Yağcı, E. & Güneyli, A. (2019). Validity and reliability study of the scale to be used in auditing Turkish language and literature teachers. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 6(4). 1018-1035. http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/646 Received: 19.05.2019 Received in revised form: 28.08.2019 Accepted: 04.09.2019 VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY OF THE SCALE TO BE USED IN AUDITING TURKISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE TEACHERS Research Article Emine Yağcı Ministry of Education, Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. emineyagci737@yahoo.com Ahmet Güneyli European University of Lefke, Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. aguneyli@eul.edu.tr Emine Yağcı is a Turkish language and literature teacher for more than 4 years. She did her BA in Turkish Language and Literature at Girne American University and her MA and Ph.D. in Education Management at Near East University. Her areas of interest are supervision, education management and language teaching. Ahmet Güneyli is an associate professor at Education Faculty of European University of Lefke for 1 year. He did his MA and Ph.D. in Turkish Language Teaching in Ankara University. His areas of interest are language teaching, teacher education, curriculum and instruction Copyright by Informascope. Material published and so copyrighted may not be published elsewhere without the written permission of IOJET. mailto:emineyagci737@yahoo.com mailto:aguneyli@eul.edu.tr https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9870-2147 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2168-1795 Yağcı & Güneyli 1018 VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY OF THE SCALE TO BE USED IN AUDITING TURKISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE TEACHERS Emine Yağcı emineyagci737@yahoo.com Ahmet Güneyli aguneyli@eul.edu.tr Abstract The objective of this study is to develop a scale related to the auditing criteria of Turkish language and literature teachers. The study group consisted of 120 Turkish language and literature teachers who were working in Northern Cyprus. Exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory (CFA) factor analysis were performed to determine the construct validity of the scale. As a result of the EFA, a two-factor structure emerged, namely field knowledge competences and proficiency in professions. The variance rate explained by two factors was 54.00%. This structure was confirmed by DFA; A 5-point Likert-type scale with 2 factors and 27 items was developed. The goodness of fit indexes calculated by CFA are as follows: 762 / SD = 2.011, GFI = .903, RMSEA = .076, CFI = .901, NFI = .849. An examination of the reliability analysis results of the score showed that the Cronbach’s Alpha internal consistency coefficient of the scale was 0.94. The Spearman-Brown Coefficient and the Guttman Split-Half Coefficient were both found to be 0.79. When the item-total correlation coefficients were examined, it was determined that the correlation coefficients of the scale items with the total ranged between 0.48 and 0.70. Resultantly, it is thought that the scale related to the criteria of the Turkish Language and Literature Teachers' Audit Criteria developed in this research will resolve a significant deficiency in the literature. Keywords: Turkish language and literature teacher, auditing, audit criteria, field knowledge, occupational knowledge 1. Introduction In order for the welfare level of the society to be raised, developed and progressed, high- quality education should be provided in schools. In order for education to be effective, the qualifications of the schools should be increased. Therefore, in order to produce qualified and well-equipped students, the teacher should also be highly proficient (Özyar, 2003; Seferoğlu, 2003). A good teacher is a person who is passionate about success, is ambitious, can cope with the stress caused by the school environment, maintains strong communication both inside and outside the school, can guide students and can act as a parent (Özabacı ve Acat, 2005). Teachers are the most important source of success in educational activities. Therefore, there are differences between the teaching profession and other professions (Confery, 1990; Good and Grouws, 1979; Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986; Ryan, 1960). Some of the characteristics that teachers should have include cognitive competence, creativity, mailto:emineyagci737@yahoo.com mailto:aguneyli@eul.edu.tr International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 2019, 6(4), 1018-1035 1019 adaptability to students’ needs, the ability to exhibit friendly behaviors, being non-judgmental and non-accusing, problem-solving abilities, proficiency in the mother tongue, helpfulness, self-confidence, participant in social activities, being focused on providing personal development, and exhibiting democratic attitudes and behaviors. Today, traditional teacher behaviors are criticized by most educators. A traditional teacher is someone who has knowledge and is capable of conveying that information to the people. However, the role of the