SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Spor ve Egzersiz Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 24 Sayı: 3

The Effect of Students’ Trust in Instructors on Students’ Class Participation and School Engagement: Example of Faculty of Sports Sciences

Hatice Deveci Şirin(Selçuk Üniversitesi)0000-0002-0529-0209
Ali Erdoğan(Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi)0000-0001-8306-5683
Erkan Faruk Şirin(Selçuk Üniversitesi Spor Bilimleri Fakültesi)0000-0002-6837-7758
Çetin Işık(Selçuk Üniversitesi)0000-0002-5952-1383
Pages
285–297
Publication Date
2022-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Moreover, the study shows that the positive effect of students’ trust in the instructor on school engagement is more effective than its effect on their participation in the course.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Trust in instructors is one of the most important variables affecting university reform and students' college life.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study group in this research consisted of y 552 students (194 female, 358 male) – voluntary participation - who were studying in the physical education and sports teaching, sports management, coaching education and recreation departments in the Faculty of Sports Sciences at Selçuk University.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Moreover, the study shows that the positive effect of students’ trust in the instructor on school engagement is more effective than its effect on their participation in the course.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Class participation · school engagement · students’ trust in instructors

Abstract

Trust in instructors is one of the most important variables affecting university reform and students' college life. The research focused on the trust in the instructors which is considered to have an influence on class participation and school engagement. Accordingly, the aim of this study is to examine the relationship between trust in faculty members and class participation and school engagement with regard to faculty of sport sciences. The study group in this research consisted of y 552 students (194 female, 358 male) – voluntary participation - who were studying in the physical education and sports teaching, sports management, coaching education and recreation departments in the Faculty of Sports Sciences at Selçuk University. The study was carried out through a quantitative approach. Student Trust in Professors Scale, Student Engagement Scale and School Engagement to Higher Education Scale were used in order to collect data in the study. Study data were analyzed via arithmetic mean, standard deviation, confirmatory factor analysis, correlation analysis and structural equation modeling. As a consequence of this study, positive relationship was found between students’ trust in the instructors and students’ participation in the course and their school engagement. Moreover, the study shows that the positive effect of students’ trust in the instructor on school engagement is more effective than its effect on their participation in the course.

🔖

Cite This Article

Şirin, H. D., Erdoğan, A., Şirin, E. F., Işık, Ç., *, E. F. Ş. (2022). The Effect of Students’ Trust in Instructors on Students’ Class Participation and School Engagement: Example of Faculty of Sports Sciences. Türk Spor ve Egzersiz Dergisi, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 3, 285–297. https://doi.org/10.15314/tsed.1162772

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (87)

