Dergiler / Türk Spor ve Egzersiz Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 1

Investigation Of University Students’ Overall Quality Of College Life And Their Satisfaction With This Life Terms Of Their Genders And Departments

Sayfa
154–160
Yayın Tarihi
2020-04-30
DOI
—
🏛️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)

As a result, it can be said that the participating students’ overall life quality and life satisfaction in the campus mean scores are low.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:The current study was conducted to investigate university students’ life quality and life satisfaction in the campus.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The sample consists of 400 students selected from among the population through random sampling.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:As a result, it can be said that the participating students’ overall life quality and life satisfaction in the campus mean scores are low.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:University · Quality of life · Life satisfaction

Abstract

The current study was conducted to investigate university students’ life quality and life satisfaction in the campus. The study was designed in the survey model. The population of the study is comprised of the students attending the Physical Education and Sports School, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences and Faculty of Education in the central campus of Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University. The sample consists of 400 students selected from among the population through random sampling. The data were collected through the questionnaire method. As the questionnaire, “The University Life Quality Scale” adapted to Turkish by (13) was used. From this scale, the overall life quality and overall life satisfaction dimensions were taken. The Cronbach’s Alpha reliability coefficient was calculated to be 0.85 for the overall life quality dimension and 0.83 for the overall life satisfaction dimension. The questionnaire was administered to the students through face-to-face method. A total of 400 students (212 females and 188 males) responded to the questionnaire. In order to analyze the collected data, percentages (%) were calculated and Independent Samples T Test and Kruskal-Wallis Test, Bivariate Correlation were used. In the determination of the differences between the variables, 0.05 was taken as the confidence interval. The obtained findings have revealed that the students’ overall life quality and life satisfaction in the campus mean scores are low, that while their mean scores do not vary significantly by gender, their overall life quality mean scores vary significantly depending on the faculty they attend (p<0,05). As a result, it can be said that the participating students’ overall life quality and life satisfaction in the campus mean scores are low.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

DALAMAN, O., ÖZKURT, R., PEPE, K. (2020). Investigation Of University Students’ Overall Quality Of College Life And Their Satisfaction With This Life Terms Of Their Genders And Departments. Türk Spor ve Egzersiz Dergisi, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 1, 154–160. https://ajindex.com/articles/206156

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (16)

  1. Arslan S, Akkaş OA. Quality of college life (QCL) of students in Turkey: Students’ life satisfaction and identifi cation. Social Indicators Research, 2014; 115, 869-884
  2. Benjamin M. The quality of student life: Toward a coherent conceptualization. Social Indicators Research, 1994; 31, 205-264
  3. Borden VMH. Segmenting student markets with a student satisfaction and priorities survey. Research in Higher Education, 1995; 36(1), 73-88
  4. Bozkurt N. Kaliteli Yaşamın Felsefesi. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Dergisi, 2003; 2–3, 15–24
  5. Bilir N, Özcebe H, Vazioğlu SA, Aslan D, Subaşı N, Telatar TG. “Van İlinde 15 Yaş Üzeri Erkeklerde SF-36 ile Yaşam Kalitesinin Değerlendirilmesi”, Türkiye Klinikleri Journal of Medical Sciences, 2005; 25, 663-668
  6. Bowling A. Measuring Health, a Rewiev of Quality of Life Measurement Scales, Buckingham, Open University Pres, 1997; 1-23
  7. Chow HPH. Life satisfaction among university students in a Canadian prairie city: A multivariate analysis. Social Indicators Research, 2005; 70, 139-150
  8. Diener E. Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 1984; 95(3), 542-575
  9. Diener E, Smith H, Fujita F. The personality structure of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1995; 69, 130-141
  10. Diener E, Oishi S, Lucas RE. Personality, culture, and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evalutions of life. Annual Review of Psychology, 2003; 54, 403-425
  11. Elliott KM Shin D. Student satisfaction: An alternative approach to assessing this important concept. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 2002; 24(2), 197-209
  12. Gilman R, Huebner ES. Review of life satisfaction measures for adolescents. Behaviour Change, 2000; 17(3), 178-195
  13. Kangal Demir A. Üniversite Yaşam Kalitesi Ölçeğinin Türkçe Uyarlaması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması, e-international journal of educational research. 2012; Volume: 3 Issue: 1- Winter 2012, pp. 16-32 14. Kapıkıran NA. Positive and negative affectivity as mediator and moderator of the relationship between optimism and life satisfaction in Turkish university students. Social Indicators Research, 2012; 106, 333-345
  14. Köker S. Normal ve Sorunlu Ergenlerin Yaşam Doyumu Düzeyinin Karşılaştırılması, Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara. 1991
  15. Marans R. Kentsel Yaşam Kalitesinin Ölçülmesi. Çev. H. Dülger Türkoğlu, Mimarlık Dergisi, 2007; 335, 23–35
  16. Martilla RJ, Rinne UK. “Epidemiology of Parkinson’s Disease in