Development of the Attitude Scale Towards Crisis and Chaos Management in Education
Hatice Bilgin 1  
More details
Hide details
Near East University, Ataturk Faculty of Education, Nicosia, N. CYPRUS
Online publish date: 2017-11-05
Publish date: 2017-11-05
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2017;13(11):7381–7389
This article has been presented in ICES 2017 - International Conference on Environmental Sciences & Educational Studies. This article belongs to the special issue " Interdisciplinary Research on the Environmental Education, Educational Studies in Sustainability & Instructional Technologies and Designs".
This study was carried out with the aim of developing the Attitude Scale towards Crisis and Chaos Management of Higher Education Administrators. Firstly, literature search was carried out in the development process of the scale. Then, 10 open-ended questions were asked to 10 Higher Education administrators about crisis and chaos management. By using the obtained data and expert opinions, a 58-point item pool was created. Expert opinions were consulted to ensure content validity. Corrections were made in line with the opinions and recommendations of the experts. Five items similar to each other that were not attitude item were removed from the scale. After the corrections made, the item pool was reduced to 53 items. The items created are of the five-point likert type and evaluted as I certainly do not agree (1), I do not agree (2), indecisive (3), I agree (4), I strongly agree (5). Pilot scheme was conducted with a total of 305 higher education administrators and academicians working at Ankara, Gazi, Başkent, and Hacettepe universities in spring semester 2016-2017. The KMO value of the scale was found to be 0,696. As a result of the factor analysis, it was determined that the 25 scale items were collected in 3 factors and the total variance of scale was 78.587%. 25 items with an item load higher than .40 were included to the scale. Loads of the items in the final scale consisting of 3 factors and 25 items are between .42 and .80. The Cronbach Alpha coefficient of the final scale was calculated as 0.87 and found to be highly reliable. The results of item analysis based on averages of the upper and lower groups of all the items in the scale were found to be significantly distinctive (p <.05). It is thought that this research will contribute to higher education administrators and academicians and researches to be done in the field of crisis and chaos management.
Augustine, N. R. (2000). Managing The Crisis You Tried To Prevent. Anthology from Harward Business Review: Crisis Management. (S. Atay, Çev.). İstanbul: Acar Printing (MESS Publishing No: 328).
Aydemir, M., & Demirci M. K. (2005). An analysis of the positive effects of recent crises on businesses. Cumhuriyet University Social Sciences Journal, 29(1), 65-81.
Büyüköztürk, S. (2011). Data Analysis Handbook for Social Sciences. Ankara: PegemA Publishing.
Can, A. (2014). Quantitative Data Analysis in the Scientific Research Process with SPSS. Ankara: PegemA Publishing.
Can, H. (1997). Organization and Management. Ankara: Siyasal, 312.
Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Multivariate Statistics for Social Sciences SPSS and LISREL Applications (1st Print). Ankara: PegemA Akademi Publishing House.
Demirtas, H. (2000). Crisis management. Education Management in Theory and Practice. 23, 353-373.
Donmez, B. (2001). School security problem and the role of school manager. Education Management in Theory and Practice, 7(25), 63–74.
Duff, E. D. (2007). Evaluation of crisis management and the implementation of employee training for emergency preparedness in a private college (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis). Nova Southeastern University, Florida, United States.
Erten, S. (2011). Crisis Management Understanding in Turkish Public Administration (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis). Isparta: Suleyman Demirel University.
Fan, X., Thompson, B., & Wang, L. (1999). Effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on structural equation modeling fit indexes. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 56-83.
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
Karaköse, T. (2007). Organizations and crisis management. Social Science E-Journal, 13, 1-15.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principle and Practice of Structural Equation Modelling (Second Edition). New York: The Guilford Press.
Ocak, Y. (2014). Crisis management in secondary schools (Edirne municipality example) (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis). Edirne: Trakya University.
Ozdemir, T. A. (2002). Evaluation of the coordination qualifications of the primary school heads in the crisis management (Unpublished Master Thesis). Duzce: Abant İzzet Baysal Univ.
Savcı, S. (2008). Perceptions of teachers working in secondary schools on crisis management (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis). Denizli: Pamukkale University.
Sayın, N. (2008). Investigation of crisis management strategy in secondary education institutions (Istanbul province example) (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis). Istanbul: Marmara University.
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Sehribanoğlu, S. (2005). Structural equation models and an application (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis). Van: Yüzüncü Yıl University Institute of Science.
Serdar, Ö. G. E. (2005). Order or disorder (chaos)? An assessment of the sustainability of organizational presence. Selcuk University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, (13), 285-303.
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 214-12.