  1. Adams, C.M. (2008). Building trust in schools: a review of the empirical evidence. In W. K. Hoy, & M. DiPaola (Eds.), Improving schools: Studies in leadership and culture (pp. 29e54). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc
  2. Adams, C.M. (2013). Collective student trust a social resource for urban elementary students. Educational Administration Quarterly, 20(10), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X13488596
  3. Amirkafi, M. ve Kazemi, K. (2019). Investigating the effective factors on students' trust in professors of Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman. Journal of Iranian Social Studies, 13(3), 4-33. Doi: 10.22034/JSS.2019.43304
  4. Anderson, J.B. (2008). Social capital and student learning: Empirical results from Latin American primary schools. Economics of Education Review, 27(4), 439-449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2007.05.002
  5. Appleton, J.J., Christenson, S.L., ve Furlong, M.J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369-386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303
  6. Asunakutlu, T. (2002). Örgütsel güvenin oluşturulmasına ilişkin unsurlar ve bir değerlendirme. Muğla Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9, 1-13.
  7. Aydın, S. (2008). Büro Yönetimi ve Sekreterlik Bölümü Öğrencilerinin Örgütsel Bağlılık Düzeyleri ve Bu Düzeylerin Akademik Başarıları ile İlişkisi. Yayımlanmış Yüksek lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  8. Bayardo, J.M., Cabada, M.L., Terrazas, P.J. (2014). College student’s commitment. European Scientific Journal, 10(16), 456-463.
  9. Beck, H.P. ve Milligan, M. (2014). Factors influencing the institutional commitment of online students. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 51-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.09.002
  10. Blum, R. (2005). School Connectedness: Improving the Lives of Students, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health Report.
  11. Bilgiç, Ö. ve Gümüşeli, A.İ. (2012). Research on teachers’level of trust to the collegues, the students and the parents. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5470-5474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.459
  12. Brown, T.A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd edition). New York, NY: Guildford Press.
  13. Bryk, A. S. ve Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: A core resource for school reform. Educational Leadership, 60(6), 40-45.
  14. Bryson, C., ve Hand, L. (2007). The role of engagement in inspiring teaching and learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(4), 349-362. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290701602748
  15. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2018). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (Geliştirilmiş 11.Baskı), Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
  16. Coleman, J.S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943
  17. Çelik, S., Toraman, S.Ö. ve Çelik, K. (2018). Öğrenci başarısının derse katılım ve öğretmen yakınlığıyla ilişkisi. Kastamonu Üniversitesi Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 26(1), 209-217. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.378129
  18. Çınkır, Ş., Kurum, G., ve Yıldız, S. (2021). Yükseköğretimde öğrenci bağlılığı ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi, 10(1), 273-298. https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.717825
  19. Daly, A. J. ve Chrispeels, J. (2008). A question of trust: Predictive conditions for adaptive and technical leadership in educational contexts. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 7(1), 30-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760701655508
  20. Deci, E.L. ve Ryan, R.M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
  21. Ennis, C. D. ve McCauley, M.T. (2002). Creating urban classroom communitiesworthy of trust. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34, 149-172. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270110096370
  22. Finn, J.D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117-142. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543059002117
  23. Estepp, C.M. ve Roberts, T.G. (2015). Teacher immediacy and professor/student rapport as predictors of motivation and engagement. NACTA Journal, 59(1), 155-163.
  24. Fornell, C. ve Larcker,D.F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800313
  25. Forsyth, P.B., Adams, C.M. ve Hoy, W.K. (2011). Collective trust: why schools can't improve without it. New York: Teachers College Press.
  26. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., ve Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept,state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74 (1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
  27. Frisby, B.N. ve Martin, M.M. (2010). Instructor–student and student–student rapport in the classroom. Communication Education, 59(2), 146-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520903564362
  28. Goddard, R.D., Salloum, S. J. ve Berebitsky, D. (2009). Trust as a mediator of the relationships between poverty, racial composition, and academic achievement evidence from Michigan's Public Elementary Schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 292-311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08330503
  29. Goddard, R.D., Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, M.W.K. (2001). A multilevel examination of the distribution and effects of teacher trust in students and parents in urban elementary schools. The Elementary School Journal, 102 (1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1086/499690
  30. Green, J., Liem, G.A.D., Martin, A.J., Colmar, S., Marsh, H.W., McInerney, D.M. (2012). Academic motivation, self-concept, engagement, and performance in high school: Key processes from a longitudinal perspective. Journal of Adolescence, 35, 1111-1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.02.016