teacher has changed as a result of the advancement of science and technology and the diversification of teaching techniques. Due to technological developments, it has become easier to reach information, meaning that the need for teachers to direct and guide students is continually increasing. The students should be able to use the learning opportunities correctly and should be able to learn outside the targeted learning behaviors. Teachers are required to work in schools that enable students to be more active in the classroom, solve problems, communicate effectively, make optimal decisions, investigate, question and become creative (Doğanay, 2005). Additionally, it is important that teachers who are employed at schools can organize teaching activities, thoroughly understand their students in this process, and who take into account the social relations, physical development and psychological conditions of their students (Eacute and Esteve, 2000; Gürkan, 2001). From this point of view, teachers need to constantly develop themselves in terms of both their knowledge of the branch (field) and their knowledge of the profession. The main purpose of education systems is to ensure that the cultural values of societies are conveyed to future generations and to develop the society with these values. Therefore, it can be said that teaching the subject of Turkish language and literature is important. In Turkish language and literature courses, two main objectives are realized: one is to develop language skills and the other is to gain knowledge and a passion for literature (Cemiloğlu, 2003). Language and literature teachers should ensure that students acquire the language in their natural environment and give feedback to them by watching how the students use the language. Teachers should praise the development of students' language skills and support them (Power and Hubbard, 2002). Language teachers should also communicate with other instructors and relate their lessons with other subjects (Strickland, Galda and Cullinan, 2004). Teachers of Turkish language and literature should be devoted, patient and capable. Marshall (1994) stated that although the teachers of all courses are important, the most important teachers are teachers who provide and emphasize the importance of mother tongue education, because the mother tongue is a necessary component in the teaching of all courses. The understanding of all courses is based on native language proficiency. It is of significant importance that individuals within society can use their language skills effectively and that they can establish healthy communication in both their daily and business lives. Saraç (2005) said that those who use their mother tongue well can be successful in all courses, and also stated that people who can effectively use their mother tongue are successful in their professional and social lives. In this respect, the development of language teachers is very important. It is thought that high-quality Turkish teachers will educate qualified students. In order to qualify as a successful teacher, an individual must have sufficient knowledge and professional competence in his/her field. Effective and successful teachers are those who are passionate about and respect their profession. If these factors are combined with the experiences of the teacher, a qualified and successful teacher profile can be distinguished (Senemoğlu, 2001). Demirtaş and Barth (1997) grouped the qualifications that teachers should possess under four headings: the knowledge of the field, effective management of the teaching-learning process, guidance, and the possession of certain personality characteristics. Yağcı & Güneyli 1020 Measurement and evaluation have considerable importance in the Turkish curriculum. However, besides the evaluation of students and learning-teaching activities within the classroom, teachers must also undergo an auditing process. The main purpose of teacher auditing should be to assess whether the system is working correctly if there are any mistakes or deficiencies caused by the teacher and to ensure that the deficiencies are resolved. Therefore, inspection is of paramount importance. When the literature is examined, it is seen that there few studies that have focused on how the auditing of Turkish teachers should be performed (Gökalp, 2010; Karakış, 2007; Sağır, 2005; Soylu, 2003). In addition, it is seen that the auditing of teachers in different branches is carried out with similar criteria. In fact, in this study, it should be said that, unlike previous research, it focuses purely on the auditing of Turkish language and literature teachers. In this study, based on the fact that the criteria for supervising the field knowledge of Turkish language and literature teachers should be detailed and specifically prepared in a different manner to teachers in other branches, to the aim was to develop a scale for the audit criteria of Turkish language and literature teachers and to perform the validity-reliability study of this scale. In the study of Yıldız and Yavuz (2015), one of the studies that focused on auditing of a small number of Turkish teachers, it was assessed how auditing should be conducted based on the opinions of Turkish teachers. According to the opinions of Turkish teachers, it was concluded that during the auditing process, the teachers' shortcomings were investigated, only paperwork checks were performed and that the audits were only scheduled once or twice a year, which did not create effective results. Furthermore, the teachers stated that not only the students but also the school administrators, other branch teachers and even parents should participate in the auditing process. As a result, the aim of this study was to develop a scale for the auditing of Turkish language and literature teachers. Another objective of this study was to perform the validity and reliability analysis of the scale. 