Adaptation of University Student Engagement Inventory to Turkish Culture: Validity and Reliability Study

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 20 Sayı: 2, 507 - 520, 31.08.2019

Feyza Gün , Tuğba Turabik , Gökhan Arastaman , Sait Akbaşlı

https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.457919

Cited By: 6

Öz

The purpose of this study was to adapt the
“University Student Engagement Inventory” developed by Maroco, Maroco, Campos
and Fredricks (2016) into Turkish. To this end, data was collected from 246
university students during the spring term of 2016-2017 academic year. The
scale consists of three factors called behavioral engagement, affective
engagement and cognitive engagement is a five-point Likert-type measuring
instrument consisting of 15 items. In the validity study of the scale, the
factor structure obtained in the original scale was tested with confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) and correlation analysis between factors was performed.
For the reliability study of the scale, Cronbach alpha values were calculated
and corrected item-total correlations were examined. The fit indexes regarding
the construct validity of the scale supported the three-factor structure of
the original scale. These factors were labelled as behavioral engagement,
emotional engagement and cognitive engagement. The Cronbach alpha value of the
University Student Engagement Inventory was calculated as .82. These results
demonstrated that the scale adapted to Turkish is a valid and reliable
instrument for determining the engagement levels of the university students. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

: Student engagement, university student, scale adaptation

Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Okul Bağlılığı Ölçeğinin Türk Kültürüne Uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Öz

Bu araştırmada üniversite öğrencilerinin okul
bağlılığına ilişkin algılarını ölçmek için Maroco, Maroco, Campos ve Fredricks
(2016) tarafından geliştirilen “Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Okul Bağlılığı
Ölçeği”nin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmasının yapılarak Türk kültürüne
uyarlanması amaçlanmıştır. Bu doğrultuda, 2016-2017 eğitim-öğretim yılının
bahar döneminde çeşitli üniversitelerde öğrenim görmekte olan 246 öğrenciden elde
edilen veriler analiz edilmiştir. Davranışsal bağlılık, duyuşsal bağlılık ve
bilişsel bağlılık olmak üzere üç boyuttan oluşan ölçek 15 maddelik beşli
likert tipinde bir ölçme aracıdır. Ölçeğin geçerlik çalışması kapsamında
orijinal ölçek geliştirme çalışmasında elde edilen faktör yapısı doğrulayıcı
faktör analizi (DFA) ile test edilmiş boyutlar arası korelasyon analizleri
yapılmıştır. Ölçeğin güvenirlik çalışmasında Cronbach alfa güvenirlik
katsayısı kestirilmiş ve madde-toplam puan korelasyonları incelenmiştir.
Ölçeğin üç boyutlu yapısına ilişkin elde edilen uyum indeksleri, orijinal
çalışmadaki üç boyutlu yapıyı destekler niteliktedir. Bu boyutlar davranışsal
bağlılık, duyuşsal bağlılık ve bilişsel bağlılık olarak adlandırılmıştır.
Ayrıca ölçeğin tamamına ilişkin Cronbach Alfa değerinin .82 olduğu
belirlenmiştir. Yapılan analizler sonucunda Türkçeye uyarlanan ölçeğin,
üniversite öğrencilerinin okula bağlılıklarını ölçmek için geçerli ve
güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Okul bağlılığı, üniversite öğrencisi, ölçek uyarlama

