KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Sınırsız Eğitim ve Araştırma Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2

Öğrenci Aktörlüğü Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi

Development of the Student Agency Scale

Rahime Büyükkurt(Erzincan Binali Yıldırım Üniversitesi)0000-0002-0467-2598
Esma Genç(Marmara Üniversitesi)0000-0002-7180-6066
Sayfa
476–522
Yayın Tarihi
2025-07-15
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Elde edilen bulgular ışığında Öğrenci Aktörlüğü ölçeğinin 28 madde ve beş boyuttan oluşan yapısı doğrulanmıştır.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Son yıllarda yükseköğretim kurumlarının nitelikli bireyler yetiştirmesi yönündeki beklentiler artmaktadır.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Araştırmada ilgili kuramsal yapı doğrultusunda 69 adet aday madde oluşturulmuş ve uzman görüşleri sonrasında kalan 59 madde ile deneme uygulaması gerçekleştirilmiştir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Elde edilen bulgular ışığında Öğrenci Aktörlüğü ölçeğinin 28 madde ve beş boyuttan oluşan yapısı doğrulanmıştır.
🔬Tür:Deneysel Tarla Denemesi
📍Kapsam:69 adet
⚙️Değişkenler:Öğrenci Aktörlüğü · Öz-düzenleme · Öz-yeterlilik

Özet

Son yıllarda yükseköğretim kurumlarının nitelikli bireyler yetiştirmesi yönündeki beklentiler artmaktadır. Bu noktada öğrencilerin sahip olması gereken niteliklerden biri olarak öğrenci aktörlüğünün önem kazandığı görülmektedir. Bu çalışmada, belirtilen önemden yola çıkarak yükseköğretim düzeyinde okumakta olan öğrencilere yönelik öğrenci aktörlüğü ölçeği geliştirmek amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmada ilgili kuramsal yapı doğrultusunda 69 adet aday madde oluşturulmuş ve uzman görüşleri sonrasında kalan 59 madde ile deneme uygulaması gerçekleştirilmiştir. Analizler bir devlet üniversitesinde farklı bölümlerde öğrenim görmekte öğrenciler üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada 597 katılımcı ile açımlayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) gerçekleştirilmiştir. AFA sonucuna göre ölçeğin 29 madde ve beş faktörlü bir yapıdan oluştuğu belirlenmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) 297 katılımcı ile gerçekleştirilmiştir, bu kapsamda ölçeğin beş faktörlü yapısı doğrulanmış, binişiklik gösteren iki maddeden biri çıkarılarak 28 madde ve beş boyuttan oluşan nihai forma ulaşılmıştır. Ölçüt geçerliği kapsamında Öğrenci Aktörlüğü Ölçeği ile ilişkili olduğu düşünülen iki ölçek ile arasında pozitif yönde orta ve yüksek düzeyde ilişki bulunmuştur. İç tutarlılık güvenirliğini belirlemek amacıyla McDonald Omega ve Cronbach alfa katsayıları AFA sonrası .96 ve DFA sonrası .95 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Çalışmada 73 kişilik bir öğrenci grubu üzerinde test tekrar test güvenirliği de incelenmiş ve iki uygulamaya ait puanlar arasındaki ilişkinin .80 olduğu belirlenmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular ışığında Öğrenci Aktörlüğü ölçeğinin 28 madde ve beş boyuttan oluşan yapısı doğrulanmıştır.

Abstract

In recent years, expectations for higher education institutions to cultivate qualified individuals have increased. In this context, student agency has gained importance as one of the key qualities that students are expected to possess. Based on this significance, the present study aimed to develop a Student Agency Scale (SAS) for undergraduate students enrolled in higher education. In line with the relevant theoretical framework, 69 candidate items were initially created, and following expert review, analyses were conducted with the remaining 59 items. The analyses were carried out with undergraduate students studying at a public university. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted with 597 participants. The results indicated that the scale consists of 29 items and has a five-factor structure. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted with a different sample of 297 participants, and the five-factor structure was confirmed. After removing two items that exhibited multicollinearity, the final form of the scale was composed of 28 items across five dimensions. For criterion validity, the relationship between SAS and two theoretically related scales was examined, and a moderate to high positive correlation was found. The internal consistency reliability coefficients, calculated using McDonald’s omega and Cronbach’s alpha were found to be.96 after EFA and .95 after CFA. Test-retest reliability analyses were conducted with a group of 73 students. It is observed that the correlation between the scores obtained from the two administrations is .80. It was determined that SAS, which includes 28 items and five dimensions, is valid and reliable.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Büyükkurt, R., Genç, E. (2025). Öğrenci Aktörlüğü Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi. Sınırsız Eğitim ve Araştırma Dergisi, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2, 476–522. https://doi.org/10.29250/sead.1709932

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (72)