2. Method 2.1. Study group The research universe consisted of Turkish language and literature and Turkish teachers working in North Cyprus. Due to the fact that all teachers in the research universe could not be reached in terms of time, cost and control, a total of 120 teachers were reached with 95% confidence level and 5% sampling error using the simple random sampling method. The personal and professional information on the study group is presented in Table 1 and Table 2. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 2019, 6(4), 1018-1035 1021 Table 1. Distribution of teachers' personal information and educational status Number (n) Percentage (%) Gender Female 93 77.50 Male 27 22.50 Age 30-34 years 27 22.50 35-39 years 42 35.00 40-44 years 29 24.17 45-49 years 22 18.33 Nationality TRNC 91 75.83 TRNC+Turkey 29 24.17 Undergraduate field Turkish language and literature 105 87.50 Turkish language teaching 15 12.50 Graduate from A university in Cyprus 85 70.83 Other 35 29.17 Level of education Bachelor’s 100 83.33 Postgraduated 20 16.67 Table 2 presents the distribution of personal information and educational status of the teachers included in the study. It shows that 77.50% of the teachers included in the study were women and 22.50% were men, 22.50% were in the 30-34 age group, 35.0% were in the 35-39 age group, 24.17% were in the 40-44 age group and 18.33% were in the 45-49 age group. 75.83% of the teachers were TRNC nationals and 24.17% were TRNC and Turkish nationals. Out of all the teachers, 87.50% were graduates from the Turkish Language and Literature department, whereas 12.50% were Turkish language teachers. 70.83% of teachers had graduated from universities in Cyprus and 29.17% had graduated from universities in other countries. It is also observed 83.33% of the teachers had bachelor’s degrees and 16.67% of them had graduate degrees. Yağcı & Güneyli 1022 Table 2. Distribution of teachers according to their professional characteristics Number (n) Percentage (%) Professional seniority 0-5 years 17 14.17 6-10 years 21 17.50 11-15 years 21 17.50 16-20 years 36 30.00 21 years and above 25 20.83 Number of schools worked Single school 23 19.17 2-3 schools 61 50.83 4 and more schools 36 30.00 Location of the school Urban 90 75.00 Rural 30 25.00 Total number of teachers in the school 100 and less 68 56.67 101-200 teachers 33 27.50 201 and more 19 15.83 Total number of students in the school 500 and less 21 17.50 501-1000 students 67 55.83 1001 and more 32 26.67 Seniority 5 years and below 54 45.00 6-15 years 36 30.00 16 years and above 30 25.00 Union membership Member 94 78.33 Non-member 26 21.67 Inservice training on Auditing Received 109 90.83 Not received 11 9.17 Table 2 shows the distribution of the teachers participating in the research according to their professional characteristics. When Table 2 is examined, it can be seen that 14.17% of the teachers included in the study had 0-5 years of experience, 17.50% had 6-10 years of experience, 17.50% had 11-15 years of experience, 30% had 16-20 years of experience and 20.83% had 21 or more years of experience. Furthermore, 19.17% of the teachers had only worked at one school, 50.83% had worked at 2-3 different schools and 30% had worked at 4 or more schools. It has been determined that 75% of the teachers included in the study were working in urban areas and 25% were working in rural areas. 56.67% of the teachers were working at schools where 100 and less teachers are employed, 27.5% were working at schools where 101-200 teachers are employed, and 15.83% were working at schools where 201 or more teachers are employed. Of the teachers who participated in this study, 17.50% were working at schools with 500 or less students, 55.83% were working at schools with 500- 1000 students, and 26.67% were working at schools with 1001 or more students. It has been found out that 78.33% of the teachers who participated in the study were members of a union, International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 2019, 6(4), 1018-1035 1023 whereas 21.67% were not members of any union. 