Bullying in students receiving education at secondary stage primary education public schools in Salihli district of Mani- sa/Turkey

Amaç: Çalışmanın amacı, Manisa İli Salihli İlçesi Merkezindeki İlköğretim İkinci Kademeöğrencilerinde akran zorbalığı düzeylerinin ve belirleyicilerinin saptanmasıdır.Yöntem: Kesitsel tipteki bu araştırmanın evrenini Manisa İli Salihli İlçe merkezinde bulunan2012-2013 yılında eğitim-öğretim gören orta öğretim 5,, 6,, 7,, 8. Sınıf öğrencileri oluşturmaktadır(n=5671). Örnek büyüklüğü desen etkisi 2 alınarak, %50 prevalans ve 0,05 yanılgı düzeyinde 720olarak hesaplandı. Çalışma verilerinin toplanmasında üç form kullanıldı; Sosyodemografik anketformu, Akran zorbalığı belirleme ölçeği ve Rosenberg Benlik Saygısı Ölçeği. Verilerin analizindeilk aşamada ki-kare istatistik analizi kullanıldı. Ki-kare analizlerinde fark çıkan değişkenler lojistikregresyon analizi ile değerlendirildi.Bulgular: Araştırma grubunun %57,1i 13 yaş ve üzerindedir. Yaş dağılımı 10-22 yaşları arasındadeğişmekteydi.. %50,6sı kızdır (n=487). Çalışmada kurban/zorba olmayı belirleyen değişkenlerincinsiyet, sosyal statü, yaşam kalitesi algısı ve benlik saygısı olduğu belirlenmiştir. Erkeköğrenciler kız öğrencilere göre, alt sosyal statüdeki öğrenciler üst sosyal statüye göre, yaşamkalitesini kötü olarak algılayanlar iyi olarak algılayanlara göre ve benlik saygıları düşük ve ortaolanlar benlik saygıları yüksek olan öğrencilere göre daha fazla zorba/kurban davranışlarındabulunmaktadırlar.Sonuç: Akran zorbalığı Manisa/Salihli için yaygın bir halk sağlığı problemidir. Bu problem ilemücadelede Türkiyeye uygun olarak tüm okulu, aileyi ve toplumu içeren müdahale programlarıgeliştirilmelidir.

Manisa ili, Salihli ilçesinde ilköğretim 6. ve 7. sınıf öğrencilerinde akran zorbalığı, etkileyen ve eşlik eden faktörler

Objective: The objective of this study was to determine the levels and determinants of bullying instudents receiving education at Secondary Stage Primary Education Schools in Salihli District ofManisa.Methods: The population of this cross-sectional study consisted of 5., 6., 7., 8. grade secondaryschool students receiving education in the school year of 2012-2013 in Salihli district of Manisa(n=5671). The sample size was calculated as 720 at a prevalence of 50% and a significance levelof 0.05 by taking the pattern effect as 2. Three forms were used in collecting the study data;Sociodemographic questionnaire form, peer victimization identification scale and Rosenberg SelfRespect Scale. Chi-square statistical analysis and logistic regression analysis were used foranalysis of data.Results: 57.1% of the study group were aged 13 and older. The age distribution was between 10- 22 years. 50.6% were girls (n=487). Gender, social status, life quality perception and self respectwere the variables determining the status of victim/persecutor. Persecutor/victim behaviours wereobserved at a higher rate in male students compared to female students, students with a lowersocial status compared to students with a higher social status, those perceiving the life quality asbad compared to those perceiving it as good, and students with a low and moderate self respectcompared to students with a high self respect.Conclusion: Peer victimization is a common public health problem for Manisa/Salihli. In order tostruggle with this problem, it is required to develop intervention programs comprising the entireschool, family and society in accordance with the Turkish culture.

