Öğretim Elemanlarının Çevreye Karşı Tutumları: Bir Q Metot Çalışması

Bu çalışmanın amacı öğretim elemanlarının çevre ile ilgili tutumlarını ortaya çıkarmak ve bu tutumların altında yatan nedenleri anlamaktır. Bu çalışmanın örneklemini Türkiye'de bir eğitim fakültesinde çalışan on dört öğretim üyesi oluşturmaktadır. Çalışma sübjektif görüşleri ortaya çıkarmak için tanımlanan Q yöntemi kullanılarak tasarlanmıştır. Veriler her ne kadar görüşmeler yoluyla toplanmış ve çoğunlukla nicel bir şekilde analiz edilmiş olsa da, sonuçlar genellikle nitel olarak yorumlanmıştır. Tüm katılımcılar için Q sıralama verileri PQMethod isimli yazılıma girilmiş ve Q yöntemi çalışmalarında sıklıkla kullanılan bir faktör çıkarma yöntemi olan centroid faktör analizinde, veriler Q rotasyonu ve Varimax rotasyonun da döndürülerek faktörlerin anlamlılığı ortaya koyulmuştur. Yapılan Q analizine göre, katılımcılar kapsamlı bir faktörün yanı sıra, koruyucu, fayda merkezli ve fayda karşıtı faktörler olarak gruplandırıldı. Katılımcıların çoğunluğu genel olarak çevre merkezli bir tutuma sahipken, bazıları ise çevreye karşı insan merkezli bir tutuma sahiptir. Öğretim elemanlarının tutumları ağırlıklı olarak anketteki kısıtlayıcı, öznel veya genel ifadelerden, kendi duygusal yapılarından, çalışma alanlarından ve dini inançlarından etkilenmiştir. Çalışmadan elde edilen bulgular, eğitim çalışmalarında pek rastlanmayan metodolojisi ile gelecekteki araştırmalar için önemli bir potansiyele sahip olabilir.

Faculty Members’ Attitude towards Environment: A Q Method Study

The aim of this study is to reveal the attitudes of faculty members about the environment and to understand the reasons underlying these attitudes. The sample of this study consists of fourteen faculty members who work at an education faculty in Turkey. This study was designed by using Q method, which is defined as revealing subjective views. Although the data collected through interviews and were mostly analyzed quantitatively, the results were interpreted predominantly in qualitative ways. The Q sorting data for all participants were entered into the PQMethod software. Through using "centroid factor analysis", which is a factor extraction method that is frequently used in the Q method studies, "Q rotation" and "Varimax rotation" were used to determine the significance of the factors. After the analysis, the participants were grouped as comprehensive, protective, utilitarian-centered, and anti-benefit factors. The majority of the participants generally have an ecocentric attitude, while some have anthropocentric attitude towards environment. Faculty members’ attitudes were predominantly influenced by restrictive, subjective or general expressions in the survey, their own emotional structures, their fields of the study, and their religious beliefs. The findings of this study may have a potential significance for the future research with its unique methodology.

