Author :
Abstract
Bu çalışmada, lise öğrencilerinin okullarının fiziki özelliklerini algılama düzeylerini ortaya çıkarmaya yönelik geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı geliştirmek amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla geliştirilerek hazınlanan madde form uzmanlara gönderilmiş, incelemeleri talep edilmiştir. Uzmanlardan gelen dönütler doğrultusunda formda gerekli düzenlemeler yapılmıştır. Oluşturulan 27 maddelik deneme formu 560 lise öğrencisine uygulanmıştır. Uygulama sonunda elde edilen veriler analiz edilmiştir. Açımlayıcı Faktör Analiziyle (AFA) “fiziksel ihtiyaçlar”, “güvenlik ihtiyaçları” ve “psikolojik ihtiyaçlar” olmak üzere üç boyutlu ve toplam 22 maddeden oluşan bir yapıya ulaşılmıştır. Analizlerde ölçeğin alt boyutları arasındaki ilişkiye bakılmıştır. Analizler sonucunda faktörlerin birbiriyle anlamlı ve olumlu bir ilişki sergilediği görülmüştür. Alt boyutların, ihtiyaçlar hiyerarşisi olarak adlandırılan temel bir yapının bileşenleri olduğu ve bunların birlikte bir üst yapıyı oluşturduğu Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) sonuçlarıyla anlaşılmıştır. Modelin uyum iyiliği indeksleri kabul edilebilir düzeydedir. Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) sonuçları da Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) sonuçlarını doğrulamıştır. Ölçeğin tümü için elde edilen iç tutarlılık katsayısı .933 olarak belirlenmiştir. Ölçeğin “Fiziksel alt boyutu” Cronbach’s Alpha güvenirlik katsayısı .945, “Güvenlik alt boyutu” Cronbach’s Alpha güvenirlik katsayısı .642 ve “Psikolojik alt boyutu” Cronbach’s Alpha güvenirlik katsayısı .756 olarak bulunmuştur. Ulaşılan bulgulara göre ölçeğin faktörlerinin iç tutarlılık katsayılarının yeterli düzeyde olduğu görülmüş ve bütününün iç tutarlılık katsayısının yüksek olmasına bağlı olarak, lise öğrencilerinin okullarına yönelik fiziki özellikleri algılama düzeyleri üzerinde tutarlı ölçümler yapabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçek oluşturulmuştur.
Keywords
Abstract
In this study, it is aimed to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool to reveal the level of perception of high school students on their schools’physical characteristics. The experimental form developed for this purpose was sent to the experts and their investigations were requested. Necessary arrangements were made in the form in accordance with the feedback from the experts. The 27-item trial form was applied to 560 high school students. Data obtained at the end of the application were analyzed. With exploratory Factor Analysis (AFA), a three dimensional structure consisting of of 22 items with the dimensions of “physical needs”, “security needs” and “psychological needs” was formed. In the analyzes, the relationship between the sub-dimensions of the scale was examined. As a result of the analyzes, it was seen that the factors showed a significant and positive relationship with each other. It was concluded, with the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) results that the sub-dimensions were the components of a basic structure called the hierarchy of needs and they constituted a superstructure together. The model's internal consistency indexes are acceptable enough. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) results also confirmed the results of Exploratory Factor Analysis (AFA). The internal consistency coefficient obtained for the whole scale was determined as .933. Cronbach's Alpha reliability coefficients were found to be .945 for the sub-dimension of physical needs, .642 for the sub-dimension of security needs and .756 for the sub-dimension of psychological needs. According to the findings, the internal consistency coefficients of the factors were found to be sufficient and due to the high internal consistency coefficient of the whole, a valid and reliable scale was established to make consistent measurements on the level of perception of high school students on their schools’physical characteristics.
Keywords
- Asvadi, M. (2001). Group Therapeutic Effectiveness on Increased Achievement Motive in Girl
- Asvadi, M. (2001). Group Therapeutic Effectiveness on Increased Achievement Motive in GirlStudents, Master's Thesis, Allame Tabatabaei University Social and Educational Sciences, Tehran.
- Barrett, P., Zihang, Y. (2013). A holistic, multi-level analysis identifying the impact of classroom design on pupils’ learning. Building and Environment 59, 678–689.
- Basch, C. E. (2011). Healthier students are better learners: A missing link in school reforms to close the achievement gap. Journal of School Health, 81 (10), 593-598.
