You are here

Home » Content

PAMUKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ ÖĞRETİM ELEMANLARINDA AKADEMİK ORTAM DOYUM DÜZEYİ

THE LEVEL OF ACADEMİC SETTİNG SATİSFACTİON AMONG PAMUKKALE UNIVERSITY ACADEMICIANS

Journal Name:

  • Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2004

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
This study was designed to achieve three objectives. The first was to investigate the level of satisfaction with working conditions, social climate and relationship with students in Pamukkale University academicians and its relationship with some demographic characteristics. The second was to make contributions for productivity and effectiveness in teaching and research activities in Pamukkale University. The third objective was to examine the psychometric properties of Academic Setting Evaluation Questionnaire. A total of 165 academicians working in PAU participated to the study. The results showed that the level of academic setting satisfaction in academicians is very low in general and it is changing meaningfully depending on the type of faculty, appellation, age, the seniority year and number of publications. in adition, it was found that the Academic Setting Evaluation Questionnaire is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the level of academic setting satisfaction The results obtained in the study were discussed in terms of their implications and causes and recomendations were presented.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışma ile üç temel amaca ulaşılmaya çalışılmıştır. Bunlardan birincisi Pamukkale Üniversitesi öğretim elemanlarının çalışma koşulları, sosyal atmosfer ve öğrencilerle ilişkiler boyutlarında doyum düzeylerini ve bunların kendileriyle ilgili çeşitli özelliklerle ilişkisini araştırmaktır. ikincisi gelişmekte olan bir üniversite olarak Pamukkale Üniversitesi'nde öğretim ve araştırma faaliyetlerinde üretkenliğin ve etkililiğin daha da güçlendirilmesine katkıda bulunmaktır. Üçüncüsü ise, geliştirilen bir ölçeğin (Akademik Ortam Değerlendirme Ölçeği) psikometrik özelliklerini incelemektir. Araştırmaya Pamukkale Üniversitesi'nde görev yapan 165 öğretim elemanı katılmıştır. Sonuçlar, öğretim elemanlarında akademik ortam doyum düzeyinin genelde çok düşük olduğunu, bunun da fakülte, unvan, yaş, kıdem yılı ve yayın sayısına göre anlamlı düzeyde değiştiğini göstermiştir. Ayrıca, Akademik Ortam Değerlendirme Ölçeği'nin doyum düzeyini test etmede kullanılabilecek güvenirlik ve geçerlik özelliklerine sahip olduğu da bulgulanmıştır. Araştırmada elde edilen bulgular, doğurguları ve nedenleri açısından tartışılmış ve ilgililere önerilerde bulunulmuştur.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-pamukkale-universitesi-ogretim-elemanlarinda-akademik-ortam-doyum-duzeyi.pdf
  • 1
1-7
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Blase, J. Roberts, J. (1994). The Micropolitics ofTeacher Work Involvement: Effective Principals' İmpacts on Teaehers. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 40,
67-94.
Costley, D.L., Melgoza, C.S. Todd, R. (1994). Human Relations in Organizations, 5th ed. St.Paul MN: West Publishing Company.
Fernandez, J. Mateo, M.A. (1993). The Development and Factorial Validation of the Academic Setting Evaluation Questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53.
Fernandez, j. Mateo, M.A. (1995). Evaluation of the Setting in Which University Faculty Caarry out Their Teaching and Research Functions: The ASEQ. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 2.
Fraser, B.J. Treagust, D.F. (1986). Validity and use of an instrument for assesing
classroom psyehosocial environment in higher education. Higher Education, 15.
Gelbal, S., (1994). p
Madde Güçlük İndeksi ile Rasch Modelinin b Parametresi ve
Bunlara Dayalı Yetenek Ölçüleri Üzerine Bir Karşılaştırma, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Green-Reese, S. Johson, D.J. (1991). Teacher Job Satisfaction and Teacher Job Stress: School Size,Age and Teaching Experince. Education, 112, 2, 247-253.
Herman, J., Dunham, R. Hulin, C. (1980). Job Satisfaction in the United States in the
1970s\ Journal of Applied Psycholgy, 65, 364-367. Hill, M.D. (1987). A Theoretical Analysis of Faculty Job Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction.
Educational Research Quarterly, 10, 36-44. Hoy, W.K. Miskel, C. (1991). Educational Administration: Theory, Research and
Practice. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. Kabeta, M.H., "University Productive Sector Linkages for Quality of Life İmprovement",
Institute of Distance Education, 1999. Lathem, A.S. (1998). Teacher Satisfaction. Educational Leadership, 55, 5, 82-83. Lawlet, E.E., Porter, L.W. (1967). The Effect of Performance on Job Satisfaction.
Industrial Relations, A Journal of Econumy and Society, 7, 1, 20-28.
Leithwood, K., Leonard, L. Sharratt, L. (1998). Conditions Fostering Organizational Learning in Schools.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 34, 243-276.
Miller, R.I. (1988). Merit Pay in United States Postsecondary Institutions. Higher Education, 17.
Moses, I. (1986). Promotion of Academic Staff: Reward and Incentive. Higher Education, 15.
Robillard, L. (2002). Quality of Life: A Concept Paper: Defining, Measuring and
Reporting Quality of Life for Canadians. Tressury Board of Canada Secretarlet.
Sweeney, J. (1982). Teacher Dissatisfaction on the Rise: Higher Level Needs Unfulfilled. Education, 102,2,203¬208.
Taylor, D.L. Tashakkori, A. (1995). Decision Participation and School Climate as Predictors of Job
Satisfaction and Teaehers' Sense of Efficacy. Journal of Experimental Education, 63,3,217-231.
Xin Ma MacMillan, R.B. (1999). Influences of Workplace Conditions on Teacher's Job Satisfaction. Journal of Educational Research, 93, 1, 39-48.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com