  1. Alkan, M. F., & Arslan, M. (2019). Learner autonomy of pre-service teachers and its associations with academic motivation and self-efficacy. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 75-96. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2019.16.2.3
  2. Acar Güvendir, M., & Özer Özkan, Y. (2015). Türkiye’deki eğitim alanında yayımlanan bilimsel dergilerde ölçek geliştirme ve uyarlama konulu makalelerin incelenmesi. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(52), 23–33. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.54872
  3. Arzhangi, B., & Michaeli Manee, F. (2024). The mediating role of academic possible selves in the relationship of self-regulated learning with metacognition and sense of agency. The Journal of New Thoughts on Education, 20(3), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.22051/jontoe.2022.41109.3627
  4. American Institutes for Research. (2018). Maximizing student agency: Implementing and measuring student-centered learning practices [Final report]. Student Centered Learning Research Collaborative. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED592084.pdf
  5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986(23-28), 2.
  6. Bandura, A. (1990). Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of personal agency. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 2(2), 128-163. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413209008406426
  7. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3
  8. Bandura, A., & Wessels, S. (1997). Self-efficacy. Cambridge University Press.
  9. Bandura, A. (1998). Personal and collective efficacy in human adaptation and change. In J. G. Adair, D. Bélanger, & K. L. Dion (Eds.), Advances in psychological science: Vol. 1. Personal, social and cultural aspects (pp. 51–71). Psychology Press.
  10. Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1745-6916.2006.00011.X
  11. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
  12. Bandura, A. (2018). Toward a psychology of human agency: Pathways and reflections. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 130-136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617699280
  13. Brandt, W.C. (2024). Measuring student success skills: A review of the literature on student agency. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment. https://www.nciea.org/library/measuring-student-success-skills-review-literature-student-agency
  14. Biesta, G., & Tedder, M. (2007). Agency and learning in the lifecourse: Towards an ecological perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 39, 132–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/02660830.2007.11661545
  15. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 32(32), 470-483. https://doi.org/10.14527/517
  16. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (7. baskı). Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  17. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Akgün, Ö. E., Demirel, F., Karadeniz, Ş., & Çakmak, E. K. (2015). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  18. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2021). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum (28. baskı). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
  19. Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). Guilford Publications.
  20. Can, A. (2018). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi. Pegem Akademi.
  21. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2021). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik spss ve lisrel uygulamaları (6. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
  22. Department of Education and Training Victoria. (2018). Amplify: Empowering students through voice, agency and leadership. State of Victoria (Department of Education and Training).https://www.education.vic.gov.au/Documents/school/teachers/teachingresources/practice/Amplify.pdf
  23. DeVellis, R.F. and Thorpe, C.T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). SAGE.
  24. Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency. American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 962–1023. https://doi.org/10.1086/231294
  25. Erkuş, A. (2007). Ölçek geliştirme ve uyarlama çalışmalarında karşılaşılan sorunlar. Türk Psikoloji Bülteni, 13(40), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.54872
  26. Erkuş, A. (2019). Psikolojide ölçme ve ölçek geliştirme-I: Temel kavramlar ve işlemler. Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
  27. Eteläpelto, A., K. Vähäsantanen, P. Hökkä, & S. Paloniemi. (2013). What is agency? conceptualizing professional agency at work. Educational Research Review, 10, 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.05.001
  28. Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N., & Hyun, H. (1993). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
  29. Gao, S., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Johnston, R. A. (2008). Nonnormality of data in structural equation models. Transportation Research Record, 2082(1), 116-124. https://doi.org/10.3141/2082-14
  30. Hacker-Wright, J. (2023). Practical wisdom, extended rationality, and human agency. Philosophies, 8(2), 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies8020039
  31. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
  32. Heilala, V., Jääskelä, P., Saarela, M., Kuula, A. S., Eskola, A., & Kärkkäinen, T. (2022). Sitting at the stern and holding the rudder: Teachers’ reflections on action in higher education based on student agency analytics. In L. Chechurin (Ed.), Digital teaching and learning in higher education (pp. 71–91). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-00801-6_4
  33. Henson, R. K., & Roberts, J. K. (2006). Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(3), 393-416. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282485
  34. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  35. Inouye, K., Lee, S., & Oldac, Y. I. (2023). A systematic review of student agency in international higher education. Higher Education, 86, 891–911. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00952-3
  36. Jääskelä, P., Poikkeus, A.-M., Vasalampi, K., Valleala, U. M., & Rasku-Puttonen, H. (2017). Assessing agency of university students: Validation of the AUS Scale. Studies in Higher Education, 42(11), 2061-2079. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1130693
  37. Jääskelä, P., Poikkeus, A.-M., Häkkinen, P., Vasalampi, K., Rasku-Puttonen, H., & Tolvanen, A. (2020). Students’ agency profiles in relation to student-perceived teaching practices in university courses. International Journal of Educational Research, 101, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101604
