SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sakarya University Journal of Education / 2021 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1

Effects of COVID-19 on Gifted Students’ Quality of Life (QOL-GSS): Scale Development and Application

Covid-19’un Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Yaşam Kalitesi Üzerine Etkisi (QOL-GSS): Ölçek Geliştirme ve Uygulama

Şefika Şule ERÇETİN
Nihan POTAS
Şuay Nilhan AÇIKALIN
Nilüfer KOÇTÜRK
Sema ABAL
Pages
28–50
Publication Date
2021-04-30
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)

Results overall indicated that COVID-19 affected gifted students’ quality of life slightly in all dimensions and QOL-GSS.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to develop a valid and reliable scale to measure the effects of COVID-19 on gifted students’ quality of life and analyse its effects on their quality of life considering some variables such as gender, age, education level, mother’s education level, father’s education level, monthly income and number of children in the family.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Regarding EFA, the result of the KMO test was .90 and Bartlett test χ2 statistic was 3055.306 (p < .001).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results overall indicated that COVID-19 affected gifted students’ quality of life slightly in all dimensions and QOL-GSS.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:COVID-19 · gifted students · quality of life

Abstract

The aim of this study is to develop a valid and reliable scale to measure the effects of COVID-19 on gifted students’ quality of life and analyse its effects on their quality of life considering some variables such as gender, age, education level, mother’s education level, father’s education level, monthly income and number of children in the family. To this end, a scale was developed and its reliability and validity were measured through a number of measures. The internal consistency was used to evaluate the reliability of the scale whereas its validity was analyzed by a factor analysis. Regarding EFA, the result of the KMO test was .90 and Bartlett test χ2 statistic was 3055.306 (p < .001). Path coefficients of the items varied between .55 and .89 and Cronbach’s Alpha (α=.76) coefficients indicated that the data obtained from the scale (QOL-GSS) was reliable. Results overall indicated that COVID-19 affected gifted students’ quality of life slightly in all dimensions and QOL-GSS. Results also indicated that the effect of COVID-19 on gifted students’ quality of life showed significant differences by gender, education level, mother’s education level, father’s education level, monthly income and number of children in the family.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERÇETİN, Ş. Ş., POTAS, N., AÇIKALIN, Ş. N., KOÇTÜRK, N., ABAL, S. (2021). Effects of COVID-19 on Gifted Students’ Quality of Life (QOL-GSS): Scale Development and Application. Sakarya University Journal of Education, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1, 28–50. https://ajindex.com/articles/239943

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Addington-Hall, J. & Kalra, L. (2001). Who should measure quality of life? British Medical Journal, 322(7299), 1417. Angeles, L. (2010). Children and Life Satisfaction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 11(4), 523-538.
  2. Arı, S. İ. (2015). Önergenlerin özsaygılarının çocuk-anababa ilişkileri açısından incelenmesi. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Selçuk Üniversitesi,
  3. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Konya. Aykaç, M. (2019). Aile yaşam doyumuyla çocuk yaşam kalitesi arasındaki ilişki (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Akdeniz Üniversitesi,
  4. Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Antalya. Aytekin, A., Arslan, N. & Küçükoğlu, S. (2015). Hemşirelerin 3-6 Çocuklarının Yaşam Kalitesi ve Özbakım Becerilerinin İncelenmesi. Cumhuriyet Hemşirelik Dergisi, 3(2), 8-15.
  5. Bekir, H., Şahin, H. ve Aydın, R. (2013). 4-7 Yaş Arası Sağlıklı Çocukların Ebeveyn Görüşlerine Göre Yaşam Kalitelerinin Belirlenmesi. Zeitschrift für die Welt der Türken/Journal of World of Turks, 5(3), 7-19.
  6. Berman, A. H., Liu, B., Ullman, S., Jadbäck, I. & Engström, K. (2016). Children’s quality of life based on the kidscreen-27: child self-report, parent ratings and child-parent agreement in a Swedish random population sample. PloS one, 11(3), 1-15.
  7. Chen, W., Niu, G. F., Zhang, D. J., Fan, C. Y., Tian, Y. & Zhou, Z. K. (2016). Socioeconomic status and life satisfaction in Chinese adolescents: Analysis of self-esteem as a mediator and optimism as a moderator. Personality and Individual Differences, 95, 105-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.01.036
  8. Crede, J., Wirthwein, L., McElvany, N. & Steinmayr, R. (2015). Adolescents’ academic achievement and life satisfaction: the role of parents’ education. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 52. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00052
  9. Cummins, R. A. (2005). Moving from the quality of life concept to a theory. Journal of Intellectual disability research, 49(10), 699-706.
  10. Çeçen Eroğlu, A. R. & Dingiltepe, T. (2012). The Comparison of Adolescents from Single Parent Families and Intact Families in Terms of Life Satisfaction and Quality of Life. Ilkogretim Online, 11(4), 1077-1086.
  11. Çivitci, A. (2009). İlköğretim öğrencilerinde yaşam doyumu: Bazı kişisel ve ailesel özelliklerin rolü. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(1), 29-52.
  12. Demiriz, S. & Ulutaş, İ. (2016). Çocuklar ne kadar mutlu? Bazı değişkenlere göre çocuklarda mutluluğun belirlenmesi. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi.7(1), 16-24.
  13. Dinisman, T. & Ben-Arieh, A. (2016). The charact