90.83% of the teachers stated that they received on-the-job training on teacher qualifications, whereas 9.17% stated that they had not received any training of that kind. 2.2. Data collection tool As a data collection tool, a scale form consisting of two parts, a Personal Information Form and Scale about the Auditing Criteria of Turkish Language and Literature Teachers, was used. This section was prepared by the researchers to determine the personal, educational status and occupational characteristics of the teachers included in the study, which has 14 questions in total. In order to be able to prepare the items of the scale related to the auditing criteria of the Turkish language and literature teacher, the literature was reviewed and similar scales related to auditing were examined. As a result, a pool of 40 propositions was created. “Vital”, “necessary”, “reasonably necessary”, “unnecessary”, “very unnecessary” were the 5 Likert- type response options of the scale. The draft scale was presented to five academicians with expertise in educational sciences (from the fields of education management, measurement assessment and Turkish education) in order to obtain their opinions. Ten teachers were asked to complete the draft scale and to then identify the items they had difficulty understanding. Thus, the scope validity of the scale was evaluated and five of the scale items were excluded from the scale. The draft scale consisted of 35 items before the validity and reliability study. 2.3. Collection of data In the study, data were obtained from teachers working at high schools of the Ministry of National Education, which are located in six different districts of Cyprus, between 15.3.2018 and 30.3.2018 in the spring term of the 2017-2018 academic year. In order to obtain written consent, the researchers of the present study applied the research ethics committee of the university. Then, in order to be able to apply the scale, permission was firstly obtained from the Department of Education and Training of the Ministry of National Education. Finally, the data collection process was initiated by obtaining permission from the administrators and teachers of the schools included in the study. It was stated that the teachers who participated in the research were not obliged to and were expected to participate on a voluntary basis. In addition, it was explained orally and in writing in the informed consent and information form that the data obtained in this study would only be used for the purposes of this study and would be treated confidentially. 2.4. Analysis of data Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 24.0 and IBM AMOS 21.0 data analysis packages were used for statistical analysis of the data obtained from the teachers. Initially, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was used to ensure the construct validity of the research scale. When the number of teachers in Cyprus was taken into account, it was not possible to reach two separate samplings for exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Therefore, factor analysis was performed on a single sample, which was a limitation. In order to determine the scale as a reliable measurement tool, the Cronbach’s alpha test and split-half test were applied and item-total correlations were examined. Frequency analysis was used to determine the distribution of teachers' personal characteristics, education and occupational characteristics and the results are shown in frequency tables. Yağcı & Güneyli 1024 3. Results 3.1. Validity analysis for scale of teacher efficiency in terms of Turkish language and literature audit The Scale of Teacher Efficiency in terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit, which was developed by the researcher was used as a data collection tool. The scale was developed to determine teachers’ views about the points - professional knowledge of teaching and subject expertise- to be considered in the audits conducted by inspectors for the Turkish Language and Literature course. Scale of Teacher Efficiency in terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit is formed of 27-items and is measured on five-point-Likert Type Scale. Two-factor dimensions were determined as a result of the validity study. These factors are professional teaching efficiency and subject expertise efficiency. Two factors explained 54% of the total variance. Cronbach’s alfa coefficients were calculated for the overall scale, professional teaching efficiency and subject expertise efficiency dimensions. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were found to be 0.94, 0.90 and 0.94, respectively. The findings of the validity and reliability studies are given below. 3.2. Content validity An items pool (40-items) was formed by the researcher as a result of expert interviews and a literature review. Then, these 40 items were presented to a group of experts from the field of Turkish Language and Literature and Educational Sciences. According to the expert reviews, five items were removed from the scale and some linguistic/grammatical corrections were applied to the other items. In addition to this, pilot practice was conducted with a small group of teachers (10 teachers) to determine any blind spots of the scale. This pilot practice showed that all items were perfectly understandable and clearly comprehensible. 3.3. Construct validity Exploratory Factor Analysis and Confirmatory Factor Analysis were applied to explain constructs and to test the construct validity of the scale. 