- Basit, A. (2005). Classroom Management Techniques at Secondary Level and Developing aModel for Urban Schools for District Peshawar. Master Thesis, Allama Iqbal Open University Faculty of Education, Islamabad.
- Bayram, N. (2013). Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesine Giriş, Amos Uygulamaları, Bursa: Ezgi Kitabevi.
- Brooks, D. C. (2012). Space and consequences: The impact of different formal learning spaces on instructor and student behavior. Journal of Learning Spaces, 1 (2).
- Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2014). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
- Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Plaut, V. C., and Meltzoff, A. N. (2014). Designing classrooms to maximize student achievement. SAGE, 1 (1), 4-12.
- Chism, N.V.N. (2006). Challenging traditional assumptions and rethinking learning spaces.https://www.educause.edu/research-and-publications/books/learning-spaces/chapter-2-challengi ng-traditional-assumptions-and-rethinking-learning-spaces, Erişim Tarihi: 20.02.2019.
- Cleveland, B., Fisher, K. (2014). The evaluation of physical learning environments: A critical review of the literature. Learning Environments Research, 17 (1), 1-28.
- Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education (6th Edition). London: Routledge.
- Conway, K. (2000). Master classrooms: Classroom design with technology in mind. Resources in Education, 35 (6).
- Culp, B. (2005). Management of the physical environment in the classroom and gymnasium: it's not that different. Teaching Elementary Physical Education, 17 (5), 13–15.
- Darabi, J. (2002). Relationship among Family Climate, Social Bases, Control Place andAchievement Motive in Urban Planning Students, Ph.D. Thesis, Islamic Azad University Science and Research Branch, Tehran.
- Earthman, G. I., Cash, C. S., and Van Berkum, D. (1996). Student achievement and behavior and school building condition. Journal of School Business Management, 8 (3), 26-37.
- Earthman, G. I. (2004). Prioritization of 31 Criteria for School Building Adequacy.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239605533_Prioritization_of_31_criteria_for_school_ building_adequacy, Erişim Tarihi: 29.12.2018.
- Earthman, G. I., and Lemasters, L. K. (2009). Teacher attitudes about classroom conditions. Journal of Educational Administration, 47 (3), 323-335.
- Earthman, G. I., and Lemasters, L. K. (2011). The influence of school building conditions onstudents and teachers: A theory-based research program (1993-2011). The ACEF Journal, 1 (1), 15-36.
- Fisher, K. (2001). Building better outcomes: the impact of school infrastructure on student outcomes and behavior. Schooling Issues Digest.
- Fisher, E. S. (2008). The Effect of the Physical Classroom Environment on Literacy Outcomes:How 3rd Class Teachers Use the Physical Classroom to Implement a Balanced LiteracyCurriculum, Master's Thesis, University Of Missouri The Faculty of the Graduate School, Missouri.
- George, D., Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple study guide and reference, 17.0 update (10th Edition). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
- Griffin, T. (1990). The physical environment of the college classroom and its affects on students. Campus Ecologist, 8 (1).
- Hurst, M. D. (2005). Schools eye future costs. Education Week, 24 (35), 34-39.
- Guardino, C. A., and Fullerton, E. (2010). Changing behaviors by changing the classroom environment. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 42 (6), 8-13.
- Haertel, G. D., Walberg, H. J., and Haertel, E. H. (1981). Socio-psychological environments and learning: A quantitative synthesis. British Educational Research Journal, 7 (1), 27-36.
- Halstead, K. (1974). Statewide Planning in Higher Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED 096914.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 20.01.2019.
- Higgins, S., Hall, E., Wall, K., Woolner, P., and McCaughey, C. (2005). The Impact of SchoolEnvironments: A literature review. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;Jsessionid=195B2B0D479CAAC7057E6BBE1EAA9DB8?doi=10.1.1.231.7213&rep=rep1&type=pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 21.12.2018.
- Ho, R. (2014). Handbook of univariate and multivariate data analysis with IBM SPSS. NewYork: CRC Press.
- Hussain, I., Ahmed, M., Suleman, Q., Ahmad, S., and Khalid, N. (2012). A study to investigatethe availability of educational facilities at secondary school level in district Karak. Language in India, Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow, 12 (10), 234-250.
- Jalil, N., Yunusb, R., Said, N. (2012). Environmental Colour Impact upon Human Behaviour: A Review. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 35, 54-62.
- Kass, R. A., Tinsley, H. E. A. (1979). Factor analysis. Journal of Leisure Research, 11, 120-138.Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd Edition). New York, ABD: The Guilford Press.
