Investigation of the effect of secondary school students’ education in districts with different levels of development on violence tendencies.

Login

Today, violence can appear as a phenomenon that is increasing and posing a serious threat. Although violence has been explained by many disciplines, there is no specialized common definition due to the changes in social and historical processes. It is accepted that the most triggering emotion that pushes a person to violence is anger. In its narrowest sense, violence is physical harm to another person for one’s own purposes. In this sense, violence is the expression of anger into behavior. In a broad perspective, violence also includes psychological damage to the person. World Health Organization (WHO) violence; It defines it as the use of physical force or threat against oneself, another person, a certain community or group, which may result in injury, death, physical harm, some developmental disorders or deprivation (Haskan, 2009;Özgür, Yörükoğlu, & Arabacı, 2011).

The tendency to violence may occur in different degrees at certain periods in the life cycle of a person. Adolescence is also seen as one of the periods in which the tendency to violence increases in this life process. Although there is no definite age for the onset of puberty, around the age of twelve is accepted as the period of entry into adolescence. This age period coincides with the secondary school level in our country. Many studies reveal that violence caused by adolescents is serious in the school environment. Crowded classrooms in schools, lack of alternative options for students to spend their free time, and academic failure can be listed among the factors that lead students to violence. In addition, verbal and physical arguments between parents, the aggressive attitudes of their parents in their relations with the people around them, and exposure to too many violent stimuli in the home environment may lead to the formation of aggressive behavior in adolescents. Students who learn such behaviors as a way of solving problems in their family life tend to exhibit these negative reactions they learned from the family more when they encounter any problem among their peers. When considered in this context, factors such as the environment in which the students live, the people they take as an example, and the financial difficulties seen in the families may affect the violence tendencies of the students and thus the rates of incitement to crime. Violence tendency especially in the early adolescence period; It manifests itself with characteristic behaviors such as disobeying parents, disobeying, and not fulfilling their responsibilities (Avcı & Yıldırım, 2014; Göldağ, 2015; Haksan & Yıldırım, 2012; Özgür, Yörükoğlu & Arabacı, 2011).

Anger is often known as a factor that creates a predisposition to violence. It can be said that the reason for the anger experienced by the person, especially during adolescence, is the high rate of inhibition behavior. Frustration arises from the inability of the person to accomplish anything they want to achieve. When the person is inhibited, aggressive behaviors occur more. Prevention of individuals by their teachers and peers during adolescence may lead them to resort to violence in their relationships at school. This situation affects school success and causes another conflict with the family, and the individual who is in this cycle feels more inhibited (Karataş, 2008).

One of the most important factors affecting the tendency to violence is the environment in which the person has lived. It has been observed that there is a relationship between the changing environmental structure and the individual’s tendency to violence. The existence of problems such as livelihood anxiety, unemployment, high service costs, economic depressions in urban areas negatively affect the mental health of individuals; this situation increases the tendency of violence and crime rate (Karasu, 2008). Such factors increase the tendency to violence by causing deep economic gaps between social classes (Avcı and Yıldırım, 2014).

The aim of this study is to observe whether there is a difference in the violence tendencies of secondary school students in two districts of Istanbul with different levels of development. In addition, the violence tendency of students was examined with independent variables such as family income level, parental education level and their thoughts about the future. The social environment in which the students live is the main variable.

Method

Participants

The sample groups in this study consist of 6th, 7th and 8th grade secondary school students in Kadıköy and Sultangazi public schools, which are two different districts of Istanbul. The total number of students participating in the research is 234. Of these, 114 (48.7%) are studying in Kadıköy and 120 (51.3%) are studying in Sultangazi. Of the students participating in the study, 112 (47.9%) were girls and 122 (52.1%) were boys, of which 68 (29.1%) were in the 6th grade, 92 (39.3%) were in the 7th grade. .class and 74 (31.6%) of them are 8th grade. Of the students, 95 (40.6%) stated that their family income level was good, 134 (57.3%) medium and 5 (2.1%) bad. Of the students participating in the study, 12 (5.1%) had no education, 81 (34.6%) were primary school graduates, 43 (18.4%) were secondary school graduates, 58 (25.2%) were high school graduates. and 39 (16.7%) of them stated that they were university graduates, 5 (2.1%) of them stated that their fathers did not have any education, 53 (22.6%) were primary school, 70 (28.8%) were secondary school. 66 (28.2%) of them stated that they were high school graduates and 40 (17.1%) were university graduates.

Tools

Personal information form and Violence Tendency Scale (VTS) were used in the study. The 20 questions in the scale are made by applying a 4-point Likert-type scoring system ranging from (1) “not at all appropriate” to …, (4) “very appropriate”. The highest score to be obtained from the scale is 80, and the lowest score is 1. High score; shows that students have a high tendency to aggression and violence. According to the scores the students get from the scale, 1-20 points are “too little”, 21-40 points are “less”, 41-60 points are “high”, and 61-80 points are “too much”. considered as a tendency towards violence.