  38. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575
  39. Klemenčič, M. (2015). What is student agency? An ontological exploration in the context of research on student engagement. M. Klemenčič, S. Bergan & R. Primožič, R. (Ed.), Student engagement in Europe Society: Higher education and student governance (pp. 11-29). Council of Europe Higher Education Publishing.
  40. Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
  41. Lundin, R. (1999). Flexible teaching and learning: Perspectives and practices. Proceedings of the Tools for Flexible Learning Workshop. 17 December 1999, Sidney. https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/index.php/IISME/article/view/6655
  42. Luo, H., Yang, T., Xue, J., & Zuo, M. (2019). Impact of student agency on learning performance and learning experience in a flipped classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 819–831. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12604
  43. Mameli, C., Grazia, V., & Molinari, L. (2021). The emotional faces of student agency. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 77, 101352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2021.101352
  44. Manna, R., & Nath, R. (2021). The problem of moral agency in artificial intelligence. 2021 IEEE Conference on Norbert Wiener in the 21st Century (21CW) (pp. 1–4),Chennai, India.
  45. Moses, L., Rylak, D., Reader, T., Hertz, C., & Ogden, M. (2020). Educators’ perspectives on supporting student agency. Theory Into Practice, 59(2), 213–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2019.1705106
  46. Netemeyer, R. G. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. Sage Publications.
  47. Nunnally, J. (1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.
  48. OECD. (2018). Education 2030: The future of education and skills. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf
  49. OECD. (2019). OECD future of education and skills 2030: OECD learning compass 2030. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/
  50. O'Hara, R. M., & Benson, L., & Ogle, J. H., & Bolding, C. W. (2021, July), Relationship between goal orientation, agency, and motivation in undergraduate civil engineering students 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual Conference. 10.18260/1-2--37655
  51. Rasulova, M., & Ottoson, K. (2022). The impact of learner agency and self-regulated learning in EFL classes. International Journal of Social Science and Human Research, 712, 712-717. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v5-i2-44?
  52. Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002
  53. Rutenberg, I., Ainscough, L., & Colthorpe, K. (2019, October 2–4). Measuring academic agency in university students. In Proceedings of the Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education, Sydney.
  54. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of psychological research online, 8(2), 23-74.
  55. Seçer, İ. (2015). SPSS ve LISREL ile pratik veri analizi. Anı Yayıncılık.
  56. Seçer, İ. (2018). Psikolojik test geliştirme ve uyarlama süreci: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. Anı yayıncılık.
  57. Sokol, B. W., Hammond, S. I., Kuebli, J., & Sweetman, L. (2015). The development of agency. In W. F. Overton, P. C. M. Molenaar, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Theory and method (7th ed., pp. 284–322). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy108
  58. Stenalt, M. H., & Lassesen, B. (2021). Does student agency benefit student learning? A systematic review of higher education research. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(5), 653–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1967874
  59. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
  60. Torres Castro, U. E., & Pineda-Báez, C. (2023). How has the conceptualisation of student agency in higher education evolved? Mapping the literature from 2000–2022. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 47(9), 1182–1195. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2023.2231358
  61. Trede, F., Macklin, R., & Bridges, D. (2012). Professional identity development: A review of the higher education literature. Studies in Higher Education, 37(3), 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.521237
  62. Tüzen, M. A. (2023). Aristoteles’in ahlak anlayışında pratik aklın rolü. Erzurum Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17, 118-127. https://doi.org/10.29157/etusbed.1312414
  63. Uçar, H. (2018). Uzaktan eğitimde öğrenenlerin eylem yeterliklerine ilişkin bir ölçek geliştirme çalışması (Rapor No: 2016-02.BŞEÜ.13-01). Bilecik Şeyh Edebali Üniversitesi. http://acikkaynak.bilecik.edu.tr:8080/xmlui/handle/11552/1038
  64. Vaughn, M. (2018). Making sense of student agency in the early grades. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(7), 62–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721718767864
  65. Vaughn, M. (2020). What is student agency and why is it needed now more than ever? Theory Into Practice, 59(2), 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2019.1702393
  66. Vaughn, M., Jang, B. G., Sotirovska, V., & Cooper-Novack, G. (2020). Student agency in literacy: A systematic review of the literature. Reading Psychology, 41(7), 712–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2020.1783142
  67. Vaughn, M., Premo, J., Erickson, D., & McManus, C. (2020). Student Agency in Literacy: Validation of the Student Agency Profile (StAP). Reading Psychology, 41(6), 533–558. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2020.1783147
  68. Walls, T. A., & Little, T. D. (2005). Relations among personal agency, motivation, and school adjustment in early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.1.23
  69. Weir, C. J. (2005). Language testing and validation. Palgrave Macmillan.
  70. Will, L. (2022). Agency, responsibility, and the self: A critical analysis of the ability to choose otherwise through the lens of Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Sartre [Unpublished master thesis]. McMaster University. http://hdl.handle.net/11375/27898
  71. Zhang, J. (2013). Learner agency, motive, and self-regulated learning in an online ESL writing class. Journal of Language Learning Technologies, 43(2), 57–81. https://doi.org/10.17161/iallt.v43i2.8526
  72. Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663–676. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163261