Journals / Adıyaman Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2

The Adaptation of Math and Science Engagement Scales in the Context of Science Course: A Validation and Reliability Study

Pages
122–131
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

Add your abstract here.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, The Math and Science Engagement Scales developed by Wang et al. (2016) was adapted to Turkish in the context of science course and, the validity and reliability studies were conducted.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The original version of the scale consists of 4 dimensions and 33 items.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Add your abstract here.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, The Math and Science Engagement Scales developed by Wang et al. (2016) was adapted to Turkish in the context of science course and, the validity and reliability studies were conducted. The original version of the scale consists of 4 dimensions and 33 items. These dimensions are; cognitive engagement, behavioral engagement, emotional engagement, and social engagement. During the adaptation phase, the items were translated into Turkish by three experts. The Turkish forms were examined and the draft form of the scale was obtained by the researchers. Then, the two experts of the two languages were examined through the language equivalence expert form for word usage and cultural suitability. The participants of the study consisted of 519 students in 6., 7., and 8. grades studied at two secondary schools in a small scale city in the south east of Turkey during the 2019–2020 academic year. The convenience sampling method was used to determine the participants. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was applied to the data obtained after the implementation. The fit index values obtained as a result of CFA (χ2 / df = 1.75; RMSEA = 0.038; SRMR = 0.049; RMR = 0.072; CFI = 0.98; NFI = 0.96) show that the 4-factor structure of the scale is acceptable. As a result of the reliability analysis, the Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of the Turkish form of the scale was 0.90 and the Guttman Split-half coefficient was 0.81. Finally, it can be said that the validity and reliability of the 33-item and 4- dimensional Turkish form of the scale adapted with this study can be used to determine student engagement in science classes. Add your abstract here.

🔖

Cite This Article

Gürbüz, G. T., Fırat, E. A., AYDIN, M. (2022). The Adaptation of Math and Science Engagement Scales in the Context of Science Course: A Validation and Reliability Study. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2, 122–131. https://ajindex.com/articles/428305

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Adeboye, N. O., Fagoyinbo, I. S., & Olatayo, T. O. (2014). Estimation of the effect of multicollinearity on the standard error for regression coefficients. Journal of Mathematics, 10(4), 16-20. https://doi.org/10.9790/5728-10411620
  2. Alin, A. (2010). Multicollinearity. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Computational Statistics, 2(3), 370-374. https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.84
  3. Arbuckle, J. L. (2005). AmosTM 6.0 user’s guide. Amos Development Corporation. Aydın, G., Saka, M., & Guzey, S. (2017). Science, technology, engineering, mathematic (STEM) attitude levels in grades 4th- 8th. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 13(2), 787 – 802. https://doi.org/10.17860/mersinefd.290319
  4. Baron, P., & Corbin, L. (2012). Student engagement: Rhetoric and reality. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(6), 759–772. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.655711
  5. Ceylan, Ö., Ermis, G. & Yıldız, G. (2018, November 2- November 4). Attitudes of special talented students towards science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM) education [Paper Presentation]. International Conference on Gifted and Talented Education, Malatya, Turkey. Czerniak, C. M., & Johnson, C. C. (2007). Interdisciplinary science teaching. In Norman G. Lederman, & Sandra K. Abell (Ed.), Handbook of research on science education (2nd ed., p.537-559).
  6. Routledge. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, S. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları [Multivariate statistics for social sciences: SPSS and LISREL applications] (Vol. 2). Pegem. Damar, A., Durmaz, C., & Önder, İ. (2017). Middle school students’ attitudes towards STEM applications and their opinions about these applications. Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Education, 1(1), 47-65. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jmse/issue/35452/415256
  7. Eryılmaz, A. (2014). Üniversite öğrencileri için derse katılım ölçeklerinin geliştirilmesi (The Development of the Scales of Classroom Engagement for University Students). Usak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(2), 203-214. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/usaksosbil/issue/21638/232562
  8. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. McGraw Hall. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
  9. Gujarati, D. N. (1995). Basic Econom