Kaynakça

• Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Morizot, J., & Pagani, L. (2009). Adolescent behavioral, affective and cognitive engagement in school: Relationship to dropout. Journal of School Health, 79(9), 408-415.
• Baron, P., & Corbin, L. (2012). Student engagement: Rhetoric and reality, Higher Education Research & Development, 31(6), 759-772. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2012.655711
• Bilge, F., Tuzgol-Dost, M., & Çetin, B. (2014). Factors affecting burnout and school engagement among high school students: study habits, self-efficacy beliefs, and academic success. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(5), 1721-1727.
• Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley.
• Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss, Vol. 2: Separation- Anxiety and Anger. New York: Basic Books.
• Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. New York: Basic Books.
• Briggs, S. R., & Cheek, J. M. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. Journal of personality, 54(1), 106-148.Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2017). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (23. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi
• Byrne, B. M., & Campbell T. L. (1999). Cross-cultural comparisons and the presumption of equivalent measurement and theoretical structure: a look beneath the surface. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 30(5), 555-574. doi: 10.1177/0022022199030005001
• Caraway, K., Tucker, C. M., Reinke, W. M., & Hall, C. (2003). Self‐efficacy, goal orientation, and fear of failure as predictors of school engagement in high school students. Psychology in the Schools, 40(4), 417-427.
• Chapman, E. (2003). Alternative approaches to assessing student engagement rates. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(13). Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=13
• Child, D. (2006). The essentials of factor analysis. Third Ed. Continuum, London.
• Costa, A. R., Araújo, A. M., & Almeida, L. S. (2014). Relação entre a percepção da autoeficácia académica e o engagement de estudantes de engenharia. International Journal of Developmental and Educational Psychology, 2(1), 307-314.
• Covell, K. (2010). School engagement and rights-respecting schools. Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(1), 39–51. doi: 10.1080/03057640903567021
• Cueto, S., Guerrero, G., Sugimaru, C., & Zevallos, A. M. (2010). Sense of belonging and transition to high schools in Peru. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(3), 277–287. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2009.02.002
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). What is the self in selfdirected learning? Findings from recent motivational research. In G. Staka (Ed.), Conceptions of self-directed learning: Theoretical and conceptual considerations (pp. 75– 92). Munster, Germany: Waxmann.
• Dotterer, A. M., & Lowe, K. (2011). Classroom context, school engagement, and academic achievement in early adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40(12), 1649–1660.
• Estell, D. B., & Perdue, N. H. (2013). Social support and behavioral and affective school engagement: The effects of peers, parents, and teachers. Psychology in the Schools, 50(4), 325-339.
• Finlay, K. A. (2006). Quantifying School Engagement: Research Report. National Center for School Engagement, 1-16. Retrieved from http://www.peecworks.org/peec/peec_inst/017962E8-001D0211.0/Finlay%202006%20Quantifying%20School%20Engagement.pdf
• Finn, J. D. (1993). School engagement and students at risk. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
• FitzSimmons, V. C. (2006). Relatedness: The foundation for the engagement of middle school students during the transitional year of sixth grade (Doctoral Dissertation). Available from ProOuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3239794).
• Fredricks,J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, State of the Evidence. Reviev of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
• George, D., & Mallery, P. (2001). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference. Needham Heights: AllynBacon.
• Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Hirschi, T. (2002). Causes of delinquency. Transaction publishers.
• Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structural analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 55-65. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
• Hu, S., & Kuh, G. D. (2002). Being (dis)engaged in educationally purposeful activities: The influences of student and institutional characteristics. Research in Higher Education, 43(5), 555-575. doi:10.1023/A:1020114231387
• Jimerson, S. R., Campos, E., & Greif, J. L. (2003). Toward an understanding of definitions and measures of school engagement and related terms. The California School Psychologist, 8, 7-27.
• Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International Inc.
• Junco, R. (2012). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers & Education, 58(1), 162-171.
• Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
• Kortering, L. J., & Christenson, S. (2009). Engaging students in school and learning: The real deal for school completion. Exceptionality, 17, 5-15.
• Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J., Bridges, B., & Hayek, J. C. (2006). Piecing together the student success puzzle: Research, propositions, and recommendations. ASHE Higher Education Report, 32(5). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
