Perception of Ecological Literacy in Education: A Scale Development Study

The increase in the world population day by day affects the balance of the living world, nature, and environment. Due to unawareness and misuse, the emergence of some environmental imbalances causes the formation of ecological problems. In order to prevent the emergence of these problems or to combat them, everyone in the education process should have an awareness level of ecological literacy. The aim of the research conducted in this direction is to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool for determining the ecological literacy levels of teachers. Within the framework of the purpose of the research, a literature review on ecology and ecological literacy was conducted. An item pool of 96 items was created. Language, meaning and content validity of the items forming the trial scale form was ensured. The data of the research were obtained with the participation of 879 teachers working in public schools in Turkey. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed on the obtained data. The final ecological literacy scale consists of three different components: cognitive ( α :.84), affective ( α :.87), and behavioral ( α :.92) attitudes. According to the results of the analysis, it can be said that the scale developed is reliable enough to measure teachers’ ecological literacy attitudes.


INTRODUCTION
Ecology is a developing and expanding branch of science that studies the interactions of living and non-living things and their relationship with their environments.The concept of literacy and the skills it contains vary.In this context, ecological literacy can be defined as transferring positive attitudes to life by developing a rich knowledge base with skills and values (Demir, 2021a).More specifically, ecological literacy means knowing the basic principles of ecology and using them in daily life, developing an understanding of how to conserve ecology by understanding man's place in the environment, and being able to recognize ecological problems and produce effective solutions to these problems.
Defining ecological literacy, which is the subject of the research, can be expressed as a very complex situation due to the different skills and components it includes (Jordan et al., 2009;Demir, 2021a).When the scientific studies on the research subject are examined, it can be said that different definitions are made.Ecological literacy, the ability to understand the interdependence of living with the concern to act on practical competences and knowledge (Inda, 2008); individuals' use of knowledge and understanding of ecological concepts in their lives and lifestyles (Lebo III, 2012); It is defined as a broad literacy (Demir, 2021a) that emphasizes the understanding of human and nature interaction with a system approach agriculture, shelter, energy use, urban design, transportation, economy, society, resource use and forestry; make changes about the future of life based on a comprehensive, holistic and similar understanding of the interrelationships between natural systems and human systems; understand the contextual and relational aspects of ecological well-being and learning as central to the pursuit of sustainability; to equip individuals with the necessary knowledge and competencies to deal with the solution of ecological problems holistically; to create a sustainable lifestyle that recognizes relationships and interdependence with the natural world; respect and care for ecological requirements for the survival of humans and species; introduce new skills to respond effectively to ecological problems; steer school systems towards a sustainable future; thinking about ecological problems based on ecological knowledge, etc." can be sorted (Orr, 1992;Schwartz, 1999;Curthoys & Cuthbertson, 2002;Cutter Mackenzie & Smith, 2003;Berkowitz et al., 2005;Wooltorton, 2006;Borden, 2007;Puk, 2012;Boehnert, 2013;Megat Jiwa, & Esa, 2013;Pitman & Daniels, 2016;Demir, 2021a).In line with these purposes, some awareness-based updates are required due to the need variability of the world and the environment we live in (Koçoğlu & Egüz, 2019;Koçoğlu & Demir, 2021a).This research was conducted to determine the impact of ecological literacy on these updates.Studies conducted on the subject in Yalçınkaya (2012), Demir (2016), Çetin and Yalçınkaya (2018) can be stated to positively affect cognitive and affective readiness regarding ecological literacy.

METHOD
In this research, which was designed as a scale development study, the information about the teachers participating in the study was given under the title of "universe and sample", item writing and drafting were given in the first step, the preparations before the data analysis process were given in the second step, and the validity and reliability studies were given in the third step.

Universe and Sample
The universe of the research consists of teachers working in public schools in Turkey.In order to conduct reliability and validity analyzes in scale studies, the number of samples should be at least five and at most ten times the number of scale items (Tavşancıl, 2018).In this context, it can be said that since the number of scale items in the study was 96, the sample size was 879 people in total, and the scale data was sufficient for the item analysis.In the scale development study, two different participant groups were formed for exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis.The first group consists of 400 teachers and the second group consists of 479 teachers.Information on the participant groups is given in Table 1.
As seen in Table 1, 400 teachers participated in the first application group of the study and 479 teachers participated in the second application group.In the first application group, 129 women, 271 men, 177 women and 302 men in the second group.Positions of duty differ from provinces, districts and villages.Looking at the seniority of the teachers, there are teachers who have a seniority starting from 1 year and up to 31 years and above.In this respect, the personal characteristics of the participants in the study vary.

Process Steps
In this section, the scale development stages are included.In the first step, the process of creating the item pool and getting it ready for pre-application; pre-application process in the second processing step; In the third step, it includes findings on item-total correlation, exploratory factor analysis, reliability analysis of internal consistency and confirmatory factor analysis for validity and reliability analysis.
First Processing Step: In the preparation of the scale, the scope of the scale was determined first.In this context, the theoretical framework for ecology, ecological literacy and environmental literacy has been determined.A literature review was conducted on the subject.It was decided to prepare the scale for teachers.An item pool should be created to be 5-6 times the total number of items planned to be implemented in the scale.As a result of the surveyed measurement tools and literature, a pool of 30 positive or negative scale items was created for cognitive attitude, 35 for affective attitude, and 31 for behavioral attitude.In order to determine the content and content validity of the items, arrangements were made in line with the opinions and suggestions of experts in the field of social studies education, curriculum development, measurement and evaluation, research methods and statistics, and a 96-item measurement tool was prepared for pre-application.While preparing this measurement tool, the following procedures were followed in the process: 1. Pre-evaluation of scale items, 2. Evaluation of the suitability of the scale items, 3. Ensuring the content and face validity of the scale items (Assessment and evaluation and receiving the opinions of Turkish language experts, field experts), 4. Before the measurement tool was applied, it was examined by teachers working in public schools in order to evaluate the scale items in terms of intelligibility and suitability.In addition, the opinions of field experts were consulted in order to ensure the content and face validity of the scale items (Assessment and Evaluation and Turkish Language Expert, etc.), and 5.As a result of the opinions regarding the scale items, necessary corrections and additions were made in the relevant items.Incomprehensible and repetitive items have been deleted.The "Ecological Literacy Scale", which has a total of 96 items in its final form, has been prepared for pre-application.

Table 1. Information of the participants in the study
The measuring tool, which was given its final shape for the pre-application, consists of four parts.In the first part of the measurement tool, there are items measuring the cognitive attitudes of ecological literacy, in the second part, the items measuring the affective attitudes, in the third part, the items measuring the behavioral attitudes, and in the fourth part, the personal information part.For the first three sections, a 5-point Likert rating was made.According to this; It was defined as "1: Strongly Agree", "2: Agree Mostly", "3: Agree Moderately", "4: Agree Slightly" and "5: Agree Strongly".
In the evaluation of the arithmetic averages of the answers given by the participants to the research questions, "1.00-1.79= Strongly Disagree", "1.80 -2.59 = Agree Slightly", "2.60 -3.39 = Agree Moderately", "3.40 -4.19 = Agree Mostly", "4.20-5.00= Totally Agree" criteria are taken as basis.In this case, the ecological literacy levels of teachers who score 4.20 and above are "very good"; For 3.40-4.19points, teachers are considered as "good", those with 2.60-3.39 points as "medium", teachers with 1.80-2.59points as "low" and those with 1.00-1.79points as "very low".
Second Process Step: The preliminary application of the research was carried out with the participation of teachers working in public schools.The number of participants required for the statistical analyzes to be meaningful and for the factor loadings to be evident after the pre-application is a matter of debate.Existing opinions are examined in three categories.These are: Number of items/number of observations, absolute number of observations and expected number of factors/number of observations (Yurdugül, 2013).Comfrey and Lee (1992) consider 300 participants as "good" for their absolute width of observation in factor formations. Osborne and Costello (2004) found that the ratio of the number of observations to be 11 times the number of factors.This research, the first application of which was carried out, was carried out with 400 teachers, exceeding three times the number of items for the 96-item measurement tool.In the second application, 479 teachers took part.
Data were collected again for the confirmatory factor analysis performed to test the construct validity of the study.In the second application of the study, there were 479 teachers who were similar to the schools in the universe but were not included in the first sample.As a result of the application, the findings related to the validity and reliability analyzes reached with the data collection tools are given in the following title.
Third Process Step: In this section, findings related to validity and reliability analyzes are given.Item-total correlation, factor loadings, explained variance, KMO value, Barlett sphericity value and Cronbach Alpha coefficient are included in the table.
For validity and reliability analysis, 96 items were included in the "Ecological Literacy Scale" before the pre-application.The reliability of the scale was tested by calculating the Cronbach's Alpha internal consistency coefficient and item-total correlations.In the reliability analysis, the items with item-total correlations below .30were excluded from the evaluation, and validity and reliability analyzes were repeated.
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value and Barlett Sphericity Test results were examined in order to test whether the scale is suitable for evaluation with exploratory factor analysis.The data set with a KMO value of .913and a significant Barlett test (p<.01) was found to be suitable for factor analysis.Büyüköztürk (2002) stated that if the KMO coefficient is higher than .60 and the Barlett test is significant, the data are suitable for factor analysis.At this point, exploratory factor analysis was performed first to examine the construct validity of the scale, and then confirmatory factor analysis was applied to test the suitability of the model determined in exploratory factor analysis.
In the exploratory factor analysis, three different components (cognitive, affective and behavioral attitudes) were handled separately.Each component is constrained as a single factor construct.
Thus, each component can be used as a stand-alone measurement tool.The validity and reliability values for three different components are given below.
When Table 2 is examined, factor loads of cognitive attitude vary between .59 and .79.It is seen that the item-total correlations of the items in the cognitive attitude vary between .32 and .53.The alpha consistency coefficient of the scale is .84.Accordingly, behavioral attitude is a single factor structure and the scale explains 52.1%.When Table 3 is examined, factor loads of affective attitude vary between .51 and .74.It is seen that the item-total correlations of the items in the affective attitude vary between .31 and .50.The alpha consistency coefficient of the scale is .87.Accordingly, behavioral attitude is a single factor structure and the scale explains 40.67%.
When Table 4 is examined, factor loads of behavioral attitudes vary between .39 and .67.It is seen that the item-total correlations of the items in the behavioral attitude vary between .59 and .76.The alpha consistency coefficient of the scale is .92.Accordingly, behavioral attitude is a single factor structure and the scale explains 50.1%.
In the correlation test conducted to determine the relationship between cognitive, affective and behavioral attitudes, which are the components of ecological literacy, it is seen that there are moderately positive and significant relationships between the components of cognitive and affective attitudes, but there is no significant relationship between the two variables with behavioral attitude.The values obtained are given in Table 5: As seen in Table 5, the level of relationship between attitudes varies.In this case, as mentioned before, it can be mentioned that there is a moderate positive relationship between affective attitude and cognitive attitude.There is no significant relationship between behavioral attitude and other attitudes.
The first requirement of being ecologically literate individuals is to build ecological literacy on knowledge and attitudes.Ecological literacy begins with knowledge.Then, after environmental knowledge and attitudes are acquired, it turns into a behavioral dimension (Inda, 2008;Davidson, 2010).The aims of the behavioral attitudes of ecological literacy are to gain new skills, make conscious decisions, create active participation in the environment, and enable individuals to communicate effectively with nature.It can be said that behavioral attitude requires a process (Demir, 2021b).Another method for construct validity of the measurement tool is Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).Confirmatory Factor Analysis was performed to determine whether the factor structure found in the exploratory factor analysis was confirmed or not.Chi-Square Fit Test for DFA performed in this study, comparative fit index (CFI), normed fit index (NFI), goodness fit index (GFI), adjusted  (Hooper et al., 2008).For the GFI, CFI, NFI, and IFI indices, 0.90 indicates acceptable fit and 0.95 indicates perfect fit (Bentler & Bonett, 1980;Hu & Bentler, 1999;Schermelleh-Engel et al., 2003).
For AGFI.,85 is an acceptable fit and.90 is a good fit; For SRMR, values of 0.05 are good fit and values between 0.05 and 0.10 are acceptable; For X 2 /SD, 2 and below indicate good fit, and 2 to 3 show acceptable fit (Schermelleh-Engel et al., 2003).Accordingly, it can be said that the three models we established fit well.The factor loadings of the models in which each of the cognitive, affective and behavioral attitudes are handled separately are shown in Figures 1, 2 and 3.The fit indices of the hand model were examined in the CFA on cognitive attitude, and the Chi-square value (X 2 =69.13,N=479, SD= 21, p=.000) was found to be significant.The fit index values are RMSEA; 0.060, GFI; 0.98, AGFI; 0.96, CFI; 0.99, IFI; 0.99, NFI; 0.98; It was found that ϰ2/df = 2.72.

