Development of the Teacher Job Satisfaction Scale: A Validity and Reliability Study
Öğretmen İş Doyumu Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması
The purpose of this study was to develop a brief, unidimensional instrument for assessing teachers' overall satisfaction with the teaching profession and to examine its psychometric properties. The quantitative scale development study involved 1,009 teachers from Türkiye's seven geographical regions. An initial six-item pool was examined using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of an alternative four-item structure. The EFA yielded a Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin value of .888 and a significant Bartlett's test of sphericity, χ²(15) = 5087.011 (p < .001). The six-item single-factor structure explained 70.919% of the total variance, with factor loadings ranging from .806 to .863. The four-item CFA model yielded χ²(1) = 4.94, RMSEA = .063, CFI = 1.00, NNFI = .99, and SRMR = .006. Standardized factor loadings ranged from .80 to .87. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was .908, and the average variance extracted was approximately .699. The findings indicate that the four-item Teacher Job Satisfaction Scale demonstrates high internal consistency and promising evidence of convergent validity. Nevertheless, given the model's low degrees of freedom and the inclusion of correlated residuals, further validation using independent samples is recommended.
Bu araştırmanın amacı, öğretmenlerin öğretmenlik mesleğine yönelik genel iş doyumlarını değerlendirmek amacıyla kısa, tek boyutlu bir ölçme aracı geliştirmek ve psikometrik özelliklerini incelemektir. Nicel araştırma yaklaşımıyla yürütülen ölçek geliştirme çalışmasına Türkiye'nin yedi coğrafi bölgesinden toplam 1009 öğretmen katılmıştır. Başlangıçta altı maddeden oluşan madde havuzunun faktör yapısı açımlayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) ile incelenmiş, ardından dört maddelik alternatif yapı doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) ile değerlendirilmiştir. AFA sonucunda Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin değeri .888, Bartlett küresellik testi χ²(15) = 5087.011 (p < .001) olarak bulunmuştur. Altı maddelik tek faktörlü yapı toplam varyansın %70.919'unu açıklamış ve faktör yükleri .806 ile .863 arasında değişmiştir. Dört maddelik modelin DFA sonuçlarında χ²(1) = 4.94, RMSEA = .063, CFI = 1.00, NNFI = .99 ve SRMR = .006 değerleri elde edilmiştir. Standartlaştırılmış faktör yükleri .80 ile .87 arasında değişmiştir. Ölçeğin Cronbach alfa iç tutarlılık katsayısı .908, açıklanan ortalama varyans değeri yaklaşık .699 olarak belirlenmiştir. Bulgular, Öğretmen İş Doyumu Ölçeği'nin dört maddelik yapısının yüksek iç tutarlılığa sahip olduğunu ve yakınsak geçerlik açısından olumlu göstergeler sunduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Bununla birlikte, doğrulayıcı modelin düşük serbestlik derecesi ve hata terimleri arasında tanımlanan kovaryans nedeniyle, yapının bağımsız örneklemlerde yeniden doğrulanması önerilmektedir.
Azizi, M. Z. F. B. M., & Abdullah, N.-A. (2021). Depression, anxiety, stress ratios and job satisfaction in special education schools in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 10(1), 686–699. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v10-i1/9624
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
Dekawati, I., Pujiyati, W., & Sitoresmi, S. (2021). The influence of principal’s role and work motivation to teachers job satisfaction. International Journal of Educational Management and Innovation, 2(1), 100–115. https://doi.org/10.12928/ijemi.v2i1.3215
DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Giraldo-O’Meara, M., Marín-García, J. A., & Martínez-Gómez, M. (2014). Validation of the JDS satisfaction scales applied to educational university environments. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 7(1), 72–99. https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.906
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Ho, C. L., & Au, W. T. (2006). Teaching satisfaction scale: Measuring job satisfaction of teachers. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(1), 172–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405278573
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Karasar, N. (2020). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi: Kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
MacCallum, R. C., Roznowski, M., & Necowitz, L. B. (1992). Model modifications in covariance structure analysis: The problem of capitalization on chance. Psychological Bulletin, 111(3), 490–504. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.111.3.490
MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84–99. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84
Mustafa, M. Z., Buntat, Y., Ahad, R., Razzaq, A., & Bokhari, N. (2019). Job satisfaction survey: A confirmatory factorial analysis based on vocational colleges teachers sample. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 11(3), 144–154. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2019.11.03.017
Pepe, A., Addimando, L., & Veronese, G. (2017). Measuring teacher job satisfaction: Assessing invariance in the Teacher Job Satisfaction Scale (TJSS) across six countries. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 13(3), 396–416. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v13i3.1389
Richemond, D. J., & Needham, C. (2020). The impact of wellness programs on employee job satisfaction in colleges and universities. Open Journal of Business and Management, 8(2), 569–599. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2020.82035
Sahito, Z., & Väisänen, P. (2020). A literature review on teachers’ job satisfaction in developing countries: Recommendations and solutions for the enhancement of the job. Review of Education, 8(1), 3–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3159
Sinval, J., & Marôco, J. P. (2020). Short Index of Job Satisfaction: Validity evidence from Portugal and Brazil. PLOS ONE, 15(4), Article e0231474. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231474
Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (12. baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Management and Educational Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Downloads
Article Information
- Article Type Articles
- Submitted October 16, 2026
- Published October 16, 2026
- Issue Vol. 5 No. 3 (2026): JMEDUSCI
- Section Articles