- Korir, D. K., Kipkemboi, F. (2014). The Impact of School Environment and Peer Influences onStudents’ Academic Performance. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4 (5), 240-245.
- Lippman, P. C. (2010). Can the physical environment have an impact on the learning environment?. CELE Exchange, 2010 (13), 1-6.
- Lippman, P. C. (2013). Designing Collaborative Spaces for Schools.https://thejournal.com/Articles/2013/02/13/Designing-Collaborative-Spaces-for-Schools.aspx?, Erişim Tarihi: 22.11.2017.
- Lyons, J. B. (2001). Do school facilities really impact a child’s education. https://www.cashnet.org/resource-center/resourcefiles/142.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 21.11.2018.
- MacAulay, D. J. (1990). Classroom environment: A literature review. Educational Psychology, 10 (3), 239-253.
- Margolis, J., Estrella, R., Goode, J., Holme, Jellison J., and Nao, K. (2008). Stuck in the Shallow end: Education, Race, and Computing (1st Edition). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- McClelland, D. C. (1965). Toward a theory of motive acquisition. American Psychologist, 20 (5),Monahan, T. (2002). Flexible space & built pedagogy: Emerging IT embodiments. Inventio, 4 (1), 1-19.
- Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometrkc theory (2nd Edition). New York: McGraw Hll.
- Oni, J. (1992). Resource and Resource Utilization as Correlates of School Academic Performance, Ph.D Thesis, Ibadan University The Institute of Education, Ibadan.
- Özdemir, M. (2016). Öğretim Süreçleri ve Öğrenme Kaynaklarının Kalitesinin Öğrenci Başarısıyla İlişkisinin Belirlenmesi. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15 (58), 738-751.
- Özerem, A., Akkoyunlu, B. (2015). Learning environments designed according to learning stylesand its effects on mathematics achievement. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 61, 61-Rippey, R. (1965). How Different Classroom Environments Affect Learning. The Phi Delta Kappan, 46 (10), 525-527.
- Savage, T. V. (1999). Teaching Self-control through Management and Discipline (2nd Edition). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
- Schermelleh-Engel, K., Mooseburger, H., ve Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structuralequation models: Test of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Method of Psychological Research Methods of Psychological Research, 8 (2), 23-74
- Scott-Webber, L., Strickland, A., Kapitula, L. R. (2013). Built environments impact behaviors:results of an active learning post-occupancy evaluation. Planning for Higher Education, 42 (1),Sogol, S., Holliday, L. (2018). Building Features in Schools That Influence Academic Performance. Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 12, 163-197.
- Stevens, J. (2009). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Stewart, S. C., and Evans, W. H. (1997). Setting the stage for success: Assessing the instructional environment. Preventing School Failure, 41 (2), 53-56.
- Strange, C. C., and Banning, J. H. (2001). Educating by Design: Creating Campus Learning Environments That Work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Stricherz, M. (2000). Bricks and mortarboards. Education Week, 20 (14), 30-32.
- Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşktlkk modellerk: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar. Türk Pskoloj Yazıları, 3 (6), 49-74.
- Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş. Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ankara: Ekinoks Yayınları
- Tabachnick, G. B. ve Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6. Edition). London: Pearson.
- Tavşancıl E. (2002). Tutumların Ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi. Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
- Tavşancıl, E. (2010). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi (4. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
- Taylor, A. (2009). Linking Architecture and Education: Sustainable Design for learning Environments (1st Edition). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
- Wargocki, P., Wyon D. (2007). The Effects of Moderately Raised Classroom Temperatures andClassroom Ventilation Rate on the Performance of Schoolwork by Children (RP-1257). HVAC&R Research, 2007, 13 (2), 193-220.
- Weiss, A. (2007). Creating the ubiquitous classroom: Integrating physical and virtual learning spaces. The International Journal of Learning, 14 (3), 77-84.
- Young, E., Green H. A., Roehrich-Patrick, Joseph, L and Gibson T. (2003). Do K-12 schoolfacilities affect education outcomes?. Nashville, TN: Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
- Zandi, N. (2011). Identification and Comparison of the Effective Inter-organizational Factors onExcellent and Dropped Students' Academic Performance in Hormozgan University, Master's Thesis, Hormozgan University Social and Educational Sciences, Hormozgan.
- Zannin, P. H. T., Marcon, C. R. (2007). Objective and subjective evaluation of the acoustic comfort in classrooms. Applied Ergonomics, 38 (5), 675-680.