3.4. Exploratory factor analysis Exploratory Factor Analysis was applied to explain the construct validity of the scale. The aim of Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) is to establish theoretical relationships between observed measurements and possible variables. Additionally, EFA is used to determine independent factors which constituent the construct. EFA also provides information about the items included in the scale; by using EFA, we try to determine if items measure the construct we are attempting to identify or not (Büyüköztürk, 2002). KMO and Bartlett’s tests were interpreted to investigate the factorizablility of the scale. Kolmogorov Smirnov, Shapiro Wilks tests, QQ plots and skewness and Kurtosis values were used to test the fit of the data set to multivariate normal distribution. The results showed that the data were normally distributed. Kaiser- Meyer- Olkin and Bartlett’s Sphericity Tests were applied to determine data appropriateness for EFA. The KMO coefficient is used to test the data fit; in other words, whether it is appropriate for factor analysis or not. The KMO coefficient is expected to be 0.60 for factorizability. Bartlett’s test is used to investigate the relationship between variables based on partial correlations (Büyüköztürk, 2009). International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 2019, 6(4), 1018-1035 1025 Table 3. KMO and Bartlett’s Sphericity Tests for Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Coefficient 0.879 Bartlett's Sphericity Tests Approx. 2 2641.871 Sd 435 P 0.000* *p<0,05 According to the results (Table 3), the KMO coefficient is 0.879, which is higher than the accepted value of 0.60. The Bartlett’s Sphericity Test result showed that the chi-square value is statistically significant (Approx. 2 = 2641.871; p=0.000). Thus, the results confirmed that the application of factor analysis to the data set is acceptable. Principal Component Analysis method and varimax rotation were used for Exploratory Factor Analysis of the scale. As a result of analysis, items with smaller factor loads than 0.5 were removed from the scale to distinguish factors properly. Subsequently, EFA was repeated for the remaining items (Seçer, 2015). Table 4. EFA Results for Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit Factors Eigenvalues Rotation Sum of Squared Loadings Tot. Explained Variance (%) Cum. Var. (%) Tot. Explained Variance (%) Cum. Var. (%) Factor 1 12.82 42.72 42.72 9.95 33.17 33.17 Factor 2 3.38 11.28 54.00 6.24 20.83 54.00 The results in Table 4 indicate that scale is formed by two factors whose initial eigenvalues are larger than 1. The First factor of Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit explained 33.17% of the total variance and the initial eigenvalue for this factor was 9.95. The initial eigenvalue for the second factor was found as 6.24 and this factor explained 20.83% of the total variance. These two factors explained 54% of the total variance together. Yağcı & Güneyli 1026 Table 5. Rotated Factor Matrix of Factor Loadings for Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit Factor 1 Factor 2 A1 0.80 A2 0.79 A3 0.77 A4 0.77 A5 0.76 A6 0.73 A7 0.73 A8 0.73 A9 0.72 A10 0.71 A11 0.70 A12 0.70 A13 0.66 A14 0.65 A15 0.64 A16 0.62 A17 0.62 A18 0.61 A19 0.60 M1 0.79 M2 0.73 M3 0.70 M4 0.70 M5 0.70 M6 0.69 M7 0.67 M8 0.64 M9 0.64 M10 0.64 M11 0.63 According to the results in Table 4, Factor 1 is composed of 19 items whose factor loadings are between 0.60-0.80. Furthermore, 11 items are under the second construct (Factor 2) and the factor loadings of this items range between 0.63-0.79. As a result of EFA, 5 items were removed from the scale and 30 items remained in the final version of the scale. 3.5. Confirmatory factor analysis Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was applied to test the construct validity of data derived as a result of EFA. CFA is used to test the derived factors fit with hypothetical factors. AFA is used to test which variable groups are highly correlated with which factors. On the other hand, DFA is used to determine whether variable groups contributing to the specified number of factors are adequately represented by these factors (Aytaç & Öngen, 2012). International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 2019, 6(4), 1018-1035 1027 Table 6. Goodness of Fit Indices for Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit Goodness of Fit Indices Value Decision χ²/sd (chi-square/degrees of freedom) 2.011 Perfect Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) 0.076 Acceptable Normed Fit Index (NFI ) 0.849 Not acceptable Comparative Fit Index (CFI) 0.901 Acceptable Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) 0.903 Acceptable The goodness of fit results for the Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit are given in Table 6. The results show that χ²/sd= 2.011. According to Kline (2005), the chi-square/degrees of freedom value shows a perfect fit when it is below 3, whereas a value between 3 and 5 shows an acceptable fit. Thus, the scale has a perfect fit in terms of χ²/sd. The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) value for the Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit