Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 2 – uploaded by Sevda Ceylan Dadakoğlu

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Table 2. Rokeach Values Inventory Factor Analysis Result "Rokeach Values Inventory" (Form B) was brought into Turkish by Caliskur and Aslan (2013) by conducting a validity and reliability study. Correlative and factor analysis methods were used in the reliability and validity study of the Rokeach Values Inventory. To determine the test-retest reliability of the test, first of all, the test was administered to the same student group at two different times. The analysis showed no statistically significant difference between the first and second applications in objective values. Spearman Correlation Coefficient was calculated to find the test-retest reliability coefficient of the inventory. It was determined that the reliability coefficients ranged between Rho=.18 and .81 for the terminal values and between Rho=.16 and .67 for the instrumental values. Significant correlation results were obtained for all items (de Winter et al., 2016; Prion & Haerling, 2014). Within the scope of the validity study, the KMO=(.81) value obtained as a result of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin analysis to determine the construct validity level showed that the number of members of the study group was sufficient for factor analysis. As a result of the Bartlett test, a significant effect of y2= 2871.394 (p<.001) was obtained (Horn & Engstrom, 1979; Williams et al., 2010). On the other hand, the seven factors obtained from the factor analysis explain 45,156% of the variance of the variable aft walitec that the tect aime tq meaciire (Tahle 7)

Table 2 Rokeach Values Inventory Factor Analysis Result "Rokeach Values Inventory" (Form B) was brought into Turkish by Caliskur and Aslan (2013) by conducting a validity and reliability study. Correlative and factor analysis methods were used in the reliability and validity study of the Rokeach Values Inventory. To determine the test-retest reliability of the test, first of all, the test was administered to the same student group at two different times. The analysis showed no statistically significant difference between the first and second applications in objective values. Spearman Correlation Coefficient was calculated to find the test-retest reliability coefficient of the inventory. It was determined that the reliability coefficients ranged between Rho=.18 and .81 for the terminal values and between Rho=.16 and .67 for the instrumental values. Significant correlation results were obtained for all items (de Winter et al., 2016; Prion & Haerling, 2014). Within the scope of the validity study, the KMO=(.81) value obtained as a result of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin analysis to determine the construct validity level showed that the number of members of the study group was sufficient for factor analysis. As a result of the Bartlett test, a significant effect of y2= 2871.394 (p<.001) was obtained (Horn & Engstrom, 1979; Williams et al., 2010). On the other hand, the seven factors obtained from the factor analysis explain 45,156% of the variance of the variable aft walitec that the tect aime tq meaciire (Tahle 7)

Related Figures (8)

Figure 1. 2020 young population ratio by age group TURKSTAT, 2021
Figure 1. 2020 young population ratio by age group TURKSTAT, 2021
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of the Study Group of the Research According to Table 1, it is seen that 56% of the students who form the study group are female, and 44% re male; It is seen that 19% of them are in the 9th grade, 17% in the 10th grade, 38% in the 11th grade, and 6% in the 12th grade.
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of the Study Group of the Research According to Table 1, it is seen that 56% of the students who form the study group are female, and 44% re male; It is seen that 19% of them are in the 9th grade, 17% in the 10th grade, 38% in the 11th grade, and 6% in the 12th grade.
Table 3. Rokeach Values Inventory (Form E) Sub-Dimensions and Values Included
Table 3. Rokeach Values Inventory (Form E) Sub-Dimensions and Values Included
Table 4. The Five Values Most Preferred by High School Students in the First Place When Table 4, which shows the values that students prefer in the first place, is examined, the most common values are freedom (16,2%), family safety (15,7%), afterlife security (14,9%), and happiness (7,7%), a comfortable life (7,3%); As for instrumental values, they preferred to be independent (24,7%), honest (17,5%), logical (10,3%), courageous (6,6%) and intellectual (6,6%), respectively.
Table 4. The Five Values Most Preferred by High School Students in the First Place When Table 4, which shows the values that students prefer in the first place, is examined, the most common values are freedom (16,2%), family safety (15,7%), afterlife security (14,9%), and happiness (7,7%), a comfortable life (7,3%); As for instrumental values, they preferred to be independent (24,7%), honest (17,5%), logical (10,3%), courageous (6,6%) and intellectual (6,6%), respectively.
Table 5. Ranking of High School Students’ Value Preferences The order of importance for the students according to the average order of preference of the terminal and instrumental values is shown in detail in Table 6. Accordingly, the terminal values at the top are as follows: afterlife security (avg.=2.17; Sd.= 1.53), family security (avg.=2.26; Sd= 1.29) and freedom (avg.= 1.29). =2.60; Ss=1.38); independent of instrumental values (mean=2.3; Sd= 1.5), honest (mean=2.4; Sd= 1.4) and intellectual (mean=2.8; Sd= 1.4).
Table 5. Ranking of High School Students’ Value Preferences The order of importance for the students according to the average order of preference of the terminal and instrumental values is shown in detail in Table 6. Accordingly, the terminal values at the top are as follows: afterlife security (avg.=2.17; Sd.= 1.53), family security (avg.=2.26; Sd= 1.29) and freedom (avg.= 1.29). =2.60; Ss=1.38); independent of instrumental values (mean=2.3; Sd= 1.5), honest (mean=2.4; Sd= 1.4) and intellectual (mean=2.8; Sd= 1.4).
Table 6. Mann Whitney-U Test Results of Terminal and Instrumental Values According to Students’ Gender As seen in Table 6, there are significant differences between genders through the terminal values as; inner peace (U=8089.50; p<.05), freedom (U=30027; p<.05), and pleasure (U=8547.50; p<.05); and through the instrumental values as; honest (U=23,937; p<.05), broad-minded (U=14588.50; p<.05) and ambitious (U=8173.50; p<.05). The fact that the rank averages are small means that this value is preferred for higher ranks in the relevant gender. Accordingly, female students choose the values of inner peace, freedom, honesty, and broad- mindedness in higher ranks than male students. On the other hand, male students prefer pleasure and ambitious values higher than female students; in other words, they attribute more importance to these values than female students.
Table 6. Mann Whitney-U Test Results of Terminal and Instrumental Values According to Students’ Gender As seen in Table 6, there are significant differences between genders through the terminal values as; inner peace (U=8089.50; p<.05), freedom (U=30027; p<.05), and pleasure (U=8547.50; p<.05); and through the instrumental values as; honest (U=23,937; p<.05), broad-minded (U=14588.50; p<.05) and ambitious (U=8173.50; p<.05). The fact that the rank averages are small means that this value is preferred for higher ranks in the relevant gender. Accordingly, female students choose the values of inner peace, freedom, honesty, and broad- mindedness in higher ranks than male students. On the other hand, male students prefer pleasure and ambitious values higher than female students; in other words, they attribute more importance to these values than female students.
The purpose of this study is to determine your hierarchies of terminal-instrumental values. You are asked to examine and sort each section within itself. First of all, after reviewing all of the value expressions in "List [" you should choose the five values that you consider most important among these values. Then, write the number '1' to the value you consider the most important and the number '2' to the value you consider the second most important and number it from 1 to 5 for the five values you choose. When List I enumeration is finished, you are requested to switch to List II and do the same for the values here. There are no right or wrong answers to the questions. The aim is to reveal your views. Your answers will only be used as data in scientific research, and your personal information is not requested. Your sincere answers to the questions are essential for the reliability of the research results. Thank you in advance for your contribution to the research.
The purpose of this study is to determine your hierarchies of terminal-instrumental values. You are asked to examine and sort each section within itself. First of all, after reviewing all of the value expressions in "List [" you should choose the five values that you consider most important among these values. Then, write the number '1' to the value you consider the most important and the number '2' to the value you consider the second most important and number it from 1 to 5 for the five values you choose. When List I enumeration is finished, you are requested to switch to List II and do the same for the values here. There are no right or wrong answers to the questions. The aim is to reveal your views. Your answers will only be used as data in scientific research, and your personal information is not requested. Your sincere answers to the questions are essential for the reliability of the research results. Thank you in advance for your contribution to the research.
LIST IT:
LIST IT:
Related topics:
Values EducationEducation for Life
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved