANLARI ETİK DAVRANIŞLARI ÖLÇEĞİNİN TÜRKÇEYE UYARLANMASI

Öz

Öğretim elemanları ile öğrenciler arasındaki iletişim ve etkileşimin niteliği, öğrencilerin araştırma ve öğrenme süreçleri için yaşamsal bir öneme sahiptir. Öğretim elemanları öğrencileriyle, sınıfta, laboratuvarda, ofiste, fakültede, üniversitenin farklı birimlerinde ve nadiren de olsa üniversite dışında bir arada bulunmaktadırlar. Öğretim elemanı ile öğrenci ilişkilerinin her zaman etik ilkeler çerçevesinde olması beklenir. Ancak öğretim elemanlarının öğrencileriyle öğretim süreci, mentorlük ve informal iletişim ve etkileşimlerinde etik ilkelere ne kadar özen gösterdiklerinin, öğrencilerin algılarına göre belirlenmesine gereksinim vardır. Bu çalışma Schnake, Fredenberger ve Dumler (2004) tarafından geliştirilen “Öğretim Elemanları Etik Davranışları Ölçeğinin” Türkçe’ye uyarlanmasını amaçlamaktadır. Ölçeğin orijinal halinde 29 madde ve dört alt boyut olmasına, uyarlama süreçleri sonucunda ölçeğin yeni formunda alt boyutlar aynen korunmasına karşın madde sayısı 24 olmuştur. Ölçeğin Türkçeye uyarlanması sürecine, Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) için 352 ve Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DAF) için 402 üniversite öğrencisi katılmıştır. Ölçeğin uyarlanmasıyla ülkemizde yapılacak araştırmalarla elde edilen bulguların, aynı ölçekle farklı kültürlerde yapılan/yapılacak olan araştırma bulgularıyla karşılaştırılabilmesine olanak sağlayacağından, ölçeğin Türkçe’ye uyarlanmasının önemli olduğu söylenebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Öğretim elemanı, etik davranış, üniversite öğrencisi, yükseköğretim

Kaynakça

• Association of American Educators (AAE). (2012). Code of Ethics for Educators. http://www.aaeteachers.org/index.php/about-us/aae-code-of-ethics, Erişim: 15.10.2012.
• APA (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct, American Psychological Association, http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/codecompare.aspx, retrieved on 03.10.2011.
• Aurin, K. & Maurer, M. (1993). “Forms and Dimensions of Teachers' Professional Ethics‐‐case studies in secondary schools”, Journal of Moral Education 22 (3):277-296.
• Bailey, K. D. (1994). Methods of Social Research, Fourth Edition, A Division of Macmillan, Inc. New York, N.Y.
• Barcena, F., Gil, F., & Jorer, G. (1993). “The ethical dimension of teaching: a review and a proposal”. Journal of Moral Education. 22 (3), 241-251.
• Barnes, J., Cote, J., Cudeck, R. & Malthouse, E. (2001). “Factor analysis—checking assumptions of normality before conducting factor analysis.” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 10(1,2), 79–81.
• Bartlett, M. S. (1954). “A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximations”. Journal of Royal Statistic Society 16 (Series B), 296-298.
• Baumgarten, E. (1982). “Ethics in the academic profession: A socratic view”. The Journal of Higher Education, 53(3), 282-295.
• Baumgartner, H. & Homburg, C. (1996). “Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: a review.” International Journal of Research Marketing, 13, 139–161.
• Bebeau, M. J. (1993). “Designing an Outcome‐based Ethics Curriculum for Professional Education: strategies and evidence of effectiveness”, Journal of Moral Education. 22 (3), 313-326.
• Bersoff, D. N. & Koeppl, P. M. (1993). “The relation between ethical codes and moral principles.” Ethics and Behavior, 3, 345–357.
• Biaggo, M., Paget, T. L. & Chenoweth, M. S. (1997). “A model for ethical management of faculty–student dual relationships.” Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 28, 184–189.
• Blevins-Knabe, B. (1992). “The ethics of dual relationships in higher education”, Ethics and , Behavior 2 (3):151 – 163.
• Branstetter, S. A., & Handelsman, M. M. (2000). “Graduate teaching assistants: Ethical training, beliefs, and practices”. Ethics and Behavior , 10 , 27–50.
• Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. The Guilford Press, New York.
• Burgess, R. G. (2005). The Ethics of Educational Research, Social Research and Educational Studies Series: 8, Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005.
• Callahan, D. (1982). “Should there be an academic code of ethics?” Journal of Higher Education, 53, 335-346.
• Cassell, J. & Jacobs, S.E. (1987). Handbook on Ethical Issues in Anthropology. Washington, American Anthropological Association.
• Carr, D. (2000). Professionalism and ethics in teaching. Taylor & Francis or Routledge, N.York.
