SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası İnsan Çalışmaları Dergisi / 2024 / Cilt: 7 Sayı: 14

Motivation Scale for Reading Skill: A Case Study of Closed Prison Facility

Okuma Motivasyonu Ölçeği: Bir Kapalı Ceza İnfaz Kurumu Örneği

Kılıç Köçeri(AĞRI İBRAHİM ÇEÇEN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1687-3001
Peri (parisa) Aslan(AĞRI İBRAHİM ÇEÇEN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-2982-9085
Pages
97–121
Publication Date
2024-12-31
🏛️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)

The two-stage investigation concluded that the PRMS is well-suited for identifying the factors influencing inmates’ reading motivations and can serve as a dependable measurement tool.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Reading serves as a crucial skill for incarcerated individuals and ex-convicts to enhance personal growth, exhibit good behavior, and reintegrate into society.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this context, a preliminary scale comprising 20 items was formulated by consulting with academics, and psychologists, and utilizing information from literature reviews.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The two-stage investigation concluded that the PRMS is well-suited for identifying the factors influencing inmates’ reading motivations and can serve as a dependable measurement tool.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:okuma · motivasyon · ölçek

Abstract

Reading serves as a crucial skill for incarcerated individuals and ex-convicts to enhance personal growth, exhibit good behavior, and reintegrate into society. This study aims to gather data on the validity and reliability of the Prisoners’ Reading Motivation Scale (PRMS) as an effective tool for assessing the factors that impact the reading motivation of inmates and convicts. In this context, a preliminary scale comprising 20 items was formulated by consulting with academics, and psychologists, and utilizing information from literature reviews. A total of 224 participants, with 70 in the pilot phase and 154 in the primary scale application, took part in the research. The initial phase of scale development involved Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), which identified the scale’s composition of 14 items across 4 factors. Subsequently, through an expanded sample size, a second CFA was conducted to determine reliability coefficients. The second CFA indicated the scale’s ability to measure variances effectively, with acceptable Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients. The two-stage investigation concluded that the PRMS is well-suited for identifying the factors influencing inmates’ reading motivations and can serve as a dependable measurement tool.

Özet

Okuma, hükümlü ve tutuklular için kişisel gelişimi artırmak, iyi davranışlar sergilemek ve topluma yedeni entegre olmak için önemli bir beceridir. Bu çalışma, hükümlü ve tutukluların okuma motivasyonunu etkileyen faktörleri değerlendirmek için Mahkumların Okuma Motivasyonu Ölçeği’nin (MOMÖ) geçerliliği ve güvenirliği hakkında veri toplamayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu bağlamda, akademisyenler ve psikologlara danışılarak ve literatür taramasıyla elde edilen bilgiler kullanılarak 20 maddeden oluşan bir ön ölçek geliştirilmiştir. Araştırmaya toplamda 224 katılımcı, 70’I pilot aşamada 154’ü ana ölçek uygulamasında olmak üzere katılmıştır. Ölçeği geliştirme sürecinin ilk aşamasında, ölçeğin 14 maddeden ve 4 faktörden oluştuğunu belirleyen Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) yapılmıştır. Daha sonar, örneklem büyütülerek güvenirlik katsayılarını belirlemek için ikinci bir DFA gerçekleştirilmiştir. İkinci DFA, ölçeğin etkili bir şekilde varyansları ölçebildiğini ve Kabul edilebilir Cronbach’s Alpha katsayılarına sahip olduğunu göstermiştir. İki aşamalı araştırma, MOMÖ’nün hükümlülerin okuma motivasyonunu etkileyen faktörleri belirlemede uygun olduğunu ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olarak kullanılabileceğini ortaya koymuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Köçeri, K., Aslan, P. (. (2024). Motivation Scale for Reading Skill: A Case Study of Closed Prison Facility. Uluslararası İnsan Çalışmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 14, 97–121. https://doi.org/10.35235/uicd.1504863

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (91)