  31. Gregory, A. ve Korth, J. (2016). Teacher–student relationships and behavioral engagement in the classroom. In Handbook of Social Influences in School Contexts (pp. 178-191). Routledge.
  32. Günüç, S. (2013). Teknolojinin öğrenci bağlılığındaki rolü ve derste teknoloji kullanımı ile öğrenci bağlılığı arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi. Yayımlanmamış Doktora tezi, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Eskişehir.
  33. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. ve Anderson, R.E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th Edition). Harlow: Pearson.
  34. Hallinan, M. T. (2008). Teacher influences on students' attachment to school. Sociology of education, 81(3), 271-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/003804070808100303
  35. Handelsman, M.M., Briggs, W.L., Sullivan, N. ve Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 98, 184-191. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.98.3.184-192
  36. Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  37. Hongwidjojo, M. P., Monika, M., & Wijaya, E. (2018). Relation of student-teacher trust with school well-being to high school students. Psikodimensia, 17(2), 162-167. https://doi.org/10.24167/psidim.v17i2.1664
  38. Hoy, W.K. ve Tschannen-Moran, M. (1999). Five faces of trust: An empirical confirmation in urban elementary schools. Journal of School Leadership, 9, 184- 208. https://doi.org/10.1177/105268469900900301
  39. Hoy, W.K.,Gage, C.Q. ve Tarter, C.J. (2006). School mindfulness and faculty trust: Necessary conditions for each other?. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(2), 236-255. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04273844 Hoy, W.K., and Tschannen-Moran, M. (2007). The conceptualization and measurement of faculty trust in schools: The Omnibus T-scale. In W. Hoy & M. Dipaola (Eds.), Essential Ideas for the Reform of American Schools, (pp. 87-114). Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, North Carolina.
  40. Hu, L.T. ve 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  41. Hu, S. ve 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. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020114231387
  42. Kahu, E.R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in higher education, 38(5), 758-773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505
  43. Khany, R. ve Tazik, K. (2016). On the relationship between psychological empowerment, trust, and Iranian EFL teachers’ job satisfaction: The case of secondary school teachers. Journal of Career Assessment, 24(1), 112-129. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072714565362
  44. Kızılay, M. (2008). İlköğretim okullarında ikinci kademe öğrencilerin okula bağlılık durumlarına ilişkin öğrenci ve öğretmen görüşleri. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Yeditepe Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Eğitim Yönetimi ve Denetimi Ana Bilim Dalı, İstanbul.
  45. Korkut, F. (2005). Yetişkinlere yönelik iletişim becerileri eğitimi. Hacettepe üniversitesi eğitim fakültesi dergisi, 28, 143-149.
  46. Krause, K. ve Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year university. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33 (5),493-505. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701698892
  47. Kuh, G.D. (2009) Afterword. In: Harper, S.R. and Quaye, S.J. (eds.) Student Engagement in Higher Education. New York and London: Routledge, pp. 313–318.
  48. Lather, A.S, Khatri, P. ve Jain, S. (2015). Students' commitment to attend classes in management higher education: a comparative study of working executives and non working students pursuing full time post graduate management programme, Global Journal of Educational Studies, 1(1), 1-15. doi:10.5296/gjes.v1i1.7454
  49. Lee, S. J. (2007). The relations between the student–teacher trust relationship and school success in the case of Korean middle schools. Educational Studies, 33(2), 209-216. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690601068477
  50. Malhotra, N.K. ve Dash, S. (2016). Marketing research an applied orientation. (Seventh Ed.), Uttar Pradesh, India: Pearson India Education Services.
  51. Marks, M.H. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high School. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 53-184. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312037001153
  52. McNally, J.J. ve Irving, P.G. (2010). The Relationship Between University Student Commitment Profiles and Behavior: Exploring the Nature of Context Effects”. Journal of Leadership ve Organizational Studies, 17(2): 201-215. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051810363810
  53. Menteş, C. (2011). İlköğretim okulu 5. sınıf öğrencilerinin öğretmenlerine olan güven düzeyleri ile derse katılım düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Sınıf Öğretmenliği Ana Bilim Dalı, Bolu.
  54. Meyer, J.P. ve Allen, N.J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. Sage Publications: USA.
  55. Mitchell, R.M. ve Forsyth, P.B. (2004). Trust, the principal and student identification. In Annual Meeting of The University Council for Education Administratio:, Kansas City, Missouri.
  56. Mitchell, R.M., Kensler, L. ve Tschannen-Moran, M. (2016). Student trust in teachers and student perceptions of safety: positive predictors of student identification with school. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 21(2), 135-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2016.1157211
  57. Mitra, D.L. (2009). Collaborating with students: building youth‐adult partnerships in schools. American Journal of Education, 115(3), 407-436. https://doi.org/10.1086/597488
  58. Murray, C. ve Greenberg, M. (2000). Children’s relationship with teachers and bonds with school: An investigation of patterns and correlates in middle childhood. Journal of School Psychology, 38, 423-445. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4405(00)00034-0
