KORUNMA İHTİYACI OLAN ÇOCUKLARIN YAŞAM BECERİLERİNE İLİŞKİN UZMAN GÖRÜŞLERİ

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, korunma ihtiyacı olan çocukların yaşam becerilerine ilişkin uzman görüşlerinin incelenmesidir. Araştırma, nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden olgubilim deseni şeklinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmada, yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formu kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu, korunma ihtiyacı olan çocuklarla çalışan 20 uzman (çocuk gelişimci, sosyal çalışmacı, sosyolog, psikolog ve eğitimci) oluşturmaktadır. Katılımcılar, korunma ihtiyacı olan çocuklarla bire bir çalışan, etkileşim kurmuş ve belirtilen meslekleri icra eden kamu görevlilerinden, amaçlı örnekleme yaklaşımından ölçüt örnekleme yöntemiyle seçilmiştir Katılımcılara, Dünya Sağlık Örgütü’nün belirlediği yaşam becerileri temel alınarak, uzman önerileriyle hazırlanan görüşme formu kapsamında 8 açık uçlu soru sorulmuştur. Araştırmanın verileri, içerik analizi yöntemi ile analiz edilmiştir. Katılımcıların görüşleri; olumlu, olumsuz ve genelleme yapılamaz gibi ortak temalara ayrılmıştır. Bulgulara göre, katılımcıların korunma ihtiyacı olan çocukların yaşam becerilerine yönelik olumsuz görüşlerinin, olumlu görüşlerine göre daha fazla olduğu belirlenmiştir. Çocukların yaşam becerilerinde; olumlu ya da olumsuz deneyimlerinin etkisine, bireysel özelliklerine ve korundukları merkezin türüne göre farklılıklar olduğu belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

• korunma ihtiyacı olan çocuk
• yaşam becerileri
• çocuk gelişimi

OPINIONS OF PROFESSIONALS ON THE LIFE SKILLS OF CHILDREN IN NEED OF PROTECTION

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine professional opinions regarding the life skills of children in need of protection. The research was carried out in the form of a phenomenological pattern, one of the qualitative research methods. In the research, a semi-structured interview form was used. The study group of the research consists of 20 professionals (child development specialists, social workers, sociologists, psychologists and educators), all working with children in need of protection. The participants were selected by criterion sampling method from the purposeful sampling approach, from public officials who engage directly with children in need of protection, interact with them and perform the specified professions. The participants responded to 8 open-ended questions within the scope of the interview form prepared with professional recommendations, based on the life skills determined by the World Health Organization. The data of the research were analyzed using the content analysis method, categorizing participants; opinions into common themes such as positive, negative and non-generalizable. According to the findings, participants expressed more negative views about the life skills of children in need of protection than positive ones. In children's life skills; It was determined that there were differences depending on the impact of positive or negative experiences, individual characteristics and the type of center where they were protected.

Keywords

• child in need of protection
• life skills
• child development

References

1. Bastian, V. A., Burns, N. R., & Nettelbeck, T. (2005). Emotional intelligence predicts life skills, but not as well as personality and cognitive abilities. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(6), 1135-1145.
2. Bolat, Y. & Balaman, F. (2017). Yaşam becerileri ölçeği: geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. İnsan ve Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(4), 22-39.
3. Botvin, G. J. & Griffin, K. W. (2004). Life skills training: empirical findings and future directions. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 25(2), 211-232.
4. Briggs, F. (2020). Child protection: a guide for teachers and child care professionals. Routledge Publishing.
5. Cassidy, K., Franco, Y., & Meo, E. (2018). Preparation for adulthood: a teacher ınquiry study for facilitating life skills in secondary education in the united states. Journal of Educational Issues, 4(1), 33-46.
6. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design choosing among five approaches. Sage.
7. Creswell, J. W. (2021). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri: beş yaklaşıma göre nitel araştırma ve araştırma deseni. Bütün, M. & Demir, S. B. (Çev). Siyasal Kitabevi
8. Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.

9. Holt, N. L., Tink, L. N., Mandigo, J. L., & Fox, K. R. (2008). Do youth learn life skills through their involvement in high school sport? a case study. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l'éducation, 31(2), 281-304.
10. Khosravani, M., Motallebzadeh, K., & Ashraf, H. (2014). Designing a “life skılls questionnaire” for analyzing the socio-cultural constructs of efl textbooks. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 5(2), 200-207.
11. Kirk, J. & Miller, M. L. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Sage.
12. Marin, S., & Recipient, G. (2011). Changing skills and educational strategies in the knowledge society. Review of Artistic Education, 1(2),123-127.
13. Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B. (2014). Designing Qualitative Research. Sage.
14. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: qualitative data analysis (second edition). Sage.
15. Nair, P. K., & Fahimirad, M. (2019). A qualitative research study on the ımportance of life skills on undergraduate students' personal and social competencies. International Journal of Higher Education, 8(5), 71-83.
16. Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Sage.
17. Pujar, L.L. & Patil, S.S. (2016). Life skill development: educational empowerment of adolescent girls. RA Journal of Applied Research, 2(5), 468- 472.
18. Robison, M. A., Mann, T. B., & Ingvarsson, E. T. (2020). Life skills instruction for children with developmental disabilities. Journal of applied behavior analysis, 53(1), 431-448.
19. Silverman, D. (2005). Doing qualitative research: a practical handbook. Sage.
20. Sreekumar, VN (2016). Life skill education among adoloscents. International Journal of Development Research 6(11), 10188-10191.
21. Sosyal Hizmetler Kanunu (1983, 24 Mayıs). Resmi Gazete (Sayı: 18059). https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/arsiv/18059.pdf
22. Sternberg, R. J. (2002). Raising the achievement of all students: teaching for successful intelligence. Educational Psycology Review, 14(4), 383-393.
23. Sukhodolsky, D. G., Kassinove, H. & Gorman, B. S. (2004). Cognitive-behavioral therapy for anger in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis, Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9(3), 247-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2003.08.005
24. Thaneerananon, T., Triampo, W., & Nokkaew, A. (2016). Development of a test to evaluate students’analytical thinking based on fact versus opinion differentiation. International Journal of Instruction, 9(2), 123- 138.
25. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasası (1982, 20 Ekim). Resmi Gazete (Sayı: 17863). https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/arsiv/17844.pdf
26. WHO, (2007). Promoting physical activity in schools: an ımportant element of a health- promoting school, who ınformation series on school health, (Document 12.), 53 P. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/43733
27. World Health Organization. (‎2003)‎. Skills for health: skills-based health education including life skills: an important component of a child-friendly/health-promoting school. World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42818
28. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.