AÇIK VE UZAKTAN ÖĞRENMEDE ESNEKLİK ÖLÇEĞİNİ TÜRKÇE’YE UYARLAMA ÇALIŞMASI

Bu araştırmanın amacı, “Açık ve Uzaktan Öğrenmede Esneklik” ölçeğini Türkçe’ye uyarlamak ve ilgili ölçeğin maddeleri ile ölçek genelinin psikometrik özelliklerini sınamaktır. Bergamin, Ziska ve Groner (2009) tarafından geliştirilen ve Bergamin Ziska, Werlen ve Siegenthaler (2012) tarafından revize edilen özgün ölçek, açık ve uzaktan öğrenme bağlamında öğrencilerin öğrenme ortamına ilişkin algılanan esneklik düzeylerini ölçmeyi hedeflemektedir.Araştırmanın iki farklı katılımcı grubu vardır. Ölçeğin faktör yapısının Türkiye örneklemi için nasıl örüntüleneceğini incelemek için 91 açık ve uzaktan eğitim öğrencisiyle açımlayıcı faktör analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Ortaya çıkan üç faktörlü ölçme modellerini sınamak ve hiyerarşik yapıyı incelemek için 141 açık ve uzaktan eğitim öğrencisinden veri toplanarak birinci ve ikinci düzey doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri gerçekleştirilmiştir. Yapı geçerliği için yakınsak geçerlik ve ayırt edici geçerlik teknikleri işe koşulmuştur. Elde edilen bulgular, ortaya çıkan ilişkili üç faktörlü modelin geçerliğinin ve güvenirliğinin sağlandığını kanıtlamaktadır. İlgili modelin, Avrupa örnekleminden toplanan verilerle geliştirilen özgün ölçeğin madde-yapı örüntüsüne benzer sonuçlara sahip olduğu belirlenmiştir. Toplam dokuz madde ve üç faktörden oluşan ölçeğin, güvenilir ve geçerli bir ölçme aracı olarak Türkiye’de öğrencilerin açık ve uzaktan öğrenme ortamlarına ilişkin algılanan esneklik düzeylerini ölçmek amacıyla kullanılabileceği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

ADAPTATION STUDY OF THE SCALE OF FLEXIBILITY IN OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING

The aim of the study is to adapt the Perceived Flexibility Scale for open and distance learnersto Turkish and to evaluate its psychometric properties. The original scale which was developedby Bergamin, Ziska and Groner (2009) and revised by Bergamin Ziska, Werlen and Siegenthaler(2012), measures students' level of perceived flexibility in the context of open and distancelearning. The study used two different samples of distance learners located in the Turkey. Toexamine how the factorial structure of the scale patterns for Turkey sample, exploratory factoranalysis was performed using data derived from 91 open and distance education students.The second sample of 141 open and distance students was used for first-order and second order confirmatory factor analysis to assess the hierarchical structure and examine 3-factoralternative measurement models which were yielded after exploratory factor analysis.Convergent and discriminant validities were employed to ensure construct validity. Findingsshowed that a three-factor inter-correlated model of perceived flexibility provided the best fitfor the data. The model is consistent with the factor structure of the original scale which wasdeveloped based on data from European distance learners. In conclusion, the Turkish versionof the perceived flexibility scale consisting of nine items and three factors can be useful tomeasure perceived flexibility of learners in open and distance learning as a validated andreliable scale.

