Özet:

Background: After “Law for the Prevention of the Harms of Tobacco Products” introduced on November 7, 1996 in Turkey, it was revised on the basis of the previous law on January 3, 2008 and was announced as “smoke-free air zone policy”. Thus the new implementation, inspired by the Spanish law, put an end to isolated smoking areas. As of May 19, 2009, indoor smoking was strictly banned in public institutions. Later on this was expanded for all business organizations in the wake of July 19, 2009. Teachers and school administrators have a relatively negative perception on smoke-free regulation in terms of their smoking habit (Fidan, Sezer, Demirel, Kara and Ünlü, 2006). Wold, Torsheim, Currie, and Roberts (2004) revealed that school managers and teachers keep on smoking in the school zone, especially outside the school building in seven European countries so that they legitimize smoking addiction in front of their pupils.From the viewpoint of teachers, Gözütok (1999) showed that when school administrators and teachers ranked descendingly 34 non-ethical behaviors for teachers, “smoking attitude in front of students” seems rather an admissible behavior and took the 30th place. Likewise, Güçlü (2010) cited that the research center of Democratic Educators Union declared that on account of the smoke-free law teachers set a bad example for pupils by smoking right outside the schoolyard.It is obvious that teachers and school managers as cigarette smokers are not suitable role models in education environment. As a matter of fact, the most important point determining the compliance with legal enforcement rely on the teacher and school managers' perception on the smoke-free law so that it would be able to estimate how the policy can attain its “smoke-free, tobacco-free school” goal.The purpose of this study is to investigate the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of Ferré, Moyer and Nobiling's Attitudes Towards Smoking Compliance Questionnaire released as part of Live Free- Tobacco Free Smoke Free Survey behalf on South Illiniois University. Method: Participants including teachers were recruited through Maltepe and Kartal districts in Istanbul and one hundred ninety-eight participants fulfilled the Turkish version survey with 15-items. They were assorted into two groups so that the first group consisted of one hundred twenty-seven teachers used for the structure validity study, and the other one consisted of seventy-one teachers used for the test-retest reliability study. In order to get the permission for translating the original survey into Turkish, we contacted Matt Moyer via email. Translated version of the survey After the survey translation into Turkish was done by a group including an linguist, an English teacher and a curriculum developer, it was appealed to Okullarda Dumansız Hava Sahası various educational administrator's view on Turkish version so as to confirm its content validity and cross-cultural conformity. Afterwards principal component and factor analysis, 27 % subgroup mean difference and test-retest reliability analysis was conducted through SPSS software. Findings and conclusions: Correlation matrix, KMO and Barlett's pretests were conducted with the data collected from one hundred twenty-seven teachers' questionnaire. Having examined the cross-correlation matrix regarding 15- items, it was found that there was no strong or weak correlation between them except third and thirteenth items. Later on, measure of sampling (MSA) table showed that two items has low anti-image values under .3 threshold value. Besides, Barlett's test indicated that the sample was adequate to conduct a factor analysis with the current sample size. Based upon these findings and expert views, three inappropriate items was extracted from the Turkish version. For second step, principal component and factor analysis was used to describe variability among observed variables consisted of twelve items left. According to factor values, it was brought out that the Turkish survey has two factors, plus one general factor which explains % 56.87 of total cumulative variance while first factor got a share of 44.29 % and latter 12.58 %, respectively. When performed the same survey twice at the different moments of time - within two weeks for this study-, the test retest reliability findings indicated that pearson correlation values have ranged from .57 to .94. In other words, the result of measurement has not changed over time. As for the mean difference between two 27 % sub groups and internal consistency reliability findings, the current research showed that there was no significant different in the subgroup and upper group of the scale (p< .01). Besides, Turkish survey was approved with Cronbach's alpha coefficient (α=0.87) in terms of its internal consistency. No doubt, smoking policy can be an effective tool for influencing pupils within and outside in school premises just as long as it could be sincerely confirmed by all educational stakeholders. So this study aimed to add a new dimension for smoking policy research in schools and other educational organizations by translating a well-known survey into Turkish.Therefore, it will provide to bring out how teachers and other educational components consider important smoking policies in schools such as smoke-free zone regulation. The results showed that the Turkish version of “Live Free-Tobacco Free Smoke Free Survey” is a valid and reliable instrument for assessment of school administrators and teachers' attitudes towards smoking compliance.

Anahtar Kelimeler: