Normatif ve Görünürlük Boyutlarıyla Yenilenen Başarı Hedef Yönelim Ölçeğinin Kimya Dersi İçin Türkçe'ye Uyarlanması / The adaptation of the Renewed Achievement Goal Orientation Scale with Normative and Appearance Dimensions into Turkish for Use in a Chemistry Course

Burak Feyzioğlu; Murat Akyıldız; Barış Demirdağ

doi:10.19160/e-ijer.1465371

TR EN

Normatif ve Görünürlük Boyutlarıyla Yenilenen Başarı Hedef Yönelim Ölçeğinin Kimya Dersi İçin Türkçe'ye Uyarlanması / The adaptation of the Renewed Achievement Goal Orientation Scale with Normative and Appearance Dimensions into Turkish for Use in a Chemistry Course

Öz

Son yıllarda başarı hedef teorisinin performans boyutunun tanımlamasında sosyal karşılaştırmaların da dikkate alınmasıyla bu boyutun tanımlanmasına ve ölçülmesine ilişkin belirsizlikler ortadan kalkmıştır. Ancak Türkiye’de kullanılan ölçme araçları, başarı hedef teorisindeki bu boyutları ayırt edemediği için bu konuda yapılan çalışmalar kuramsal sürecin gerisinde kalmıştır. Bu çalışmanın amacı Lüftenegger, Bardach, Bergsmann, Schober ve Spiel (2019) tarafından geliştirilen performans hedef yönelimini hem normatif hem de görünürlük açısından ele alan Başarı Hedef Yönelim Ölçeğini lise öğrencilerinin kimya dersindeki başarı hedef yönelimlerini ölçmek için uyarlamak ve psikometrik özelliklerini incelemektir. Çalışma grubu, farklı devlet okullarında kimya dersine devam eden 1487 lise öğrencisinden oluşmaktadır. Ölçeklerde yer alan alt ölçeklerin yapı geçerliliği doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile test edilmiştir. Güvenilirlik çalışmaları için iç tutarlılık katsayısı Cronbach's alpha (α) değerlerinin yanı sıra McDonald's ω (omega) katsayıları hesaplanmıştır. Ayrıca ölçeklerde yer alan her bir madde için madde-toplam korelasyonları hesaplanmıştır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonuçları incelendiğinde, uyum indekslerinin Başarı Hedefi Yönelim Ölçeği için uyum iyiliği kriterlerini karşıladığı kabul edilmiştir. Ölçekteki maddelerin faktör yükleri istatistiksel olarak anlamlıdır. Ölçeğin faktör yapısı cinsiyet, lise türü ve yaşanılan il değişkenlerine göre değişiklik göstermemektedir. Bu sonuçlar, ölçeğin Türkçe formunun kimya dersi için geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik açısından yeterli psikometrik özelliklere sahip olduğunu göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

The adaptation of the Renewed Achievement Goal Orientation Scale with Normative and Appearance Dimensions into Turkish for Use in a Chemistry Course / Normatif ve Görünürlük Boyutlarıyla Yenilenen Başarı Hedef Yönelim Ölçeğinin Kimya Dersi İçin Türkçe'ye Uyarlanması

Abstract

In recent years, the ambiguities regarding the definition and measurement of this dimension have been eliminated as a result of the incorporation of the achievement goal theory in social comparisons in the definition of the performance dimension. However, since the measurement tools used in our country are unable to distinguish these dimensions in goal theory, studies on this subject have fallen behind the theoretical process. The objective of this study is to adapt the Achievement Goal Orientation Scale, developed by Lüftenegger, Bardach, Bergsmann, Schober, and Spiel (2019), which considers performance goal orientation in terms of both normative and appearance, to measure high school students' achievement goal orientations in chemistry class and to examine its psychometric properties. The study group consists of 1487 high school students attending chemistry courses in different public schools. The construct validity of the subscales in the scales was tested with confirmatory factor analysis. For reliability studies, internal consistency coefficient Cronbach's alpha (α) values as well as McDonald's ω (omega) coefficients were calculated. Additionally, item-total correlations were calculated for each item in the scales. Upon examination of the confirmatory factor analysis results, it was determined that the fit indices met the goodness of fit criteria for the Achievement Goal Scale. The factor loadings of the items in the scale are statistically significant. Furthermore, the factor structure of the scale does not vary according to gender, high school type and city of residence. These results demonstrate that the Turkish form of scale has sufficient psychometric properties in terms of validity and reliability for a chemistry course.

Keywords

Destekleyen Kurum

Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Bilimsel Araştırma Proje Birimince projelendirilerek desteklenmiştir.

Proje Numarası

EĞF-23002

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma AYDIN ADNAN MENDERES ÜNİVERSİTESİ REKTÖRLÜĞÜ Eğitim Araştırmaları Etik Kurulu tarafından onaylanmıştır (23.12.2022 / E-84982664-050.01.04-289133).

Kaynakça

Alivernini, F., Manganelli, S., & Lucidi, F. (2018). Personal and classroom achievement goals: Their structures and relationships. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36(4), 354–365. doi:10.1177/0734282916679758
Akbulut, C. K., & Uzuntiryaki-Kondakçi, E. (2019). Turkish adaptation of the 3 x 2 goal orientation scale. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 8(3), 839-866. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/buefad/article/517750
Akın, A. (2012). Kendini sabotaj ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitim ve Bilim, 37(164). http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/717
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1989-03213-001
Bardach, L., Oczlon, S., Pietschnig, J., & Lüftenegger, M. (2020). Has achievement goal theory been right? A meta-analysis of the relation between goal structures and personal achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(6), 1197. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-60501-001
Bardach, L., Yanagida, T., Klassen, R. M., & Lüftenegger, M. (2022). Normative and appearance performance-approach goal structures: Two-level factor structure and external linkages. The Journal of Experimental Education, 90(1), 130-145. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220973.2020.1729081
Bishop, P. A., & Herron, R. L. (2015). Use and misuse of the Likert item responses and other ordinal measures. International Journal of Exercise Science, 8(3), 297–302. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4833473/
Browne, M.W. & Cudeck, R. (1992) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 230-258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005

Büyüköztürk, S., Akgün, Ö. E., Özkahveci, Ö., & Demirel, F. (2004). The validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 4(2). https://www.asosindex.com.tr/index.jsp?modul=makale-detay&alan=benzer&secenek=magazine&Id=wJGg44oBQzmg-9NMX_se
Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464-504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233-255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
Cho, E., Lee, M., & Toste, J. R. (2018). Does perceived competence serve as a protective mechanism against performance goals for struggling readers? Path analysis of contextual antecedents and reading outcomes. Learning and Individual Differences, 65, 135–147. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2018.05.017
Distefano, C., & Morgan, G. B. (2014). A comparison of diagonal weighted least squares robust estimation techniques for ordinal data. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(3), 425-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.915373
Edwards, O. V. (2014). Differentiating performance approach goals and their unique effects. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(2), 134-145. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2014.020205
Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 72(1), 218.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2×2 achievement goal framework. Journal Of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.3.501
Elliot, A. J., & Murayama, K. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 613. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.613
Elliot, A. J., Murayama, K., & Pekrun, R. (2011). A 3× 2 achievement goal model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(3), 632. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023952
Elmas, C., & Altunoglu, B. D. (2023). The cognitive-affective distinction in achievement goal: The development and validation of the achievement questionnaire for biology learning. Science Education International, 34(3), 177-189. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v34.i3.2
Erduran Tekin, Ö. (2023). Adaptation of motivation for learning in higher education scale (EMAPRE-U) to Turkish, E-International Journal of Educational Research, 14(3), 34-51. https://doi.org/10.19160/e-ijer.1252283
Forero C. G , Maydeu-Olivares A. & Gallardo-Pujol D. (2009) Factor analysis with ordinal indicators: A monte carlo study comparing DWLS and ULS estimation, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16(4), 625-641, https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510903203573
Gadermann, Anne M., Guhn, Martin & Zumbo, Bruno D. (2019) "Estimating ordinal reliability for Likert-type and ordinal item response data: A conceptual, empirical, and practical guide. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation: Vol. 17, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.7275/n560-j767
Guo, M., Hu, X., & Leung, F. K. (2022). Culture, goal orientations, and mathematics achievement among Chinese students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(6), 1225-1245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10202-0
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to under parameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods,3, 424-453. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 3, 424-453. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Hulleman, C. S., Schrager, S. M., Bodmann, S. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). A meta-analytic review of achievement goal measures: Different labels for the same constructs or different constructs with similar labels? Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 422. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018947
Hulleman, C., Rhee Bonney, C., Karabenick, S., Elliot, A., Barron, K., Yperen, V. N., & Harackiewicz, J. (2006). Defining and distinguishing mastery-avoidance goals: Definitions, domains, and assessment. Symposium organized for the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Participants: S. Karabenick (chair), A. Elliot, C. Hulleman, C. Rhee Bonney, K. Barron, N. Van Yperen, JM Harackiewicz (discussant),
Jorgensen, T. D., Kite, B. A., Chen, P.-Y., & Short, S. D. (2018). Permutation randomization methods for testing measurement equivalence and detecting differential item functioning in multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 23(4), 708–728. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000152
Kite B. A., Jorgensen T. & Chen P. (2018) Random permutation testing applied to measurement invariance testing with ordered-categorical indicators. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 25:4, 573-587. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2017.1421467
Koskey, K. L., Karabenick, S. A., Woolley, M. E., Bonney, C. R., & Dever, B. V. (2010). Cognitive validity of students’ self-reports of classroom mastery goal structure: What students are thinking and why it matters. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(4), 254-263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.05.004
Kurt, U., & Tas, Y. (2023). Students engagement in science during COVID-19 pandemic: Role of self-efficacy beliefs and achievement goals. Journal of Science Learning, 6(1), 23-33.
Li, C.-H. (2016). The performance of ML, DWLS, and ULS estimation with robust corrections in structural equation models with ordinal variables. Psychological Methods, 21(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000093
Lüftenegger, M., Bardach, L., Bergsmann, E., Schober, B., & Spiel, C. (2019). A citizen science approach to measuring students’ achievement goals. International Journal of Educational Research, 95, 36-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.03.003
Lüftenegger, M., Tran, U. S., Bardach, L., Schober, B., & Spiel, C. (2017). Measuring a mastery goal structure using the TARGET framework. Zeitschrift für Psychologie. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000277
Meade AW, Johnson EC, Braddy PW. (2008). Power and sensitivity of alternative fit indices in tests of measurement invariance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2008; 93:568–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.568
Miçooğulları, B. O., & Sever, O. (2023). The role of teacher candidates’ achievement goal orientations in determining motivation and learning strategies in the faculty of education. International Journal of Education Technology and Scientific Researches, 8(25), 2918-2948. http://dx.doi.org/10.35826/ijetsar.678
Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., & Middleton, M. (2001). Performance-approach goals: Good for what, for whom, under what circumstances, and at what cost? Journal of educational psychology, 93(1), 77. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.77
Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., Middleton, M., Maehr, M. L., Urdan, T., Anderman, L. H., Anderman, E., & Roeser, R. (1998). The development and validation of scales assessing students' achievement goal orientations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23(2), 113-131. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1998.0965
Midgley, C., Maehr, M. L., Hruda, L. Z., Anderman, E., Anderman, L., Freeman, K. E., & Urdan, T. (2000). Manual for the patterns of adaptive learning scales. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 734-763.
Miller-Rushing, A., Primack, R., & Bonney, R. (2012). The history of public participation in ecological research. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10, 285–290. https://doi.org/10.1890/110278.
