Journals / IOJET / 2019 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 4

VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY OF THE SCALE TO BE USED IN AUDITING TURKISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE TEACHERS

Journal
IOJET
Pages
1018–1035
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)

Resultantly, it is thought that the scalerelated to the criteria of the Turkish Language and Literature Teachers' Audit Criteriadeveloped in this research will resolve a significant deficiency in the literature.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The objective of this study is to develop a scale related to the auditing criteria of Turkishlanguage and literature teachers.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study group consisted of 120 Turkish language andliterature teachers who were working in Northern Cyprus.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Resultantly, it is thought that the scalerelated to the criteria of the Turkish Language and Literature Teachers' Audit Criteriadeveloped in this research will resolve a significant deficiency in the literature.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The objective of this study is to develop a scale related to the auditing criteria of Turkishlanguage and literature teachers. The study group consisted of 120 Turkish language andliterature teachers who were working in Northern Cyprus. Exploratory (EFA) andconfirmatory (CFA) factor analysis were performed to determine the construct validity of thescale. As a result of the EFA, a two-factor structure emerged, namely field knowledgecompetences and proficiency in professions. The variance rate explained by two factors was54.00%. This structure was confirmed by DFA; A 5-point Likert-type scale with 2 factorsand 27 items was developed. The goodness of fit indexes calculated by CFA are as follows:762 / SD = 2.011, GFI = .903, RMSEA = .076, CFI = .901, NFI = .849. An examination ofthe reliability analysis results of the score showed that the Cronbach’s Alpha internalconsistency coefficient of the scale was 0.94. The Spearman-Brown Coefficient and theGuttman Split-Half Coefficient were both found to be 0.79. When the item-total correlationcoefficients were examined, it was determined that the correlation coefficients of the scaleitems with the total ranged between 0.48 and 0.70. Resultantly, it is thought that the scalerelated to the criteria of the Turkish Language and Literature Teachers' Audit Criteriadeveloped in this research will resolve a significant deficiency in the literature.

🔖

Cite This Article

YAĞCI, E., GÜNEYLİ, A. (2022). VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY OF THE SCALE TO BE USED IN AUDITING TURKISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE TEACHERS. IOJET, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 4, 1018–1035. https://ajindex.com/articles/542294

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Ayyıldız, H., Cengiz, E. (2006). Pazarlama modellerinin testinde kullanılabilecek yapısal eşitlik modeli (yem) üzerine kavramsal bir inceleme, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 11(1), 63-84.
  2. Aytaç, M., ve Öngen, B. (2012). Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile yeni çevresel paradigma ölçeğinin yapı geçerliliğinin incelenmesi. İstatistikçiler Dergisi, 5(1), 14-22.
  3. Barth, J. L. ve Demirtaş, A. (1997). İlköğretim sosyal bilgiler öğretimi. Ankara: YÖK/Dünya Bankası Milli Eğitimi Geliştirme Projesi, Öğretmen Eğitimi Dizisi. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (First Edition). NY: Guilford Publications, Inc. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 32(32), 470-483.
  4. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2009). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum (9. Baskı). Ankara:
  5. Pegem A Yayınları.
  6. Cemiloğlu, M.(2003). Türk dili ve edebiyatı öğretimi (1. Baskı). İstanbul:
  7. Alfa. Confrey, J. (1990). What constructivism implies for teaching. In R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, & N. Noddings (Eds.), Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph No. 4: Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 107-122).
  8. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Doğanay, A. (2005). Hayat bilgisi ve sosyal bilgiler öğretimi, sosyal bilgiler öğretimi. Ankara:
  9. Pegem A Yayıncılık. Eacute, J. ve Esteve, M. (2000). The transformation of the teachers’ role at the end of the twentieth century: New challenges for the future. Educational Review, 52(2), 197-209.
  10. Good, T.L. & Grouws, D.A. (1979). The missouri mathematics effectiveness project: An experimental study in fourth-grade classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(3), 355. Gürkan, T. (2001). Bireyin çok yönlü gelişimi. Bilim ve Aklın Aydınlığında Eğitim Dergisi. Sayı 22. Gökalp, S. (2010). İlköğretim müfettişlerinin öğretmen teftişlerindeki denetim görevlerini yerine getirme derecelerine ilişkin ilköğretim okullarında görev yapan öğretmenlerin algılarının incelenmesi (Mersin merkez örneği), Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Mersin Üniversitesi,
  11. Mersin. Karakış, M. (2007). İlköğretimde güncel denetim duruşunun öğretmenlik bilincini uyandırma yeterliliğine ilişkin öğretmen görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Dicle Üniversitesi,
  12. Diyarbakır. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of