• Law, D. W. (2007). Exhaustion in university students and the effect of coursework involvement. Journal of American College Health, 55(4), 239- 245.
• Leech, N. L., Barrett, K. C., & Morgan, G. A. (2011). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and interpretation (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
• Lippman, L., & Rivers, A. (2008). Assessing school engagement: A guide for out-of-school time program practitioners. (A research-to-results brief). Washington, DC: Child Trends. Retrieved from https://www.childtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/child_trends-2008_10_29_rb_schoolengage.pdf
• Maltby, J., Day, L., Hall, S. S., & Chivers, S. (2017). The measurement and role of ecological resilience systems theory across domain-specific outcomes: The domain-specific resilient systems scales. Assessment, 1-18. doi: 10.1177/1073191117738045
• Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 153–184.
• Maroco, J., Maroco, A. L., Campos, J. A. D. B., & Fredricks, J. A. (2016). University student’s engagement: development of the University Student Engagement Inventory (USEI). Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 29(21), 1-12. doi: 10.1186/s41155-016-0042-8
• McNeely, C., & Falci, C.(2004). School connectedness and transition into and out of health risk behavior among adolescents: Acomparison of social belonging and teacher support. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 284-292.
• Murphy, K. R., & Davidshofer, C. O. (1991). Psychological testing: Principles and applications. (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Murray, C. (2009). Parent and teacher relationships as predictors of school engagement and functioning among low-income urban youth. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 29(3), 376-404.
• Newmann, F. M. (1992). Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. NewYork: McGraw Hill.
• Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (1992). Instructional discourse and student engagement. In: Schunk, D. H., & Meece, J. (Eds.). Student perceptions in the classroom (p. 149–79). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Önen, E. (2014). Öğrencinin okula bağlılığı ölçeği: Türk ortaokul ve lise öğrencileri için uyarlama çalışması. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 5(42), 221-234.
• Özdamar, K. (1999). Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi. Eskişehir: Kaan Yayınevi
• Özdemir, M. (2017). Sosyal adalet liderliği, okula yönelik tutum ve okul bağlılığı arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 42(191), 267-281. doi: 10.15390/EB.2017.6281
• Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual. UK: McGraw Hill.
• Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Sağlam, A., ve İkiz, F. E. (2017). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin şiddet eğilimleri ile okula bağlılık düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. İlköğretim Online, 16(3), 1235-1246.
• Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 33(5), 464-481.
• Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two-sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92. doi: 10.1023/A:1015630930326
• Schermelleh-Engel, K., & Moosbrugger, 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.
• Shin, R., Daly, B., & Vera, E. (2007). The relationships of peer norms, ethnic identity, and peer support to school engagement in urban youth. Professional School Counseling, 10(4), 379-388.
• Simons‐Morton, B. G., & Crump, A. D. (2003). Association of parental involvement and social competence with school adjustment and engagement among sixth graders. Journal of School Health, 73(3), 121-126. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2003.tb03586.x
• Sirin, S. R., & Rogers-Sirin, L. (2005). Components of school engagement among African American adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 9(1), 5-13.
• Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. (2012). Developmental Dynamics of engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), The handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 21–44). New York: Springer Science.
• Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (2009). Engagement as an organizational construct in the dynamics of motivational development. In K. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation in school (pp. 223–245). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology,100(4), 765-781.
• Steinberg, L. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reforms has failed and what parents need to do. New York: Simon and Schuster
• Stoeber, J., Childs, J. H., Hayward, J. A., & Feast, A. R. (2011). Passion and motivation for studying: predicting academic engagement and burnout in university students. Educational Psychology, 31(4), 513-528. doi: 10.1080/01443410.2011.570251
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson
• Virtanen, T. E., Kiuru, N., Lerkkanen, M. K., Poikkeus, A. M., & Kuorelahti, M. (2016). Assessment of student engagement among junior high school students and associations with self-esteem, burnout, and academic achievement. Journal for Educational Research Online/Journal für Bildungsforschung Online, 8(2), 136-157.
• Wang, M. T., & Fredricks, J. A. (2014). The reciprocal links between school engagement, youth problem behaviors, and school dropout during adolescence. Child development, 85(2), 722-737. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12138
• Wang, M., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in Middle School. American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 633-662. doi: 10.3102/0002831209361209