• Chalk, R., Frankel, M. S. & Chafer, S. B. (1980). AAAS professional ethics project. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
• Churchill, L. R. (1982). “The teaching of ethics and moral values in teaching: Some contemporary Confusions”. Journal of Higher Education, 53(3): 296-396.
• Colnerud, G. (1997) “Ethical conflicts in teaching”, Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 627–635.
• Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Costello, A. B. & Osborne, J. W. (2005). “Best Practices in Exploratory Factor Analysis: Four. Recommendations for Getting the Most from Your Analysis”. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation.V. 10 (7), 1-9.
• Cote, J., R. Netemeyer, R. & Bentler, P. (2001). “Structural equation modeling— improving model fit by
• correlating errors.” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 10(1, 2), 87–88.
• Cothran, D.J. and Ennis, C.D.: (1997), “‘Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of Conflict and Power’”, Teacher and Teacher Education 13, 541–553.
• Dill D. D. (1982). “The structure of the academic profession: Toward a definition of ethical issues”. Journal
• of Higher Education, 53, 255-267.
• Dika, A.& Hamiti, M. (2011), “Challenges of implementing the ethics through the use of information technologies in the university”, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15, 1110–1114.
• EDWA (1993). Social Justice in Education: Policy and Guidelines for the Education of Students with Disabilities, Perth: WA Government Printer.
• Floyd. F.J. & Widaman. K. F. (1995). “Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment ınstruments”. Psychological Assessment, 7 (3), 286-299.
• Fritz, O. & Wolfgang, A. (1993). “Trust in Advance: on the professional morality of teachers”. Journal of Moral Education 22 (3):253-275.
• Glass, L. L. (2003). “The gray areas of boundary crossings and violations.” American Journal of Psychotherapy, 57, 429–444.
• Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor Analysis, Second Edition, Hillsdale, N.J.
• Gözütok, D. (1999). “Teachers’ ethical behavior. The Third İnternational Conference on Teacher Education.
• Almost 2000: Crises and challenge in theacher education” (June 27- July 1 1999), (p. 83- 99), İsrail: Beit Berl Collage.
• Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Güçlü, A. B. & Uzun, E. (2002). Felsefe Sözlüğü. Bilim ve Sanat Yayınları, Ankara.
• Haas, L. J., Malouf, J. L. & Mayerson, N. H. (1986). “Ethical dilemmas in psychological practice: Results of a national survey.” Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 17, 316–321.Hall, D. T. (2004). “The protean career: A quarter-century journey”, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65 (1), 1–13.
• Hançerlioğlu, O. (1975). Felsefe Sözlüğü, Remzi Kitapevi Yayınları, . Baskı, İstanbul.
• Haynes, F. (2002). The Ethical School, Taylor & Francis e-Library, London and New York
• Hoyle, R. H. (1995). Structural Equation Modelling: Concepts, Issues, and Aplications. London: Sage Publication Inc.
• Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. & Mullen, M. R. (2008). “Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit”. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
• Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). “Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives.” Structural Equation Modeling, 6 (1), 1-55.
• Hutcheson, G., & Sofroniou, N.( 1999). “The multivariate social scientist: Introductory statistics using generalized linear models”. London and Thousand Oaks: Calif. 224-225.
• Jacob, S. & Hartshorne, T. S. (2003). Ethics and law for school psychologists, Fourth Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.
• Joseph, P. B. & Efron, S. (1993). “Moral Choices/Moral Conflicts: teachers' self‐perceptions”. Journal of Moral Education, 22 (3), 201-220.
• Johnson, C. E. (2007). Ethics in the workplace: Tools and tactics for organizational transformation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Jörreskog, K.G. & Sörbom, D. (1993). Structural Equation Modelling with the Simplıs Command Language. Scientific Software International, Inc., Lincolnwood, IL 60712-1704,USA.
• Jörreskog, K. G. & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s Reference guide. Scientific Software International, Inc., Chicago.
• Keith-Spiegel, P., Tabachnick, B. G., & Allen, M. (1993). “Ethics in academia: Students’ views of professors’ actions”. Ethics and Behavior, 3(2), 149-162.
• Keith-Spiegel, P. C., Whitley, B. E., Balogh, D.W., Perkins, D. V. & Wittig, A. F. (2002). The ethics of teaching: A casebook (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Kitchener, K. S. (1985). “Ethical principles and ethical decisions in student affairs. New Directions for
• Student Services”, 30, 17-29. A model of ethical decision-making for use by student affairs professionals is proposed.
• Koocher, G. P. & Keith-Spiegel, P. (1998). Ethics in psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford.
• Kompf, M (1993). “Ethical Considerations in Teacher Disclosure: construing persons and methods”. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9, 5–6, pp519–528.
• Kline, P. (1979). Psychometrics and psychology. London: Acaderric Press.
• Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, Third Edition, The Guilford Press, New York.
• Lazarus, A. A. (1994). “How certain boundaries and ethics diminish therapeutic effectiveness.” Ethics & Behavior, 4, 255–261.
• Looman, W.S. & Farrag, S. (2009). “Psychometric properties and cross-cultural equivalence of the Arabic Social Capital Scale: instrument development stud”. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 46 (2009) 45-54.
• MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W. & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). “Power analysis and determination of Sample size for covariance structure modeling.” Psychological Methods,1(2),130–149.
• MacCallum, R.C. & Widaman, K.F. (1999). “Sample Size in Factor Analysis. Psychological Methods”. Vol.4. No. 1.84-99. Erişim: 05.09.2011, http://people.musc.edu/~elg26/teaching/psstats1.2006/maccallumetal.pdf
• Morgan, B. L., & Korschgen, A. J. (2001). “The ethics of faculty behavior: Students' and professors' views”. College Student Journal 35, 418-422.
• National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP). 1999. “American Tort Reform Association Press Conference”, September 8. http://www.nassp.org/press_releases/sop_tortreform.tirozzi.htm, Alındığı tarih: 15.09.2012.
• Oxford English Dictionary (2011). The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, 7th Edition Oxford, Oxford University Press, UK.
• Pascarella, E. T. & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Peter, J. P. (1981). “Construct validity: a review of basic ıssues and marketing practices”. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(2), 133-145.
• Raykov, T. & Marcoulides, G. A. (2000). A first course in structural equation modeling, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
• Robertson, E., & Grant, G. (1982). “Teaching and ethics: An epilogue. Journal of Higher Education”, 5 3 (3), 345-357.
• Rupert, P. A., & Holmes, D. L. (1997). “Dual relationships in higher education. Journal of Higher Education”, 68(6), 660-677.
• Sandler, J. C., & Russell, B. L. (2005). “Faculty-student collaborations: Ethics and satisfaction in authorship credit”. Ethics & Behavior, 15, 65-80.
• Scherer, R. F., Wiebe F. A., Luther, D. C. & Adams J. S. (1988). “Dimensionality of coping: factor stability using the ways of coping questionnaire. Psychological”, Reports, 62, 763-770.
• Smith, D. & Fitzpatrick, M. (1995). “Patient-therapist boundary issues: An integrative review of theory and research”. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26, 499–506.
• Schnake, M., Fredenberger, W. & Dumler, M. P (2004). “Dimensions of Student Perceptions of Faculty Ethical Behevior: Refining a Measure and Reletionships with Selected Outcome Variables”. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 8(2), 1-16.
• Schreiber, J. B., Stage, F. K., King, G., Nora, A. & Barlow, E. A. (2006). “Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results”: A Review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99 (6), 323-337.
• Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H. & Müller, H. (2003). “Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures”. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
• Solomon, R. S. (1984). Ethics: A brief introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Sperber, A. D.(2004). “Translation and Validation of Study Instruments for Cross- Cultural Research”. Gastroenterology. 126:124-128.
• Strike, K. A. (1999) Justice, caring and universality: in defence of moral pluralism, in: M. S. Katz, N. Noddings & K. A. Strike (Eds) Justice and caring: the search for common ground in education (New York, Teachers College Press).
• Svinicki, M. (1994). Ethics in college teaching. In W. J. McKeachie (Ed.), Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (9th ed., pp. 269–277). Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
• Tabachnick, B., Keith-Spiegel, P. & Pope, K. S. (1991). “The ethics of teaching: The beliefs and behaviors of psychologists as educators”. American Psychologist, 46, 506-515.
• Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L. S.(2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. Fifth Edition Pearson Education. Inc.
• Thompson, D. F. (1985). “The Possibility of Administrative Ethics”. Public Administration Review”, 45, 555-561.
• Tobin, K., & Tippins, D. (1993). Constructivism as a referent for teaching and learning. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 3-21). Washington: AAAS Press.
• Turgut, İ. (2002). Eğitim ve Etik. Kanyılmaz Matbaası, İzmir.
• Vieira, A. L. (2011). Interactive LISREL in Practice, Getting Started with a SIMPLIS Approach, Springer Heidelberg Dordrecht London New York.
• Wilson, E. K. (1982). “Power, pretence, and piggybacking: Some ethical issues in teaching”. Journal of Higher Education, 53, 268-281.
• Wubbels, Th., Cre´ton, H. A. & Hooymayers, H. P. (1985). “Discipline problems of beginning teachers, interactional teacher behavior mapped out”. Abstracted in Resources in Education, 20, 12, p. 153, ERIC document 260040.
• Zabihollah, R. (2001). “Ethical Behavior in Higher Educational Institutions: The Role of the Code of Conduct”, 30, Journal of Business ETHICS 171.