  1. Abeele, V. V., & Gerling, K. (2020). Development and validation of the player experience inventory: A scale to measure player experiences at the level of functional and psychosocial consequences. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 135, 102370.
  2. Akbaralievna, M. D. (2021). The Role of Reading in Personal Development. European Journal of Innovation in Nonformal Education, 1(2), 138-141.
  3. Alexander, P. A., & Dochy, F. J. (1995). Conceptions of knowledge and beliefs: A comparison across varying cultural and educational communities. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 413-442.
  4. Alharbi, F. S. (2022). Validation of the factor structure and psychometric characteristics of the Arabic adaptation of the sense of coherence SOC-13 scale: a confirmatory factor analysis. BMC psychology, 10(1), 115.
  5. Alvermann, D. E., & Montero, M. K. (2003). Literacy and Reading. Encyclopedia of education, 4, 1513-1518.
  6. Au, J. M. (2001). The effect of print access on reading frequency. Reading Psychology, 22(3), 225-248.
  7. Backhaus, K. E., & Weiber, T. (2021). Multivariate analysis. Springer Books.
  8. Bahtiyar, A., & Bilge, C. A. (2017). Fen Öğretmen Adaylarinin Bilimsel Süreç Becerileri İle Bilimsel Araştirmaya Yönelİk Tutumlarinin İncelenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (42), 47-58.
  9. Becker, M. M., & Kortenbruck, M. (2010). Intrinsic and extrinsic reading motivation as predictors of reading literacy: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 773.
  10. Biederman, I., & Vessel, E. A. (2006). Perceptual pleasure and the brain: A novel theory explains why the brain craves information and seeks it through the senses. American Scientist, 94(3), 247-253.
  11. Carmel, R. R., & Hachmon, M. (2023). Exploring predictors for new kindergarten teachers’(NKTs’) integration in the workplace. Early Childhood Education Journal, 51(1), 31-42.
  12. Chen, S. Y., & Jiang, S. H. (2013). The Correlation between Educational Levels of Inmates and Their Behavior Management Abilities. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57(4), 460-478.
  13. Cliff, N. (1988). The eigenvalues-greater-than-one rule and the reliability of components. Psychological bulletin, 103(2), 276.
  14. Cox, S. R., & Khayum, M. (2003). Do reading skills courses help underprepared readers achieve academic success in college? Journal of College Reading and Learning, 33(2), 170-196.
  15. Crewe, B. (2013). Writing and reading a prison: Making use of prisoner life stories: Ben Crewe considers the value of prisoner life stories as part of an ethnographic approach. Criminal Justice Matters, 91(1), 20-20.
  16. Çokluk, Ö. Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları (Vol. 2). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  17. de Benedictis, F. M., & Bush, A. (2020). Complicated pneumonia in children. The Lancet, 396(10253), 786-798.
  18. Deng, X., & Sun, C. (2019). Enterprise Innovation, Industrial Upgrading and the Role Mechanism of Government-Led Fund. Journal of Shanxi University of Finance and Economics, 41, 54-67.
  19. DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications. Sage publication.
  20. Dochy, F. D., & Dyck, W. (2002). Cognitive prerequisites and learning: How far have we progressed since Bloom? Implications for educational practice and teaching. Active learning in higher education, 3(3), 265-284.
  21. Dönmezer, S. (1994). Toplumbilim (11. Baskı). İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım.
  22. Eisinga, R. G., & Pelzer, B. (2013). The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown? International journal of public health, 58, 637-642.
  23. Falk, L., & Wilson, K. (2014). Personal Development Programs in Prison: Who Benefits and How? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 58(6), 658-674.
  24. Fokides, E. (2023). The Educational uses of 360o Videos and low-cost HMDs. Reflecting on the Results of Seven Projects. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1-23.
  25. Gambrell, L. B. (1966). Creating classroom cultures that foster reading motivation. Reading Teacher, 50, 14-25.
  26. Gannon-Cook, R. (2010). A case study and meta-literature review. in R. Gannon-Cook, what motivates faculty to teach in distance education? University Press of America.
  27. Ghazali, N. H. (2016). A Reliability and Validity of an Instrument to Evaluate the School-Based Assessment System: A Pilot Study. International journal of evaluation and research in education, 5(2), 148-157.
  28. Guthrie, J. T., & Huang, C. W. (2001). Benefits of opportunity to read and balanced instruction on the NAEP. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(3), 145-162.
  29. Guthrie, J. T., & Klauda, S. L. (2007). Contributions of concept-oriented reading instruction to knowledge about interventions for motivations in reading. Educational Psychologist, 42(4), 237-250.