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
In the study, it was aimed to develop an "Ecological Literacy Scale".For this purpose, the validity and reliability studies of the scale were carried out in the research conducted with the participation of teachers working in public schools in Turkey.The final version of the scale consists of 34 items in total, 7 of which are related to cognitive attitude dimension, 13 to affective attitude dimension, and 14 to behavioral attitude dimension.The scale follows a 5-point Likert rating where "1: Strongly Agree", "2: Agree Mostly", "3: Agree Moderately", "4: Agree Slightly" and "5: Agree Strongly".The highest score that can be obtained from the scale was determined as 170 and the lowest score as 34.A high score for each scale shows a high level of the respective dimension, while a high total score indicates a high level of ecological literacy.The total variance explained by the cognitive attitude dimension of the scale was 52.09% and the reliability coefficient (α) was .84;The total variance explained by the affective attitude dimension was 40.66% and the reliability coefficient (α) was .87,and the total variance explained by the behavioral attitude dimension was 50.13% and the reliability coefficient (α) was .92.In addition, as a result of the confirmatory factor analysis carried out regarding the structure of the scale, the fit indices of the model were examined and the Chi-square value (X 2 =69.13,N=479, SD= 21, p=.000) was found to be significant.The fit index values (RMSEA, GFI, AGFI, CFI, IFI, NFI, ϰ2/df) were found to be within acceptable limits.Considering the analyses conducted to test the construct validity and reliability of the scale, it was decided that the data collection tool made a valid and reliable measurement.According to these features, it is understood that the scale has valid and reliable features and can be used to determine the ecological literacy levels of teachers.In addition, by using this developed scale, problems arising from the teacher can be identified and relevant solutions can be developed in order to increase awareness about ecological literacy in educational institutions and learning environments.

Figure 1 .Figure 2 .
Figure 1.Load values of the model as a result of confirmatory factor analysis of cognitive attitude *Bilişsel tutum: Cognitive attitude

Figure 3 .
Figure 3. Load values of the model as a result of confirmatory factor analysis of behavioral attitude *Davranışsal tutum: Behavioral attitude

Table 4 .
Behavioral attitude reliability and validity values

Table 5 .
Correlation situations between ecological literacy components

Literacy Attitudes Correlation Between Attitudes Sensory Cognitive Behavioral
AGFI), excess fit index (IFI), mean of estimation errors.root square (RMSEA) and standardized root mean square error (SRMR) fit indices were examined.For RMSEA, values of.08 and below indicate good fit, and values between.08 and.10 indicate poor fit