PDF

___

1. Sayıl M, Uçanok Z, Güre A. A de- scriptive study of emotinal needs, concerns, parent-adolescent con- flicts and self concept in puberty. Turkish Journal of Child and Ado- lescent 2002; 3: 155-66.
2. Odağ C, Tamar M. The Stage of adolescence: A critical phase in the formation of the superego. Turkish Journal of Child and Ado- lescent 2002; 9: 190-8.
3. Güney M. Depression in adoles- cent. World of Psychiatry 1998; 2: 41-4.
4. Koç M. Terms of developmental psychology of adolescence and general properties. Journal of the institute of social sciences 2004; 2: 231-56.
5. Altıparmak S, Taner Ş, Türk SM, Eser E. The quality of life in adolescent in secondary public schools in Bornova/İzmir. Anatolian Journal of Psychiatry 2012; 13: 167- 73.
6. Steinberg LS. Ergenlik. Ankara: İmge Kitabevi Yayınları 2007.
7. Koç Z. School bullying: Definition, causes and preventing measures. Journal of World Teachers 2006; 1: 7-12.
8. Olweus D. A useful evaluation de- sign and effects of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. Psychology, Crime & Law 2005; 11: 389-402.
9. Due P, Holstein BE, Lynch J. Bul- lying and symptoms among school-aged children: international comparative cross sectional study in 28 countries. Eur J Public Health 2005; 15: 128-32.
10. Alikaşifoglu M. Erginöz E, Ercan O. Violent behaviour among Turkish high school students and correlates of physical fighting. Eur J Public Health 2004; 14: 173-7.
11. Dake JA, Price JH, Telljohann SK. The nature and extent of bullying at school. J Sch Health 2003; 73: 173-80.
12. Health behaviour in school-aged children international report from the2005/2006Survey.http://www.e uro.who.int/Document/E91416.pdf . Access: 20.06.2015.
13. Manisa Demographic Health Survey Manual. Celal Bayar University School of Medicine. Department of Public Health. Manisa 2003.
14. Pişkin M, Ayas T. Peer bullying scale child form. Akademik Bakış Dergisi 2001; 23: 1-12.
15. Rosenberg M. Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. New Jersey: Princeton University Press 1965.
16. Dereboy İF, Dereboy Ç, Coşkun A, Coşkun B. Self-concept, self- esteem and sense of identify. Çocuk ve Gençlik Ruh Sağlığı Dergisi 1994; 1: 3-12.
17. Özcebe H, Ulukol B, Mol- lahaliloğlu S, Yardım N, Karaman F. T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı Sağlık Hhizmetlerinde Okul Sağlığı kitabı. Ankara: Yücel Ofset Mat- baacılık 2008.
18. Baldry AC, Farrington DP. Types of bullying among Italian school children. Journal of Adolescence 1999; 22: 423-6.
19. Ivarsson T, Broberg AG, Arvidsson T, Gillberg C. Bullying in adolescence: psychiatric problems in victims and bullies as measured by the Youth Self Report (YSR) and the Depression Self-Rating Scale (DSRS). Nord J Psychiatry 2005; 59: 365-73.
20. Kim YS, KohYJ, Leventhal BL. Prevalence of school bullying in Korean middle school students. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2004; 158: 737-41.
21. Alikaşifoglu M, Erginöz E, Ercan O. Bullying behaviours and psy- chosocial health: results from a cross-sectional survey among high school students in Istanbul, Turkey. Eur J Pediatr 2007; 166: 1253-60.
22. Kepenekci YK, Cinkir S. Bullying among Turkish high school stu- dents. Child Abuse Negl 2006; 30: 193-204.
23. Pişkin M. Common problem in our schools: School bullying. VII. Na- tional Counseling and Guidance Congress(Congress Book).Malatya 2003; 9-11: 125.
24. Dussich JPJ, Maekoya C. Physical child harm and bullying-related behaviors. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Compara- tive Criminology 2007; 51: 495- 509.
25. Nansel T, Craig W, Overpeck MD, Saluja G, Ruan WJ. Cross-national Consistency in the Relationship Between Bullying Behaviors and Psychosocial Adjustment, Arch Pediatric Adolescent Medicine 2004; 158: 730-36.
26. Olweus D. Bullying or peer abuse at school: Facts and intervention. Current Directions in Psychologi- cal Science 1995; 4: 196-200.
27. Pişkin M. School bullying: Definition, types, related factors, and strategies to prevent bullying problems, Educational Sciences. Theory & Practice 2002; 2: 531-62.
28. Craig WM. The relationship among bullying, victimization, depression, anxiety and aggression in elementary school children. Personality and individual differences 1998; 24: 123-30.
29. Konishi C, Hymel S. Bullying and Stress in Early Adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence 2009; 29: 333-56.
30. Mok MMC, Flynn M. Does school size affect quality of school life? Issues Educ Res 1997; 7: 69-86.
31. Mok MMC. Flynn. Students perceptions of social studies: A study of middle school and high school students in Jordan. International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity 2004; 8: 3-13.