was found to be 0.076. For an acceptable fit for the model, RMSEA should be between 0.05-0.08. In this research, RMSEA showed acceptable fit for the tested model (Brown, 2006). The Normed Fit Index is used to determine the accurateness of model with the null hypothesis and takes values between 0-1. NFI values between 0.95 and 1 show that the model has perfect fir, and values ranging between 0.90-0.95 indicate an acceptable fit. The NFI value of the Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit was found to be 0.849, indicating that the model did not show acceptable fit in terms of NFI (Kline, 2005). The acceptable range for the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) value is between 0.90 – 0.95, and values over 0.90 indicate an acceptable fit for the model (Tabachnizk and Fidell, 2001). The CFI value of Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit was found to be 0.901 and the model showed acceptable fit. The Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) value of the Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit was found to be 0.903 and the model showed acceptable fit. If the GFI value is in the range between 0.90-0.95, this shows that there is a good fit for the model (Ayyıldız & Cengiz, 2006). Yağcı & Güneyli 1028 Figure 1. Path Analysis Results for Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit CFA was conducted in order to test the construct validity of the scale. As a result of the CFA, 3 items were removed from the 30-item scale and the final form of the scale was formed with 27 items. A total of 16 items belonged to the professional teaching efficiency sub-scale, whereas the other 11 items formed another sub-scale called subject expertise efficiency. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 2019, 6(4), 1018-1035 1029 3.6. Reliability analysis for scale of teacher efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit Internal consistency tests were used to indicate the reliability of the scale. Cronbach’s alpha and split-half reliability tests were used to determine the internal reliability of the scale. Table 7. Internal reliability tests results for Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms Turkish Language and Literature Audit Value Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient 0.94 Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient Part 1 Value 0.90 Total item 14 Part 2 Value 0.93 Total item 13 Split half correlation 0.66 Spearman-Brown Coefficient 0.79 Guttman Split-Half Coefficient 0.79 According to Table 7, the Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient for Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit was found to be 0.94. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for professional teaching efficiency and subject expertise efficiency were found to be 0.90 and 0.93, respectively. The split-half test results showed that the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.90 for the first half, which is formed by 14 items of the scale, while for the second half (13-items), the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was found to be 0.93. Split half correlation was calculated as 0.66. The Spearman-Brown Coefficient and Guttman Split-Half Coefficient were both 0.79. Yağcı & Güneyli 1030 Table 8. Item-total correlations Item-Total Correlations P1 0.59 P2 0.63 P3 0.51 P4 0.49 P5 0.48 P6 0.60 P7 0.62 P8 0.58 M9 0.50 P10 0.57 P11 0.61 F1 0.64 F2 0.67 F3 0.57 F4 0.53 F5 0.49 F6 0.67 F7 0.66 F8 0.62 F9 0.65 F10 0.64 F11 0.70 F12 0.68 F13 0.66 F14 0.69 F15 0.67 F16 0.64 P: Professional competence, F: Field competence Item-total correlations are given in Table 8. Correlations between items and total were ranged between 0.48 and 0.70. As a result of these analyses, it has been determined that the Scale of Teacher Efficiency in Terms of Turkish Language and Literature Audit is a valid and reliable tool. 4. Conclusion and recommendations The purpose of this study is to develop a scale for the audit criteria of the Turkish language and literature teachers and to calculate its reliability and validity. First, a pool of 40 propositions was created. A draft scale consisting of 35 items was created by subtracting 5 items according to expert opinions. Then, the scale consisting of 35 items was applied to the sample group and both validity and reliability analysis were performed on the obtained data. EFA showed that the scale was gathered around two factors, which were named as “qualifications related to field knowledge” and “qualifications related to professional knowledge”. As a result of the exploratory factor analysis results, five propositions were excluded from the form of the Teacher Competency Scale for Turkish Language and Literature Auditing consisting of 35 items and a 30-item form has been created. A total of 19 International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 2019, 6(4), 1018-1035 1031 items with factor loads varying between 0.60 and 0.80 were included in the field competence factor and 11 items with factor loads varying between 0.63 and 0.79 were included in the professional competence factor. In the professional competence factor, there are