Journals / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2021 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 4

The Study of Developing and Validating the Union Bias Scale

Pages
888–913
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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, the structure of the Union Bias Scale was concluded to be valid and reliable.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Observation of different levels and types of organizational problems, such as school principals and teachers suing each other and conflicts between teachers, caused by union bias in schools in Turkey today, is the starting point of this study.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Participants of the study included teachers being a union member and working at a primary, middle or high school in the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 academic years in Düzce, Turkey.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, the structure of the Union Bias Scale was concluded to be valid and reliable.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2017-2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Union bias · Ingroup bias · Ingroup favoritism

Abstract

Observation of different levels and types of organizational problems, such as school principals and teachers suing each other and conflicts between teachers, caused by union bias in schools in Turkey today, is the starting point of this study. This study, therefore, aimed to develop and validate a scale that helps determine union bias in schools. Participants of the study included teachers being a union member and working at a primary, middle or high school in the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 academic years in Düzce, Turkey. During the data analysis, firstly, the first data set was examined in terms of the assumptions of the factor analysis and then Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was applied. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed on the second data set. Convergent validity of the scale was examined with item load values, mean-variance, and composite reliability coefficients. Discriminant validity was examined by the Fornell-Lacker criteria. Also, measurement invariance in gender groups was examined. The Cronbach Alpha and combined reliability coefficients were calculated to determine the scale's reliability. The Union Bias scale consists of 27 items and six dimensions. The explained total variance was 64%. As a result of the first and second order confirmatory factor analyses, it was revealed that the six-dimensional structure predicted Union Bias and the scale’s structure did not differ in gender groups. The Cronbach's alpha value was .90 and the composite reliability was .96. As a result, the structure of the Union Bias Scale was concluded to be valid and reliable.

Özet

Observation of different levels and types of organizational problems, such as school principals and teachers suing each other and conflicts between teachers, caused by union bias in schools in Turkey today, is the starting point of this study. This study, therefore, aimed to develop and validate a scale that helps determine union bias in schools. Participants of the study included teachers being a union member and working at a primary, middle or high school in the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 academic years in Düzce, Turkey. During the data analysis, firstly, the first data set was examined in terms of the assumptions of the factor analysis and then Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was applied. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed on the second data set. Convergent validity of the scale was examined with item load values, mean-variance, and composite reliability coefficients. Discriminant validity was examined by the Fornell-Lacker criteria. Also, measurement invariance in gender groups was examined. The Cronbach Alpha and combined reliability coefficients were calculated to determine the scale's reliability. The Union Bias scale consists of 27 items and six dimensions. The explained total variance was 64%. As a result of the first and second order confirmatory factor analyses, it was revealed that the six-dimensional structure predicted Union Bias and the scale’s structure did not differ in gender groups. The Cronbach's alpha value was .90 and the composite reliability was .96. As a result, the structure of the Union Bias Scale was concluded to be valid and reliable.

🔖

Cite This Article

KAZAK, E. (2022). The Study of Developing and Validating the Union Bias Scale. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 4, 888–913. https://ajindex.com/articles/540075

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Akyürek, S. (2016). Türkiye’de iç grup yanlılığının toplumsal adalete ve güvenliğe etkisi [The effect of ingroup bias on social justice and security in Turkey]. The Journal of Europe-Middle East Social Science Studies, 2(2), 161 179. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/174247
  2. Allport, G. W. (1954).
  3. The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Alpar, R. (2011). Çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemler [Multivariate statistical methods]. Detay Yayıncılık. Arslan, C. (2015). Öğretmenlerin sendikal örgütlenmeye ilişkin tutumları ve sendikal örgütlenme nedenleri [Teachers' attitudes towards teachers unions and the reasons of their unionization]. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Cumhuriyet University. Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2014). Multiple-Group Factor Analysis Alignment. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(4), 495-508.
  4. Bağcı, A. (2009). Application of total quality management in teacher unions from the perspectives of union members [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Middle East Technical University. Bayar, L. S. (2015). The effect of belonging to a labour union on work values and work behaviours. [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. Dokuz Eylül University. Baydar, F. (2016). Analysis of teachers' opinions on the role of unions for constitution of educational policy. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Marmara University. Baysal, Ö., & Yücel, C. (2010). Elementary school teachers’ attitudes toward unions: sample of Uşak Province. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 16(3), 329-352. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/108220
  5. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588 606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
  6. Berkant, H. G., & Gül, M. (2017). Union member teachers’ perceptions and expectationstowards unions. Journal of the Human and Social Sciences Researches, 6(1), 419-442.
  7. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Guilford Press.
  8. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Factor analysis: basic concepts and using to development scale. Educational Administration in Theory & Practice, 8(4), 470 483. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/108451
  9. Büyüköztürk, S., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, O. E., Karadeniz, S., & Demirel, F. (2011). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods]. 8. Baskı,
  10. Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
  11. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2006). Sosyal bili