Application

Students in state schools in Kadıköy and Sultangazi districts participating in the research were given a personal information form consisting of 9 questions and a Violence Tendency Scale consisting of 20 questions during class hours and the students were asked to answer this questionnaire. There was no time limit for filling out the questionnaires given to the students. The research was applied in the first semester of the schools.

Analysis of Data

In the analysis of the data, firstly, an independent sample t-test analysis was conducted to examine whether the places where the students lived had an effect on the violence tendency. Independent sample t-test analysis was also used to examine gender and whether or not to have a personal room. Finally, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to examine the effects of class levels, family income levels, thoughts about the future, number of siblings and parental education status on violence tendency.

Table 1. Comparison of the total score of the violence tendency scale with independent sample t-test analysis in terms of place of residence variable.

There is a statistically significant difference between the total mean scores of violence tendencies of the two groups determined by where the students live; t(232)=1.978; p<0.05 (See Table 1).

Table 2. Comparison of the total score of the violence tendency scale with independent sample t-test analysis in terms of gender and having a personal room.

There is no statistically significant difference between the total mean scores of male and female students’ violence tendencies; t(232)=-1.433; p>0.05. There is no significant difference between the mean total scores of violence tendencies of the 2 groups determined according to the students having a personal room; t(231)=-1,682; p>0.05 (See Table 2).

Table 3. Comparison of the total score of violence tendency with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) in terms of student’s grade level, family income level, future thinking, number of siblings, mother’s education level and father’s education level.

There is a statistically significant difference between the total mean scores of violence tendencies of the three groups determined according to the grade levels of the students; F(2,231)=3,891; p<0.05. As a result of the Tukey-b multiple comparison test performed as a result of the test, it was determined that the significant difference resulted from the 6th grade and 8th grade students. There is a statistically significant difference between the total mean scores of violence tendencies of the three groups determined according to the family income levels of the students; F(2,231) = 4.825; p<0.05. As a result of the Tukey-b multiple comparison test performed as a result of the test, it was determined that the significant difference was caused by the students with a good family income and a moderate level. There is no statistically significant difference between the total mean scores of violence tendencies of the four groups determined according to the students’ thoughts about the future; F(3,230)= 1.032; p>0.05. There is a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of violence tendencies of the four groups determined according to the number of siblings of the students; F(3,230)=2.955; p<0.05. According to the results of the Tukey-b multiple comparison test, which was performed as a result of the test, it was determined that the significant difference was caused by the group with 3 or more siblings. There is no statistically significant difference between the total mean scores of violence tendencies of the five groups determined according to the education levels of the mothers of the students; F(4.229)= 0.792; p>0.05. There is no statistically significant difference between the total mean scores of violence tendencies of the five groups determined according to the education levels of the fathers of the students; F(4.229)=2.143; p>0.05 (See Table 3).

Argument

Adolescents’ tendency to violence is affected by many factors. In the study, it was shown that the different development levels of the districts, the grade of the students, the number of siblings they have and the level of family income affect the violence tendencies. In the literature, Arabacı et al. (2011) found that as the income level of the family increased, the mean scores of students’ tendency to violence also increased, but in this study, the mean score of the tendency to violence decreased as the income level of the family increased. Again, in the same study, as the income level of the families of the students increased, the mean of violence tendency scores also increased.

In the study, the gender of the student, the education level of the parents, the idea of ​​the future, the presence of the personal room did not have any effect on the violence tendency. (Arabacı et al., 2011) investigated the effect of violence tendency on gender in high school students and observed that males are more prone to violence than females.

In a similar study in the future, more comprehensive findings can be obtained by increasing the number of districts with different levels of development. In this study, the income levels of the families are stated as good, medium and bad, and this may create an uncertainty for the students. In addition to these, the study can be repeated considering whether the parents are working or not, the class size in the schools, the attitudes and behaviors of the teachers towards the students, and the active working status of the guidance service.

resources

Avci, O. and Yıldırım, İ. (2014). Tendency to Violence, Loneliness and Social Support in Adolescents. Hacettepe University Faculty of Education Journal, 29(1), 157-168.

Ayan, S.(2007) Aggression Tendencies of Children Subject to Domestic Violence. Anatolian Journal of Psychiatry2007, (8),206-214.

Balkıs, M., Invention, M. and Duru, E. (2005). The Relationship of Attitudes Towards Violence with Self-Efficacy, Media, Beliefs Against Violence, Fellowship and School Commitment. Aegean Education Journal 2005, (6)2, 81-87.

Göldağ, B. (2015). Students’ Violence Tendency Levels and Value Perceptions. TUBAV Journal of Science, 8(4), 1-15.

Haskan, O. (2009). Tendency to Violence, Loneliness and Social Support in Adolescents. Hacettepe University Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Educational Sciences, Department of Psychological Counseling and Guidance, 1-9.

Haskan, O. and Yıldırım, İ. (2012). Development of the Violence Tendency Scale. Journal of Education and Science, 37(163), 165-177.

Özgür, G., Yörükoğlu, G. and Arabacı, L. (2011). Journal of Psychiatric Nursing, 2(2), 553-60.