SavedAdd your journal

Journals / MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 3

Math Anxiety Scale: Validity and Reliability Study

Matematikalık kamtama şkalası: validdüülüktü cana işenimdüülüktü sındoo

Yavuz Ercan GÜL
Akmatali ALİMBEKOV
Pages
1521–1531
Publication Date
2020-07-21
DOI
—
🏛️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)

As a result of all these studies, a valid and reliable Kyrgyz measurement tool has been developed to measure students' math anxiety levels.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to develop a valid and reliable instrument to measure math anxiety levels of students.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study group consisted of 216 students studying at the 49th school in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of all these studies, a valid and reliable Kyrgyz measurement tool has been developed to measure students' math anxiety levels.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:matematika · kamtama · validdüülük

Abstract

The aim of this study is to develop a valid and reliable instrument to measure math anxiety levels of students. The study group consisted of 216 students studying at the 49th school in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. Within the scope of the validity analyzes of the scale, scope validity and construct validity were performed. In the scope of reliability analyzes, Crombach Alpha reliability coefficient was examined. Crombach Alpha coefficient was calculated as 0.76. In the factor-based discriminative analysis, differences were found to be statistically significant for all sub-dimensions. A positive correlation was found between the factors. As a result of all these studies, a valid and reliable Kyrgyz measurement tool has been developed to measure students' math anxiety levels.

Özet

Bul izildöönün maksatı – okuuçulardın matematikadan ulam payda bolgon kamtama dengeelderin ölçöögö caramduu, b.a. validdüü cana işenimdüü ölçöö instrumentin dayardoo. İzildöönün ülgü tobun bişkek şaarının no:49-orto mektebinin 216 okuuçusu tüzgön. Ölçögün karacatının validdüülügün sınoo boyunça mazmunduk cana konstruktuk validdüülük operatsiyaları atkarılgan. İşenimdüülüktü anıktoo boyunça kronbah α koeffisiyenti eseptelip, anın maanisi 0.76 bolup çıkkan. Faktorlordu ayırmalooçu diskriminanttık analizdin natıycasında bardık subşkalalar boyunça anılgan körsötküçtör statistikalık caktan maanige ee ekendigi anıktalgan. Faktorlordun ortosunda öz ara pozitivdik baylanış bar ekendigi belgilüü bolgon. Bul operatsiyalardın natıycasında okuuçulardın matematikalık kamtama dengeelderin ölçöögö validdüü cana işenimdüü kırgız tilinde ölçöö karacatı dayardalgan.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜL, Y. E., ALİMBEKOV, A. (2020). Math Anxiety Scale: Validity and Reliability Study. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 3, 1521–1531. https://ajindex.com/articles/12734

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Ashcraft, M. H. (2002). Math Anxiety: Personal, Educational, and Cognitive Consequences. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 181-185.
  2. Attard, C. (2013). If I Had to Pick any Subject, it Wouldn’t be Maths”: Foundations for Engagement with Mathematics During the Middle Years. Math Education Research Journal. 1(1), 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-013-0081-8
  3. Bai, H. (2011). Cross-Validating a Bidimensional Mathematics Anxiety Scale. Assessment. 1, 178-182, doi: 10.1177/1073191110364312. Betz, N. E. (1978) "Prevalence Distribution and Correlates of Math Anxiety, in College Students”. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 25(5), 441-448
  4. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör Analizi: Temel Kavramlar ve Ölçek Geliştirmede Kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi 32(1), 470-483
  5. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2005). Anket Geliştirme. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(2), 133 – 151. Büyüköztürk, Ş. vd. (2016). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara:
  6. Pegem Akademi. Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing Validity: Basic İssues in Objective Scale Development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309-319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309. Жуманова М. М., Болотбек кызы С., Убайдуллаева А., Юсупали уулу З. & Маматова Д. Т. (2017). Кыргызстандын Мектеп Бyтyрyyчyлөрyнyн Кесипке Багыттуулугундагы Айрым Тенденциялар. Вестник Ошского Государственного Университета, 3(1), 91-96.
  7. Davis L.L. (1992). Instrument Review: Getting the most from a Panel of Experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5, 194-197.
  8. Ercan, İ & Kan, İ. (2004). Ölçeklerde Güvenirlik ve Geçerlik. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, 30 (3), 211-216.
  9. Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods. Newyork: McGraw Hill. Hinkin, T. R., Tracey, J. B., & Enz, C. A. (1997). Scale construction: Developing Reliable And Valid Measurement İnstruments. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 21(1), 100-120. doi:10.1177/109634809702100108. Karasar, N. (2016). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. İkinci Yazım, 31. Basım, Ankara:
  10. Nobel Yayınları.
  11. Kesici, A. (2018). Matematik Kaygısı Ebeveynlerden Çocuklara Aktarılan Kültürel Bir Miras Mı?. Dicle Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi,10(20), 304-313.
  12. Lee, J. & Stankov, L. (2013). Higher-Order Structure of Noncognitive Constructs and Prediction of PISA 2003 Mathematics Achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 26, 119-130.
  13. Ma, X. & Xu, J. (2004). The Causal Ordering of Mathematics Anxiety and Mathematics Achievement: A Longitudinal Panel Analysis. Jour