Evaluation of Implementation Results STRESS TESTS -2006 and 2012:

                Differences and Similarities:

      SDBÖ, 25 positive, 30 negative feature have arranged, a test consisting of questions. '2006 1 Print the 'Test evaluation, SDBÖ' Determining the Level of Stress Scale; evaluation of the two sub-scales, previously proposed. However, not implementing the same test as the mind, because scoring is applied incorrectly, as a result of the feedbacks were experiencing problems. 'By non-experts, the positive and negative questions and incorrect scoring of items ayırdedilememesi' eliminate these problems and check each other in terms of both the scale separately, a separate evaluation is recommended. Bias Stress Scale-seo, Stress Resistance Scale-HAQ 'between themselves and the two sub-scales with the Beck Depression Inventory SDBÖ' BDI 'were associated with the results.

     In 2006, in practice, the sample was limited due to the universe, to be set up in 2012 were more extensive and comprehensive.

2006 - SDBÖ research and evaluation studies, compared to the years 2008-2012 between the research and evaluation studies, carried out in more detail. Connected to the universe, and comprehensive chosen a different sample groups, the first and last test sample was applied to each group and the groups that make up its own separate, distinct and separate evaluations, including a combination of all sample results were compared with each other.

     SDBÖ giving rise to the year 2006, the application phase is very Adviser evaluation phases, the emergence of the difficulties and problems, 'Question accordance with the properties of the two sub-test measurements, isolating the separate analysis of the data from the two sub-tests and evaluation are needed in the data as a single test, measurement results 'Assessment of SDBÖ in order to eliminate these difficulties and problems of the two, in the form of sub-scale implementation of the agreed. The two sub-scales, 'SEO and SDS' the opposite of each other, in spite of the creation of items of the question, counsel for the problems and difficulties of eliminating the two scales, the 'test' each other more objective in its own controller and 'client-error and neutrality' and has to obtain objective data. Analysis and evaluation of both lower test results, comments made ​​in the opposite direction, helping to deliver the same findings and contribute.

  www.hturkmen.com

In 2006, the SDBÖ on my scientific research, measurement and evaluation of the results of operations, practices, methods and techniques detailed analysis compared the methods of descriptive, Standard Test Methods, Statistical Methods and Correlational Method is used. ';' In 2006 and in 2012, the two sub- scale, the sample, groups of students in the first test, post-test 'with an interval of 15 to 25 days' was applied. The result of application of each student in the group, and in conjunction with the raw scores of the two sub-test from the total raw scores were determined separately. 'First and Last Test Measurements' SEO SDS and the tables were constructed. The objective here is different years between applications, '2006 and 2011' differences and similarities in what is, in order to determine the degree by 'ordinal' and Equal Interval 'Interval' Psychological Scales were used. The data obtained were classified, 'Measurement, raw score' frequency tables were constructed. Groups created, 'Scoreboard, the frequency' range of groups and group boundaries coincide with the actual measurements the distribution of intervals were determined. Item analysis table arranged, the two sub-test, 'SEO and SDS' was created with the aim of determining the level of stress and high internal consistency 'Item Analysis Table' consists of items of the question. In addition, the current measured by the level of stress in persons 'content validity' tests for the validation level is quite high and very reliable. 'The content, application, and construction and so on. validated high 'sum frequency, sum of percentages for the calculations. Percentile Table, Change-Measures of Dispersion and Central cluster-Medium Size, ungrouped and grouped measurements are calculated separately for the two sub-scales. 'Table-1' percentile tables 'Table-2' in accordance with the percentages, 0rtanca = 'Ortn = Median = Y50 = Q2, A25 = Q1, Q3, etc. Y75 =' Both sub-scale 'SEO, SDS' the first test, the last According to the test results, correlation tables were created, the amount of the relationship between the variables, ie the correlation coefficients 'r' using various correlation techniques, calculated separately for grouped and ungrouped data. 'Pearson, Spearman Brown, Alpha Correlation Coefficient, etc.