Mindrila, D. (2010). Maximum likelihood (ML) and diagonally weighted least squares (DWLS) estimation procedures: A comparison of estimation bias with ordinal and multivariate non-normal data. International Journal of Digital Society, 1(1), 60-66.
Muthén B. O.& Kaplan D. (1992). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables: A note on the size of the model. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45, 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1992.tb00975.x
Nye, C. D., & Drasgow, F. (2011). Assessing goodness of fit: Simple rules of thumb simply do not work. Organizational Research Methods, 14(3), 548-570. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428110368562
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of educational Psychology, 95(4), 667. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Pintrich, P. R., Conley, A. M., & Kempler, T. M. (2003). Current issues in achievement goal theory and research. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(4-5), 319-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2004.06.002
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). The motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: NCRIPTAL, The University of Michigan.
Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review : DR, 41, 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004
R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/.
Revelle, W. (2017) psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych Version = 1.7.8.
Rhemtulla M., Brosseau-Liard P. É. & Savalei V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17, 354-373. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029315
Riesch, H. (2015). Citizen science. In J. D. Wright (Ed.). International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (pp. 631–636). Oxford: Elsevier. Ruiz-Pr.
Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shavelson, R. J., Li, M., & Schultz, S. E. (2001). On the validity of cognitive interpretations of scores from alternative concept-mapping techniques. Educational Assessment, 7(2), 99-141. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326977EA0702_2
Rutkowski, L. & Svetina, D. (2014). Assessing the hypothesis of measurement invariance in the context of large-scale international surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2014;74:31–57. doi: 10.1177/0013164413498257. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164413498257
Savalei V. (2021) Improving fit indices in structural equation modeling with categorical data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 56:3, 390-407. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2020.1717922
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories an educational perspective. Pearson Education, Inc. Senko, C. (2016). Achievement goal theory. Handbook of motivation at school, 75.
Senko, C., & Dawson, B. (2017). Performance-approach goal effects depend on how they are defined: Meta-analytic evidence from multiple educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(4), 574. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000160
Senko, C., & Tropiano, K. L. (2016). Comparing three models of achievement goals: Goal orientations, goal standards, and goal complexes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(8), 1178. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000114
Senko, C., Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2011). Achievement goal theory at the crossroads: Old controversies, current challenges, and new directions. Educational Psychologist, 46(1), 26-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.538646
Shirk, J., Ballard, H., Wilderman, C., Phillips, T., Wiggins, A., Jordan, R., ... Bonney, R. (2012). Public participation in scientific research: A framework for deliberate design. Ecology and Society, 17(2), 29. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04705-170229.
Şen, Ş. (2015). Süreç odaklı rehberli sorgulayıcı öğrenme ortamında öğrencilerin elektrokimya konusundaki kavramsal anlamaları ve özdüzenleyici öğrenme becerilerinin incelenmesi, (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye.
Toogood, M. (2013). Engaging publics: Biodiversity data collection and the geographies of citizen science: Engaging publics. Geography Compass, 7(9), 611–621. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12067.
Toprakçı, E. (2017). Sınıf yönetimi (3. baskı) Pegem Akademi.
Varoglu, L., Yilmaz, A., & Şen, Ş. (2024). The impact of the 5E learning model improved with concept maps on motivation. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1504
Wang, J., Bai, B., & Nie, Y. (2023). Examining the role of perceived classroom goal structures and parents’ goals in ESL/EFL learners’ achievement goals, engagement and achievement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 67(5), 820-836. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2022.2070928
Weiner, B. (2004). Social motivation and moral emotions. Attribution theory in the organizational sciences. Theoretical and empirical contributions,2.
Wu, H., & Estabrook, R. (2016). Identification of confirmatory factor analysis models of different levels of invariance for ordered categorical outcomes. Psychometrika, 81(4), 1014–1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-016-9506-0
Xia, Y.& Yang, Y. (2018a). RMSEA, CFI, and TLI in structural equation modeling with ordered categorical data: The story they tell depends on the estimation methods. Behav Res 51, 409–428 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1055-2
Xia Y. & Yang Y. (2018b) The influence of number of categories and threshold values on fit indices in structural equation modeling with ordered categorical data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 53:5, 731-755. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2018.1480346
Yüksel, A. O., Çetin, E., & Atasoy, B. (2023). Investigation of higher education students' use of learning strategies in distance education. Instructional Technology and Lifelong Learning, 4(2), 222-253. https://doi.org/10.52911/itall.1376749
Zenorini, R. d. P. C., & dos Santos, A. A. A. (2010). Escala de metas de realização como medida da motivação para aprendizagem [Achievement goals scale as a measure of motivation for learning]. Revista Interamericana de Psicología, 44(2), 291–298.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Türkçe

Konular

Kültürlerarası Ölçek Uyarlama , Kimya Eğitimi

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

Burak Feyzioğlu ^*
0000-0002-0128-3343
Türkiye

Murat Akyıldız
0000-0001-5069-0132
Türkiye

Barış Demirdağ
0000-0003-1474-4951
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi

30 Haziran 2024

Gönderilme Tarihi

4 Nisan 2024

Kabul Tarihi

11 Haziran 2024

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 1970 Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.19160/e-ijer.1465371

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA82ZH56BN

Kaynak Göster

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Feyzioğlu, B., Akyıldız, M., & Demirdağ, B. (2024). Normatif ve Görünürlük Boyutlarıyla Yenilenen Başarı Hedef Yönelim Ölçeğinin Kimya Dersi İçin Türkçe’ye Uyarlanması / The adaptation of the Renewed Achievement Goal Orientation Scale with Normative and Appearance Dimensions into Turkish for Use in a Chemistry Course. e-Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 15(1), 47-66. https://doi.org/10.19160/e-ijer.1465371