  30. Guthrie, J. T., & Klauda, S. L. (2014). Effects of classroom practices on reading comprehension, engagement, and motivations for adolescents. Reading Research Quarterly, 49(4), 387-416.
  31. Güriş, S. &. (2014). Bilimsel araştırmalarda SPSS ile istatistik. DER Yayınları.
  32. Hamilton, L. S., & Chang, E. F. (2021). Parallel and distributed encoding of speech across human auditory cortex. Cell, 184(18), 4626-4639.
  33. Huang, J. S., & Cheung, H. (2022). Longitudinal relations among teacher-student closeness, cognitive flexibility, intrinsic reading motivation, and reading achievement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 61, 179-189.
  34. Huang, S. O., & Capps, M. (2016). US and Chilean college students' reading practices: a cross‐cultural perspective. Reading Research Quarterly, 51(4), 455-471.
  35. Ineson, E. M., & Kim, M. (2013). The influence of prior subject knowledge, prior ability and work experience on self-efficacy. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 12(1), 59-69.
  36. Karafazlı, H., & Cem, T. (2020). Türkiye'de Cezaevlerinde Uygulanan Eğitim Politikaları. Eğitim Yönetimi ve Politikaları Dergisi, 1(2), 42-53.
  37. Karasar, N. (2011). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi, (11. baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
  38. Karim, A. B., & Chang, P. H. (2022). Spiritual leadership behaviors in religious workplace: the case of pesantren. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1-29.
  39. Katranc, M. (2015). Book reading motivation scale: Reliability and validity study. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(3), 300-307.
  40. Kelley, M. J., & Decker, E. O. (2009). The current state of motivation to read among middle school students. Reading Psychology, 30(5), 466-485.
  41. Kim, K. J. (2011). Reading motivation in two languages: An examination of EFL college students in Korea. Reading and Writing, 24, 861-881.
  42. Klinger, S. (2008). Low Literacy: Breaking the Family Cycle. Indiana Libraries, 27(2), 36-39.
  43. Köçeri, K. G., & Çelebi, E. (2023). Mahkumların Yazma Motivasyonlaini Etkiliyen Faktörler: Ağrı Kapalı Ceza İnfaz Kurumu Örneği. EKEV Akademi Dergisi, (94), 154-171.
  44. Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575.
  45. Lin, D. W.-C. (2012). Reading motivation and reading comprehension in Chinese and English among bilingual students. Reading and Writing, 25, 717-737.
  46. Liu, F. D., & Qin, X. (2020). Distinct fate, dynamics and niches of renal macrophages of bone marrow or embryonic origin. Nature communications, 11(1), 2280.
  47. MacKenzie, D. (2006). Is economics performative? Option theory and the construction of derivatives markets. Journal of the history of economic thought, 28(1), 29-55.
  48. Merenda, P. F. (1997). A guide to the proper use of factor analysis in the conduct and reporting of research: Pitfalls to avoid. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 30(3), 156-164.
  49. Mohajan, H. K. (2017). Two criteria for good measurements in research: Validity and reliability. Annals of Spiru Haret University. Economic Series, 17(4), 59-82.
  50. Mohseni Takaloo, N., & Ahmadi, M. R. (2017). The effect of learners’ motivation on their reading comprehension skill: A literature review. International journal of research in English education, 2(3), 10-21.
  51. Mollayeva, T. E.-K.-R., & Colantonio, A. (2018). Sex & gender considerations in concussion research. Concussion, 3(1), CNC51.
  52. Mori, S. (2002). The relationship between motivation and the amount of out-of-class reading. Temple University.
  53. Murayama, K. F., & Sakaki, M. (2019). Process account of curiosity and interest: A reward-learning perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 875-895.
  54. O'hear, A. (2012). Education, Society and Human Nature (RLE Edu K). A. O'hear içinde, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. Routledge.
  55. O'hear, A. (2014). The Element of Fire (Routledge Revivals): Science, Art and the Human World. Routledge.
  56. Özdemir, O. (2021). 7242 Saılı Kanun Sonrası Hükümlülerin Açık Ceza İnfaz Kurumlarına Ayrılmaları. Adalet Dergisi, (67), 379-410.
  57. Petty, R. E., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 847–855.
  58. Poggie Jr, J. (1972). Toward quality control in key informant data. Human Organization, 31(1), 23-30.
  59. Rasinski, T., & Lenhart, L. (2008). Explorations of fluent readers. Reading Today, 25(3), 18.
  60. Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. E. (2019). Interest development and learning. S. E. Hidi içinde, The Cambridge handbook of motivation and learning (s. 265-290). Cambridge University Press.
  61. Roberts, J. J. (1973). The Young Lions of Psalm. Biblica, 265-267.
  62. Royanto, L. R. (2012). The effect of an intervention program based on scaffolding to improve metacognitive strategies in reading: A study of year 3 elementary school students in Jakarta. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences, 69, 1601-1609.