statements about the personal characteristics that teachers should possess, planning skills and what should be included in the learning-teaching process. On the other hand, in the field competence factor, there are some statements about how the teaching of four basic language skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing) should be performed. As a result of the EFA, CFA was applied to the 30-item construct of the scale collected under two factors. The goodness of fit values calculated by CFA are 762 / sd = 2.011, GFI = .903, RMSEA = .076, CFI = .901, NFI = .849. The goodness of fit values calculated by CFA indicate that the model is a valid model. As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis, 3 items from the 30-item scale were discarded and the final form of the scale was formed with 27 items. The 16 items included in the final form of the 27-item scale belong to field the competence sub-dimension and the remaining 11 items belong to the professional competence sub-dimension. The results of the reliability analysis of the scale are as follows: the Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency coefficient was 0.94. The Cronbach's alpha value for the professional competence sub-dimension was 0.90, while a value of 0.93 was found for the area competence. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the first half of the14-item scale was found to be 0.90, while the Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the second half was 0.93. The correlation coefficient between the halves was 0.66. The Spearman-Brown Coefficient and Guttman Split-Half Coefficient of the scale were 0.79. When the item-total correlation coefficients were examined, it was determined that the correlation coefficients of the scale items with the total ranged between 0.48 and 0.70. As a result, it can be said that the scale related to the criteria of the Turkish Language and Literature Teacher's Audit Criteria is valid and reliable. It should be noted that all items are positive, two factors can be calculated separately and in addition, the total score of the 5 Likert scale can be calculated as follows: “5=Vital”, “4=necessary”, “3=reasonably necessary”, “2=unnecessary”, “1=too unnecessary”. It can be stated that as the scores received by the respondents increase, the competence level of Turkish language and literature teachers will increase and the level of competence will decrease as the scores decrease. Based on the obtained findings, it can be said that the measurement tool developed within the scope of this study will eliminate a significant deficiency in the related literature, because it will be possible to discuss the auditing criteria for Turkish language and literature teachers. Yağcı & Güneyli 1032 References Ayyıldız, H., Cengiz, E. (2006). Pazarlama modellerinin testinde kullanılabilecek yapısal eşitlik modeli (yem) üzerine kavramsal bir inceleme, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 11(1), 63-84. Aytaç, M., ve Öngen, B. (2012). Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile yeni çevresel paradigma ölçeğinin yapı geçerliliğinin incelenmesi. İstatistikçiler Dergisi, 5(1), 14-22. Barth, J. L. ve Demirtaş, A. (1997). İlköğretim sosyal bilgiler öğretimi. Ankara: YÖK/Dünya Bankası Milli Eğitimi Geliştirme Projesi, Öğretmen Eğitimi Dizisi. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (First Edition). NY: Guilford Publications, Inc. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 32(32), 470-483. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2009). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum (9. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem A Yayınları. Cemiloğlu, M.(2003). Türk dili ve edebiyatı öğretimi (1. Baskı). İstanbul: Alfa. Confrey, J. (1990). What constructivism implies for teaching. In R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, & N. Noddings (Eds.), Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph No. 4: Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 107-122). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Doğanay, A. (2005). Hayat bilgisi ve sosyal bilgiler öğretimi, sosyal bilgiler öğretimi. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık. Eacute, J. ve Esteve, M. (2000). The transformation of the teachers’ role at the end of the twentieth century: New challenges for the future. Educational Review, 52(2), 197-209. Good, T.L. & Grouws, D.A. (1979). The missouri mathematics effectiveness project: An experimental study in fourth-grade classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(3), 355. Gürkan, T. (2001). Bireyin çok yönlü gelişimi. Bilim ve Aklın Aydınlığında Eğitim Dergisi. Sayı 22. Gökalp, S. (2010). İlköğretim müfettişlerinin öğretmen teftişlerindeki denetim görevlerini yerine getirme derecelerine ilişkin ilköğretim okullarında görev yapan öğretmenlerin algılarının incelenmesi (Mersin merkez örneği), Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Mersin Üniversitesi, Mersin. Karakış, M. (2007). İlköğretimde güncel denetim duruşunun öğretmenlik bilincini uyandırma yeterliliğine ilişkin öğretmen görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Dicle Üniversitesi, Diyarbakır. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of Structural Equation Modeling, (Second Edition). NY: Guilford Publications, Inc. Marshall, J. (1994). Anadili ve yazın öğretimi (Çev. Cahit Külebi). Başak Yayınları, Ankara, 62. Özabacı, N. ve Acat, B. M. (2005). Öğretmen adaylarının kendi özellikleri ile ideal öğretmen özelliklerine dönük algılarının karşılaştırılması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 42(42), 211-236. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 2019, 6(4), 1018-1035 1033 Özyar, A. (2003). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı’nın öğretmen yetiştirme politikaları. Retrieved from http://oyegm.meb.gov.tr in 5th of January 2019. Power, B. M. and R.S. Hubbard (eds), (2002), Language development: A reader for teachers, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Rosenshine, B. & Stevens, R. (1986). Teaching functions. Handbook of research on teaching, 3, 376-391. Ryan, D. (1960). Characteristics of effective teachers. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Saraç, C. (2005). Türk dili ve edebiyatı/Türkçe öğretmenlerinin yetiştirilmesi. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 21, 211 – 222. Sağır, M. (2005). İlköğretim kurumlarında görevli öğretmenlerin işbaşında yetişmelerinde, müfettişlerin denetim rolüne ilişkin öğretmen, yönetici ve müfettiş algıları. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu. Seçer, İ. (2015). Psikolojik test geliştirme ve uyarlama süreci. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. Seferoğlu, S. S. (2003). Öğretmenlerin hizmet-içi eğitiminde yeni yaklaşımlar. Çağdaş Eğitim Sistemlerinde Öğretmen Yetiştirme Ulusal Sempozyumu, Eğitimde Yansımalar: VII, s. 149-167. Senemoğlu, N. (2001). Öğrenci görüşlerine göre öğretmen yeterlilikleri, Eğitimde Yansımalar: VI 193-215, Öğretmen Hüseyin Hüsnü Tekışık Eğitim Araştırma Geliştirme Vakfı Yayınları, Ankara. Soylu, E. (2003). İlköğretim müfettişlerinin öğretmen denetimlerinde denetim ilkelerini uygulamaya ilişkin müfettiş ve öğretmen görüşleri (Gaziantep ili örneği), Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara. Strickland, D. S., Galda, L. ve Cullinan, B. E. (2004). Language arts: Learning and teaching. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th edition). Allyn & Bacon, Boston. Yıldız, D. Ç ve Yavuz, M. (2015). Türkçe öğretmenlerinin görüşlerine göre denetimin değerlendirilmesi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 38, 191-206. http://oyegm.meb.gov.tr/ Yağcı & Güneyli 1034 SCALE OF AUDITING CRITERIA FOR TURKISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE TEACHERS V e r y N e c e ss a r y N e c e ss a r y M o d e r a te ly N e c e ss a r y U n n e c e ss a r y V e r y U n n e c e ss a r y Professional Competence 1. To have research skills and understanding 2. Planning the teaching taking individual differences into account 3. Associating knowledge and skills between courses 4. Recognizing the developmental characteristics of students 5. Teaching to learn 6. Helping students develop themselves 7. Giving importance to learning styles of students 8. To use teaching-learning strategy, methods, techniques, tactics in an appropriate and effective way 9. Ensuring that all students participate in multiple in-school learning environments (seminars, conferences, panels…) that improve their interaction with me and with each other, and organize such learning environments 10. Ensure that all students participate in multiple learning environments (seminars, conferences, panels…) outside the school, which improve their interaction with me and with each other, and organize such learning environments 11. To direct students to use various materials and resources Field competence 12. To ensure that the students follow certain rules in the listening process. 13. Recognizing the barriers to good listening and solving problems related to listening 14. To direct the students to use the rules related to Turkish in proper and correct way while expressing their feelings, thoughts, impressions and dreams. 15. To ensure that students pay attention to speech, emphasis and intonation while speaking. 16. To encourage the students to use the Turkish language instead of the foreign language words while speaking. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 2019, 6(4), 1018-1035 1035 17. To ensure comprehension of the integrity of meaning in paragraphs and texts 18. To select a book to evaluate students' free time and to give them the habit of reading books continuously 19. To help students implement vocabulary, phonetic, grammar and writing rules in their writing tasks 20. To introduce different types of literature to students and to ensure that they comprehend similarities and differences 21. To introduce the structural features of Turkish 22. To ensure that students use punctuation marks correctly and in place 23. To teach students the rules of spelling 24. To ensure comprehension the relations between the words 25. To follow the changes and developments in Turkish in terms of vocabulary and usage. 26. To make students understand the forms of expression 27. To make students perceive the types of texts in Turkish literature