The Adaptation Study of the School Quality Management Culture Survey (SQMCS) to Turkish (Pages: 83 -90)
Author :
Abstract
The purpose of this study has been to examine the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of School Quality Management Culture Survey (SQMCS). A total of 209 teachers working at primary and secondary schools in Izmir participated in the study. The validity and reliability of the measurement tool consisting of 31 items and 9 sub-dimensions was analyzed using LISREL 8.51 and SPSS 13.0 programs. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to determine the validity of the measurement instrument. The results of the CFA of the scale indicated that the data was in good fit with the original factor structure (א2/df=1.33, RMSEA=.040, 90%CI=.031-.049, SRMR=.061, CFI=.95, NNFI=.94, GFI=.86). The results of the item analysis on the mean differences (-2.878 ≤ t ≤ -11.255) between the 27% lower and upper groups making up the scale indicated that the items have distinctive properties (p<.01). Coefficient of internal consistency of the sub-dimensions of the scale range between .71 and .89 (Cronbach’s alpha) and inter-item correlation coefficients between (rij).38 and .67.The results obtained concerning the psychometric properties of the Turkish version (SQMCS-tr) reveal that of the scale is a valid and reliable measurement instrument to determine teachers’ perceptions of school quality culture management survey.
Keywords
Abstract
The purpose of this study has been to examine the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of School Quality Management Culture Survey (SQMCS). A total of 209 teachers working at primary and secondary schools in Izmir participated in the study. The validity and reliability of the measurement tool consisting of 31 items and 9 sub-dimensions was analyzed using LISREL 8.51 and SPSS 13.0 programs. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to determine the validity of the measurement instrument. The results of the CFA of the scale indicated that the data was in good fit with the original factor structure (א2/df=1.33, RMSEA=.040, 90%CI=.031-.049, SRMR=.061, CFI=.95, NNFI=.94, GFI=.86). The results of the item analysis on the mean differences (-2.878 ≤ t ≤ -11.255) between the 27% lower and upper groups making up the scale indicated that the items have distinctive properties (p<.01). Coefficient of internal consistency of the sub-dimensions of the scale range between .71 and .89 (Cronbach’s alpha) and inter-item correlation coefficients between (rij).38 and .67.The results obtained concerning the psychometric properties of the Turkish version (SQMCS-tr) reveal that of the scale is a valid and reliable measurement instrument to determine teachers’ perceptions of school quality culture management survey.
Keywords
- Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2004). Veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık
- Byrne, B.M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Chau, P.Y.K. (1997). Reexamining a model for evaluating information center success using a structural equation modeling approach. Decision Sciences, 28(2), 309-334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.15405915.1997.tb01313.x
- Dahlgaard, J.J., Kristensen, K., & Kanji, G. (2002). Fundamentals of total quality management: process analysis and improvement. London: Nelson Thornes.
- Detert J.R., Schroeder, R.G., & Cudeck, R. (2003). The measurement of quality management culture in schools: development and validation of the SQMCS. Journal of Operations Management, 21, 307-328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(02)00130-4
- Frias, C.M., & Dixon, R.A. (2005). Confirmatory factor structure and measurement invariance of the memory compensation questionnaire. Psychological Assessment, 17(2), 168-178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10403590.17.2.168
- Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.
- Hu, L.T., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
- Kaya, E.Ü. (2009). İşletmelerde toplam kalite yönetim uygulamalarının başarısında örgüt kültürü ve ikliminin önemi: Kuramsal bir çerçeve. İŞ, GÜÇ: Endüstri İlişkileri ve İnsan Kaynakları Dergisi, 11(1), 89112. http://dx.doi.org/10.4026/1303-2860.2009.0094.x
- Kelloway, E.K. (1998). Using LlSREL for structural equation modeling: a researcher’s guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
- Luthans, F. (1992).Organizational behaviour (6th ed.), New York: McGraw Hill.
- Marsh, H.W., Balla, J.R., & McDonald, R.P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391-410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/00332909.103.3.391
- McDonald, R.P., & Moon-Ho, H.R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting statistical equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 64-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.64
- Militarua, M., Ungureanua, G, & Chenic, A.Ş. (2013). The prospects of implementing the principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) in education. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Science, 93, 1138-1141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.003
- Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
- Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
- Olsen, M.D., Ching-Yick T., & Joseph J.W. (1998). Strategic management in the hospitality industry (2nd ed.), New York: John Wiley & Sons.
- Özer, M.A. (2011). 21. yüzyılda yönetim ve yöneticiler (2.Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
- Özevren, M. (2000).Toplam kalite yönetimi: Temel kavramlar ve uygulamalar. İstanbul: Alfa.
- Sallis, E. (2005). Total quality management in education (3rd ed.). London: Taylor& Francis e-Library.
- Schmelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
- Shridhara, B.K. (2010). Total quality management. Mumbai: Global Media.
- Sipahi, B., Yurtkoru, E.S., & Çinko, M. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde SPSS’le very analizi. İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım.
- Şimşek, Ö.F. (2007). Introduction to structural equation modeling; Basic principles and LISREL applications. Ankara: Ekinox.
- Tanrıöğen, A. (2011). Eğitim bilimleri ile ilgili kavramlar: Eğitim bilimine giriş. (Ed) D. Ekiz, & H. Durukan. İstanbul: Lord Matbaacılık.