PDF

___

Al-Harbi, K. A. S. (2011). E-Learning in the Saudi tertiary education: Potential and challenges. Applied Computing and Informatics, 9(1), 31-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aci.2010.03.002
Araka, E., Maina, E., Gitonga, R., & Obonko, R. (2020). Research trends in measurement and intervention tools for self-regulated learning for e-learning environments—systematic review (2008–2018). Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(6), 1- 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-020-00129-5
Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with Internet based MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 32-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256290002400104
Arbaugh, J. B. (2018). Republication of “Virtual Classroom Characteristics and Student Satisfaction with Internet-Based MBA Courses”. Journal of Management Education, 42(4), 533-556. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918770400
Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2010). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), The reviewer's guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences (pp. 93-114). New York, NY: Routledge.
Bates, A. W. (2001). National strategies for e-learning in post-secondary education and training. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO.
Bergamin, P., Ziska, S., & Groner, R. (2009). Structural equation modeling of factors affecting success in student’s performance in ODL-programs: Extending quality management concepts. Open Praxis, 4(1), 1-8.
Bergamin, P. B., Ziska, S., Werlen, E., & Siegenthaler, E. (2012). The relationship between flexible and self-regulated learning in open and distance universities. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(2), 101–123.
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Cattell, R. B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. New York: Plenum.
Cornelius, S., & Gordon, C. (2008). Providing a flexible, learner-centred programme: Challenges for educators. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(1), 33-41. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.11.003
De Boer, W., & Collis, B. (2005). Becoming more systematic about flexible learning: Beyond time and distance. Association for Learning Technology Journal, 13(1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/0968776042000339781
Demetriadis, S., & Pombortsis, A. (2007). E-lectures for flexible learning: A study on their learning efficiency. Educational Technology & Society, 10, 147–157.
Farrell, A. M. (2010). Insufficient discriminant validity: a comment on Bove, Pervan, Beatty and Shiu (2009). Journal of Business Research, 63(3), 324-327.
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London, England: SAGE Publications.
Flannery, M., & McGarr, O. (2014) Flexibility in higher education: An Irish perspective. Irish Educational Studies, 33(4), 419-434. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2014.978658
Fleiss, J. L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 378-382.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Garrick, J., & Jakupec, V. (2000). Flexible learning, work and human resource development. In V. Jakupec & J. Garrick (Eds.), Flexible learning, human resource and organisational development. Putting theory to work (pp. 1-8). London: Routledge.
Güler, E. (2018). Açık ve uzaktan öğrenme ortamlarında esneklik. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(3), 75-95.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.
Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures. Hambleton, R.K., Merenda, P. F., & Spielberger, C. D. (Eds.), Adapting Educational and Psychological Tests for Cross-Cultural Assessment (pp. 3-38). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Harrington, D. (2009). Confirmatory factor analysis. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrica, 30(2), 179-185.
Jöreskog, K. G., Olsson, U. H., & Wallentin, F. Y. (2016). Multivariate analysis with LISREL. Basel, Switzerland: Springer.
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141-151. Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/001316446002000116
Khan, B. H. (2007). Flexible learning in an open and distributed environment. In B. H. Khan (Ed.), Flexible learning in an information society (pp. 1-17). Hershey: Idea Group Inc.
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Koçak, D., Çokluk, Ö., & Kayri, M. (2016). Faktör sayısının belirlenmesinde MAP testi, paralel analizi K1 ve yamaç birikinti grafiği yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılması. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(1), 330-359.
Koeske, G. F. (1994). Some recommendations for improving measurement validation in social work research. Journal of Social Service Research, 18, 43-72.
Lewis, P. A., Tutticci, N. F., Douglas, C., Gray, G., Osborne, Y., Evans, K., & Nielson, C. M. (2016). Flexible learning: Evaluation of an international distance education programme designed to build the learning and teaching capacity of nurse academics in a developing country. Nurse education in practice, 21, 59-65. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2016.10.001
Li, K. C., & Wong B. Y. Y. (2018). Revisiting the definitions and implementation of flexible learning. In K. Li, K. Yuen & B. Wong (Eds.), Innovations in Open and Flexible Education (pp. 3-13). Singapore: Springer.
McGarry, B. J., Theobald, K., Lewis, P. A., & Coyer, F. (2015). Flexible learning design in curriculum delivery promotes student engagement and develops metacognitive learners: An integrated review. Nurse Education Today, 35(9), 966-973. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.06.009
Naidu, S. (2017). How flexible is flexible learning, who is to decide and what are its implications? Distance Education, 38, 269–272. doi:10.1080/01587919.2017.1371831
Nikolov, R., Lai, K. W., Sendova, E., & Jonker, H. (2018). Distance and flexible learning in the twenty-first century. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen & K. W. Lai (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (2nd ed.), (pp. 1-16). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Noar, S. M. (2003). The role of structural equation modeling in scale development. Structural Equation Modeling, 10(4), 622–647.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
O'Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instrumentation, and Computers, 32, 396-402.
Orçan, F. (2018). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Which one to use first? Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 9(4), 414-421. doi: 10.21031/epod.394323
Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS Survival Manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows (4th ed.). Open University Press.
Raykov T., & Marcoulides G. A. (2011). Introduction to Psychometric Theory. New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
Veletsianos, G., & Houlden, S. (2019). An analysis of flexible learning and flexibility over the last 40 years of Distance Education. Distance Education, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2019.1681893
Yurdugül, H. (2005). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında kapsam geçerliği için kapsam geçerlik indekslerinin kullanılması. XIV. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi, 28–30 Eylül 2005, Denizli. 27.11.2018 tarihinde http://yunus.hacettepe.edu.tr/~yurdugul/3/indir/PamukkaleBildiri.pdf adresinden indirilmiştir.
Yurdugül, H., & Sırakaya, D. A. (2013). Çevrimiçi öğrenme hazır bulunuşluluk ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitim ve Bilim, 138(169), 391-406.
Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99(3), 432–442.