Okullarda zorbalık ve mağduriyet: Amerika birleşik devletleri örneği

Bu çalışmada, Amerika Birleşik Devletlerinde (ABD) okullarda görülen zorbalık davranışları incelenmektedir. Okullarda öğrencilerin fiziksel ve sözlü zorbalığa maruz kalmaları sebebi ile mağdur olmaları, ABD’de çözüm aranan önemli sorunlar arasında yer almaktadır. Bu çalışmada, 2005 yılında ABD’de gerçekleştirilen ve yedi farklı zorbalık türü belirleyen Suç Mağdurları Ulusal Surveyinin (National Crime Victimization Survey) verileri kullanılmakta ve analiz edilmektedir. Çalışma kapsamında ilk olarak, demografik değişkenlerin ve okulla ilişkili değişkenlerin farklı türdeki zorbalık davranışları ile ilişkisi incelenmektedir. Ardından, tüm bağımsız değişkenlerin (demografik, okulla ilgili, algısal ve güvenlik/disiplin) zorbalık davranışlarının mağduru olunmasındaki etkisi analiz edilmektedir. Çalışmanın örneklemini 12-18 yaşları arasındaki 7.112 ortaokul ve lise öğrencisi oluşturmaktadır. Analizlerde esas olarak Ki-kare ve lojistik regresyon metotları kullanılmaktadır. Araştırma sonucunda, zorbalık davranışı mağduru olunmasında çeşitli faktörlerin (örneğin; cinsiyet, ekonomik durum, yaş, bazı algılar, bazı güvenlik değişkenleri gibi) etkili olduğu görülmüştür. Bazı değişkenler ise (örneğin; cinsiyet) fiziksel ve sözlü zorbalık mağduriyeti açısından değişiklik gösterebilmektedir.

Bullying and victimization in the schools: The case of united states of America

In this study, bullying behaviors experienced at the schools in the United States of America (USA) is examined. Victimization of students in the schools due to physical and verbal bullying is among the important problems that wait for solution in the USA. This study uses and analyzes the data of National Crime Victimization Survey that was carried out in 2005 in the USA and lists seven types of bullying. This study, firstly, examines the relationships between different type of bullying behaviors, and demographic and school related variables. Then, possible effects of all independent variables (demographic, school related, perceptional, and discipline/security) on being victims of bullying behaviors are analyzed. The sample of this study is 7.112 that include students between the ages of 12 and 18 from secondary and high schools. Chi-square and logistic regression methods are used for statistical analyses. Findings of the study reveal that different factors (i.e. sex, economic condition, age, some perceptions, some security related issues) are effective in terms of being victims of bullying behaviors. Findings of the study also indicate that some factors (i.e. sex) vary in terms of being victims of physical and verbal bullying.

PDF

___

CARLYLE, K.E. & STEINMAN, K.J. (2007). “Demographic differences in the prevalence, co-occurrence, and correlates of adolescent bullying at school”, The Journal of School Health, 77: 623-629.
ESPELAGE, D.L. & SWEARER, S. M. (2003). “Research on school bullying and victimization: What have we learned and where do we go from here?”, School Psychology Review, 32: 365-383.
GARSON, G. D. (n.a.). “Statnotes: Topics in Multivariate Analysis”. http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/logistic.htm adresinden 28 Temmuz 2006 günü alınmıştır.
HAYNİE, D.L., NANSEL, T., EITEL, P. CRUMP, A.D., SAYLOR, K., YU, K.et al. (2001). “Bullies, victims, and bully/ victims: distinct groups of at-risk youth”, Journal of Early Adolescence, 21, (1): 29-49.
HOX, J. (2002). Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
LANDAU, S., BJORKQVIST, K., LAGERSPETZ, K.M., OSTERMAN, K., & GIDEON, L. (2002). “The effect of religiosity and ethnic origin on direct and indirect aggression among males and females: some Israeli findings”, Aggressive Behavior, 28: 281-299.
LIMBER, S. P., & SMALL, M. A. (2000, August). “Self-reports of bully-victimization among primary school students”. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.
MERLO, A. V. & SÖZER, M. A. (2010). “Police, youth, and crime prevention: Examining the best practices”, Turkish Journal of Police Studies, 12, (4): 95-118.
NANSEL, T. R., OVERPECK, M., PILLA, R. S., RUAN, W. J., SIMONS-MORTON, B., & SCHEIDT, P. (2001). “Bullying behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment”, Journal of the American Medical Association, 285: 2094-2100.
OLWEUS, D. (1993). Bullying at School: What We Know and What We can Do. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
PENG, C. J., LEE, K. L., & INGERSOLL, G. M. (2002). “An Introduction to Logistic Regression Analysis and Reporting”, The Journal of Educational Research, 96, (1), 3.
RİGBY, K. (2005). “Why Do Some Children Bully at School?”, School Psychology International, 26, (2); 147-161.
RIGBY, K & SLEE P.T. (1994). “Bullying among Australian school children: reported behavior and attitudes toward victims”, Journal of Social Psychology, 131:615-627.
SCHAFER, M., WERNER, N.E., & CRICK, N.R. (2002). “A comparison of two approaches to the study of negative peer treatment: general victimization and bully/victim problems among German schoolchildren”, British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, (2); 281-306.
SEALS, D. & YOUNG, J. (2003). “Bullying and victimization: prevalence and relationship to gender, grade level, ethnicity, self-esteem, and depression”, Adolescence, 38: 735-747.
UNDERWOOD, M. K., GALEN, B. R., & PAQUETTE, J. A. (2001). “Top ten challenges for understanding gender and aggression in children: Why can’t we all just get along”, Social Development, 10: 248-266.
USDJ/BJS- U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (2006). National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2005 [Computer file]. Conducted by U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
ICPSR04429-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor].
ZAHN, M. A., BRUMBAUGH, S., STEFFENSMEIER, D., FELD, B. C., MORASH, M., CHESNEY-LİND, M., MILLER, J., PAYNE, A., GOTTFREDSON, D. C. ve KRUTTSCHNITT, C. (2008). Girls Study Group: Understanding and Responding to Girls’ Delinquency. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.