  63. Rusche, G., & Kirchheimer, O. (1939). Punishment and social structure. Columbia University Press.
  64. Sabol, B. M., & Haunert, K. (2002). Evaluation of a digital echo sounder system for detection of submerged aquatic vegetation. Estuaries, 25, 133-141.
  65. Schiefele, U., & Schaffner, E. (2016). Factorial and construct validity of a new instrument for the assessment of reading motivation. Reading Research Quarterly, 51(2), 221-237.
  66. Schutte, N. S., & Malouff, J. M. (2004). University student reading preferences in relation to the big five personality dimensions. Reading psychology, 25(4), 273-295.
  67. Schutte, N. S., & Malouff, J. M. (2007). Dimensions of reading motivation: Development of an adult reading motivation scale. Reading psychology, 28(5), 469-489.
  68. Scott, W. A. (1963). Cognitive complexity and cognitive balance. Sociometry, 66-74.
  69. Shrestha, N. (2021). Factor analysis as a tool for survey analysis. American Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, 9(1), 4-11.
  70. Simpson, M. L., & Rush, L. (2003). College students' beliefs, strategy employment, transfer, and academic performance: An examination across three academic disciplines. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 33(2), 146-156.
  71. Stephens, D. E., & Bredemeier, B. J. (1996). Moral atmosphere and judgments about aggression in girls’ soccer: Relationships among moral and motivational variables. ournal of sport and exercise psychology, 18(2), 158-173.
  72. Stipek, D. (2002). Good instruction is motivating. D. Stipek içinde, Development of achievement motivation (s. 309-332). Academic Press.
  73. Streiner, D. L. (1994). Figuring out factors: the use and misuse of factor analysis. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 39(3), 135-140.
  74. Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in science education, 48, 1273-1296.
  75. Takane, Y., & Yanai, H. (2007). Alternative characterizations of the extended Wedderburn–Guttman theorem. Linear algebra and its applications, 422(2-3), 701-711.
  76. Tavakol, M., & Wetzel, A. (2020). Factor Analysis: a means for theory and instrument development in support of construct validity. International journal of medical education, 11, 245.
  77. TEKİN, C. (2023). Türkiye Ceza İnfaz Kurumlarında Eğitim ve İyileşrirme (Faaliyetler ve Yasal Dayanakları). Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 22(87), 1200-1223.
  78. Tobias, S., & Carlson, J. E. (1969). Brief report: Bartlett's test of sphericity and chance findings in factor analysis. Multivariate behavioral research, 4(3), 375-377.
  79. Vega, E. O., & Gilster, M. E. (2009). Inmate Perceptions of Correctional Education Programs. Journal of Correctional Education, 60(3), 233-247.
  80. Walberg, H. J., & Tsai, S. L. (1984). Reading achievement and diminishing returns to time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(3), 442.
  81. Wang, J. H., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Modeling the Effects of Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, Amount of Reading, and Past Reading Achievement on Text Comprehension between U.S. and Chinese Students. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2), 162-186.
  82. Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student Motivation in Middle School: The Role of Perceived Pedagogical Care. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411-419.
  83. Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411.
  84. Wigfield, A. (1997). Reading motivation: A domain-specific approach to motivation. Educational psychologist, 32(2), 59-68.
  85. Wigfield, A. G., & Turci, L. (2016). Beyond cognition: Reading motivation and reading comprehension. Child development perspectives, 10(3), 190-195.
  86. Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children's motivation for reading to the amount and breadth or their reading. Journal of educational psychology, 89(3), 420.
  87. Yu, Y. G.-L., & Flury, M. (2021). Are micro and nanoplastics from soil-biodegradable plastic mulches an environmental concern? Journal of Hazardous Materials Advances, 4, 100024.
  88. Yurdakal, İ. H., & Kırmızı, F. S. (2019). Okumaya Yönelik Tutum Ölçeği Güvenirlik ve Geçerlik Çalışması1 Reading Attitude Scale: Validity and Reliability Study. Elementary Education Online, 18(2), 714-733.
  89. Zhao, H. Z., & Wang, Z. (2023). The Effect of Growth Mindset on Adolescents’ Meaning in Life: The Roles of Self-Efficacy and Gratitude. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 4647-4664.
  90. Zhou, J. L., & Armaghani, D. J. (2023). Chart-Based Granular Slope Stability Assessment Using the Modified Mohr–Coulomb Criterion. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 48(4), 5549-5569.
  91. Zijlmans, E. A., & Sijtsma, K. (2018). Item-score reliability in empirical-data sets and its relationship with other item indices. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 78(6), 998-1020.