  59. 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431608322940
  60. Newmann, F.M. (1992). Higher-Order thinking and prospects for classroom thoughtfullness. Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools. Teachers College press, New York.
  61. Newmann, F.M., Wehlage, G.G. ve Lamborn, S.D. (1992). The significance and sources of student engagement. In F. M. Newmann (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools (pp. 11 – 39). NewYork: Teachers College Press.
  62. Nguyen, B., Yu, X., Melewar, T.C. ve Hemsley-Brown, J. (2016). Brand ambidexterity and commitment in higher education: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Research 69 (8), 3105–3112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.026
  63. Nichols, S.L. (2008). An exploration of students’ belongingness beliefs in one middle school. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(2), 145–169. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.76.2.145-169
  64. Okonofua, J. A., Paunesku, D., & Walton, G. M. (2016). Brief intervention to encourage empathic discipline cuts suspension rates in half among adolescents. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(19), 5221-5226. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1523698113
  65. Omarov, A. (2009). Örgütsel güven ve iş doyumu: Özel bir sektörde uygulama. Yayımlanmış Doktora tezi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İşletme Ana Bilim Dalı, İzmir.
  66. Özer, N. ve Atik, S. (2014). Ortaokul ve lise öğrencilerinin okul müdürlerine güven düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD),15(3), 87-106.
  67. Özer, N. ve Tül, C.(2014). Öğrenciler için öğretmene güven ölçeğinin Türkçe formunun psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesi. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi,10(1),105-119.
  68. Özer, N., Atik, S., Şad, S.N. ve Kış, A. (2018). Turkish college students’ “trust in professors and engagement: I trust therefore I engage. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 24(3), 553-578. https://doi.org/10.17762/kuey.v24i3.78
  69. Öztürk, B. (2000). Sınıf içi etkileşim. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 24(24), 621-640.
  70. Pianta, R. C., Steinberg, M. ve Rollins, K. (1995). The first two years of school: Teacher-child relationships and deflections in children’s classroom adjustment. Developmental Psychopathology, 7, 295-312. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579400006519
  71. Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust 1. Journal of personality, 35(4), 651-665.
  72. Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American educational research journal, 38(2), 437-460. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312038002437
  73. Sabol, T.J., & Pianta, R.C. (2012). Recent trends in research on teacher–child relationships. Attachment & human development, 14(3), 213-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2012.672262
  74. Schlechty, P. C. (2001). Shaking up the schoolhouse: How to support and sustain educational ınnovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Wiley imprint.
  75. Skinner, E, Kindermann, T. ve Furrer, C. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: A conceptualization and assessment of children's behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493-525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233
  76. Skinner, E.A, ve Pitzer, J.R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. Christenson, S.L., Reschly A.L. ve Wylie C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on student engagement içinde (21–44). New York: Springer
  77. Şad, S.N. ve Özer, N. (2014). Silent scream:“I d Do Not Want to Participate Professor!”. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2532-2536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.606
  78. Tavşancıl, E. (2014). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi (5. Baskı), Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
  79. Tschannen-Moran, M. (1998). Trust and collaboration in urban elemantary schools. Unpublished doctoral thesis, The Ohio State University.
  80. Tschannnen-Moran, M. (2004). Trust matters: leadership for successful schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  81. Tschannen-Moran, M. (2009). Fostering teacher professionalism in schools the role of leadership orientation and trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 217-247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08330501
  82. Tschannen-Moran, M. ve Gareis, C.R. (2015). Faculty trust in the principal: an essential ingredient in high-performing schools", Journal of Educational Administration, 53(1), 66-92. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-02-2014-0024
  83. Tschannen-Moran, M. ve Hoy, W.K. (2000). A multi disciplinary analysis of the nature, meaning, and measurement of trust. Review of Educational Research, 70(4), 547-593. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070004547
  84. Uslu, O. ve Ardıç, K. (2013). Güç mesafesi örgütsel güveni etkiler mi?. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 15 (2), 313-338.
  85. Maele, D.V., Forsyth, P.B., & Houtte, M.V. (2014). Trust and school life: The role of trust for learning, teaching, leading, and bridging. Springer. Business Media.
  86. Wang, Z., Bergin, C. ve Bergin, D.A. (2014). Measuring engagement in fourth to twelfth grade classrooms: The Classroom Engagement Inventory. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(4), 517-535. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000050
  87. Wasti, S. A. (2000). Meyer ve Allen üç boyutlu örgütsel bağlılık ölçeğinin geçerlilik ve güvenirlilik analizi. 8. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi Bildirileri, içinde (401- 410). Nevşehir: Erciyes Üniversitesi.