PDF

___

Akhtar-Danesh, N., Batunann, A., & Cordingley, L. (2008). Q-methodology in nursing research: a promising method for the study of subjectivity. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 30(6), 759-773.
Akgül, B. M., Birinci, C., Göral, Ş., & Karaküçük, S. (2017). An investigation of ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes and antipathy towards environment in athletes. Journal of Human Sciences, 14(4), 3405-3414 doi:10.14687/jhs.v14i4.46803406
Alpak-Tunç, G. & Yenice, N. (2017). An analysis of pre-service science teachers’ moral considerations about environment and their attitudes towards sustainable environment. International Electronic Journal of Environmental Education, 7(1), 17-33.
Alpak-Tunç, G. (2016). Investigation of prospective science teachers’ ethical approach towards environment with attitudes towards sustainable environment. (Unpublished master thesis), Adnan Menderes University, Aydın.
Amerigo, M., Aragones, J., Frutos, B. Sevillano, V. & Cortes, B. (2007). Underlying dimensions of ecocentric and anthropocentric environmental beliefs. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10(1), 97-103 doi: 10.1017/S1138741600006351
Atlı, K., Uzun, N., Saraç, C., Sağlam, N. & Sağlam, S. (2015). The relationship between students’ ecocentric, anthropocentric and antipathetic attitudes towards the environment and their academic achievement. International Journal of Innovative Research in Education, 2(1), 39-47 doi: 10.18844/ijire.v0i0.124
Benton R., & Benton C. (2006). Why teach environmental ethics? Because we already do. Clare Palmer (Edt.). Teaching environmental ethics (p. 77-92). Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill NV.
Bozdemir, H. & Faiz, M. (2018). Ecocentric, anthropocentric and antipathetic attitudes of teacher candidates towards the environment. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 8(1), 61-75.
Brown, S. R. (1980). Political subjectivity: Applications of Q methodology in political science. New Haven, Yale University Press.
Cappellaro, E. (2016). Elementary teacher candidates' ethical approaches to environment. 15th Elementary Teacher Training Symposium, 11-14 May 2016, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla.
Cardeiro, R.W. & Sayler, R.D. (1994). Student knowledge of environmental and natural resource issues in The Pacific Northwest. Journal of Natural Resources Life Science Education, 23(2), 132-136.
Casey, P. J. & Scott K. (2006). Environmental concern and behavior in an Australian sample within an ecocentric- anthropocentric framework. Australian Journal of Psychology, 58(2), 57-67 doi: 10.1080/00049530600730419
Çimen, O., & Yılmaz, M. (2014). The influence of transformative learning based environmental education on preservice biology teachers' perception of environmental problems. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 3(1), 339-359.
Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The new environmental paradigm. Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 10-19 Doi: 10.3200/JOEE.40.1.19-28
Erten, S. (2004). What is environmental education and environmental awareness, how environmental education should be? Journal of Environment and Human, 65(66), 1-13.
Erten, S. (2007). Study on adaptation of the ecocentric, anthropocentric and antipathetic attitude scale. Educational Studies- Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 28, 67-74.
Erten, S. & Aydoğdu, G. (2011). The ecocentric, anthropocentric and antipathetic attitudes toward environment in Turkish and Azerbaijani students. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 41, 158-169.
Fernández Manzanal, R., Rodríguez Barreiro, L., & Carrasquer, J. 2007. Evaluation of environmental attitudes: Analysis and results of a scale applied to university students. Science Education, 91, 988-1009 doi:10.1002/sce.20218
Gerçek, C. (2016). University students' perceptions about environmental ethics. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 15(59), 1100-1107.
Karahan, G. (2009). Nursing students' eccentric, anthropocentric and antipathetic attitudes towards the environment. Master Thesis. Istanbul University, Istanbul.
Karatekin, K. (2013). Developing a scale to measure pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards solid waste and recycling: A validity and reliability study. International Eurasian Journal of Social Sciences, 4 (10), 71-90.
Kim, C. & Fortner, R. W. (2006). Issue-specific barriers to addressing environmental issues in the classroom: An exploratory study. The Journal of Environmental Education, 37, 15-22 doi: 10.3200/JOEE.37.3.15-22
Kortenkamp, K.V. & Moore, C. F. (2001). Ecocentrism and anthropocentrism: Moral reasoning about ecological commons dilemmas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 261-272 doi: 10.1006/jevp.2001.0205
MacKinnon, B., & Fiala, A. (2014). Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues. Nelson Education.
McKeown, B., & Thomas, D. (1988). Q methodology. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California.
McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in Education: Evidence-Based Inquiry, My Education Lab Series. Pearson
Miles, M. B., & Huberman A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source book. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Özdemir, O. (2016). Ecological literacy and environmental education. Ankara: Pegem
Özer, N. (2015). Determination of pre-service science teachers’ level of awareness of environmental ethics. Master Thesis, Aksaray University, Aksaray.
Ramlo, S. E. & Newman, I. (2011). Q methodology and its position in the mixed-methods continuum. Operant Subjectivity, 34(3), p: 172- 191 doi:10.15133/j.os.2010.009
Schmolck, P. (2008, October). Common and specific approaches in the analysis of Q-sort data with PQMethod. Keynote speech presented at the 24th Annual Q Conference. Hamilton, Ontario.
Schmolck, P. (2014). PQMethod (version 2.35). URL http://schmolck.org/qmethod/. [p163]
Simons, J. (2013). An introduction to Q methodology. Nurse Researcher, 20(3), 28-32 doi:10.7748/nr2013.01.20.3.28.c9494
Stephenson, W. (1955). The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Sönmez, D. (2018). The necessity of environmental ethics for university students: evaluation of works on the subject in Turkey. International Journal of Education Science and Technology, 4(1), 18-27.
Surmeli, H. & Saka, M. (2013). Pre-service teachers’ anthropocentric, biocentric, and ecocentric environmental ethics approaches. International Journal of Academic Research, 5(5), 159-163 Doi: 10.7813/2075-4124.2013/5-5/B.23
Thompson, S. C. G., & Barton, M. A. (1994). Ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14, 149-157.
Tuncay, B. (2010). Moral reasoning of pre-service science teachers toward local and non-local environmental problems. (Unpublished master thesis), Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
Uzun, N. & Sağlam, N. (2006). Development and validation of an environment al attitudes scale for high school students. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 30, 240-250.
White, L. (1967). The historical roots of our ecological crisis. Science, 155, 1203-1207.
Yıldız, E. (2014). Investigation and evaluation of ecological foot print awareness levels of science and technology teacher candidates. (Unpublished master thesis), Gazi University, Ankara.
Yılmaz, O., Boone, W. & Andersen, H. O. (2004). Views of elementary and middle school Turkish students toward environmental issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26(12): 1527-1546 doi: 10.1080/0950069042000177280
Yurttaş, A., & Çağlar, A. (2019). The attitudes of governmental official in terms of sustainable environment. International Electronic Journal of Environmental Education, 9(2), 142-156.
Zabala, A. (2014). Qmethod: A package to explore human perspectives using Q methodology. The R Journal, 6(2), 163-173.