ANA SINIFI ÖĞRENCİLERİNE UYGULANAN BEDEN GÜVENLİĞİ EĞİTİM PROGRAMININ ETKİNLİĞİ

Year 2020, Volume: 14 Issue: 3, 414 - 419, 20.09.2020

Ayşe Sezer , Nurcan Kolaç , Seda Kocabaş , Seval Yaşar , Tuğba Gürsoy

https://doi.org/10.21763/tjfmpc.654347

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Giriş: Erken çocukluk dönemindeki çocuklar beden güvenliklerini tehdit eden sosyal, fiziksel ve çevresel risklere karşı daha savunmasız ve risk grubundadır. Bu dönemdeki çocuklara beden güvenliklerini nasıl korumaları gerektiğinin öğretilmesi önemlidir. Bu çalışma ana sınıfı öğrencilerine uygulanan beden güvenliği eğitim programının etkinliğini belirlemek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Araştırma, ön-son test kontrol gruplu, randomize olmayan deneysel modeldedir. Yöntem: Örneklem büyüklüğü G*power güç analizi programı ile hesaplanmıştır. Buna göre, %80 güç, %5 hata payı ile her bir grupta 34’er kişinin (toplam 78 öğrenci) örnekleme alınması gerektiği hesaplandı. Çalışma 80 öğrenci ile tamamlandı. Veriler, kişisel bilgi formu ve beden güvenliği bilgi anketi ile toplandı. Çalışmaya başlamadan ailelerden yazılı onam alındı. Her biri 25 dakika süren 5 oturumluk program, 40 kişilik deney grubuna 5 haftada uygulandı. Kontrol grubu için herhangi bir çalışma yapılmadı. Verilerin analizinde ki kare testi ve McNemar testi kullanıldı. Bulgular: Eğitim alan gruptaki çocukların “bulduğun ilaçları anne/baba ya da öğretmene söylemeden içer misin” sorusuna verdikleri ön-son testleri yanıtları arasında anlamlı fark vardı (p<0.05). Eğitim alan gruptaki çocukların “yanında bir büyük (anne, baba, akraba) olmadan deniz ya da havuza tek başına girer misin?” ve “suyla oynar mısın?” sorularına ön-son test cevapları arasında anlamlı fark vardı (p<0.05). Eğitim alan grubun “evde tek başınayken, tanımadığın biri kapıyı çalarsa açar mısın?” ve “okul ya da ev dışında tanımadığın kişi seninle oyun oynamak için çağırırsa gider misin?” ön-son test cevapları arasında anlamlı fark vardı (p<0.05). Kontrol grubunda çocukların tüm sorulara verdikleri ön test ve son test doğru/yanlış cevap yüzdeleri arasında istatiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulunmamıştır (p>0.05). Sonuç: Sonuç olarak beden güvenliği eğitimi öğrencilerin zehirlenme, yabancılarla iletişim ve boğulmalar konusunda bilgilenmesinde etkili olmuştur.

Keywords

çocuk, beden, güvenlik, eğitim

THE EFFECT OF PERSONAL SAFETY TRAINING PROGRAM FOR PRE SCHOOL CHILDREN

Abstract

Introduction: Preschool children are more vulnerable and at risk to social, physical and environmental risks that threaten their personal safety. It is important to teach children in this period how to protect their personal safety. Method: This study was aimed to determine the effectiveness of the body safety education program to preschool students. The study design was pre-post-test, non-randomized experimental and control group model. The sample size was calculated by G*power analysis. Accordingly, it was calculated that 34 students (total 78 students) should be sampled in each group with 80% power and 5% error margin. The study was completed with 80 students. Data were collected by personal information form and body safety information questionnaire. Written informed consent was obtained from the families before the study. The 5-session program, each of which lasted for 25 minutes, was implemented in 5 weeks for the training group (n=40). No intervention was applied to the control group. Chi-square test and Mc Nemar test were used for data analysis. Result: There was a significant difference between the pre-posttest responses of the children in the intervention group to the question in "Do you drink the drugs you find without telling the parent / teacher?” (p <0.05). There was a significant difference between the pre-posttest answers of the children in the intervention group to the questions “Would you enter the sea or pool alone without a grand (mother, father, relative)? or play with water?”(p <0.05). There was a significant difference between the pre-posttest answers of the training group, "When you're alone at home, if someone you don't know knocks on, will you open it?” and “if person who you don't know calls to play with you, you would go?” (p <0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the pre-posttest answers of the control group to the all questions (p> 0.05). Conclusion: As a result, body safety education program was effective in informing students about poisoning, communication with strangers and drowning.

Keywords

child, body, safety, teaching

References

• 1. Cordovil R, Araujo D, Pepping G, Barreiros J. An ecological stance on risk and safe behaviors in children: The role of affordances and emergent behaviors. New Ideas in Psychology 2015; 36:50-59.
• 2. Johnston, BD, Ebel BE. Child injury control: Trends, themes, and controversies. Academic Pediatrics 2013; 13(6): 499-507
• 3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 10 leading causes of injury deaths by age group. Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) 2011, www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/LeadingCauses.html, ErişimTarihi: 10.05.2019.
• 4. World Health Organization, Children: reducing mortality, https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/ detail/children-reducing-mortality, Erişimtarihi: 23.05.2019.
• 5. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. İstatistiklerle çocuk, 2017, https://www.tuseb.govtr/enstitu/ tacese/yuklemeler/istatistik/istatistiklerlecocuk2017.pdf, Erişim tarihi:23.05.2019.
• 6. Mack KA, Liller KD. Home injuries: potential for prevention. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine 2010; 4(1):75-81.
• 7. Towner E, Mytton J. Prevention of unintentional injuries in children. Pediatrics and Child Health 2009; 19(11): 517-521.
• 8. Gluckman PD, Hanson MA, Beedle AS. Early life events and their consequences for later disease: A life history and evolutionary perspective. American Journal of Human Biology 2007; 19(1):1-19.
• 9. Damashek A, Kuhn J. Toddlers' unintentional injuries: The role of maternal reported paternal and maternal supervision. Journal of Pediatric Psychology 2013; 38(3):265-275.
• 10. Dixon DR, Bergstrom R, Smith MN, Tarbox J. A review of research on procedures for teaching safety skills to persons with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities 2010; 31(5): 985-994.
• 11. Morrongiello BA. Caregiver supervision and child-injury risk: I. Issues in defining and measuring supervision; II. Findings and directions for future research. Journal of PediatricPsychology 2005;30(7):536-552.
• 12. Setien MA, Han D, Zuniga GC, Mier N, Lucio RL, Treviño L. Does injury prevention education initiate household changes in a Spanish-speaking minority population? Journal of Community Health 2014; 39(1): 167-172.
• 13. Sanberk İ, Emen M, Kabakçı D. An ınvestigation of socially advantaged and disadvantaged Turkish mothers’ views about training on preventing children from sexual abuse. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 2017; 26(3): 288-307.
• 14. Çıtak Tunç, Gorak G,OzyaziciogluN, Ak B, Isil Ö, Vural P. Preventingchildsexualabuse: body safetytrainingforyoungchildren in Turkey. Journal of Child SexualAbuse 2018; 27(4): 347-364,
• 15. Jin Y, Chen J, Jiang Y, Yu B. Evaluation of a sexual abuse prevention education program for school-age children in China: a comparison of teachers and parents as instructors. Health Education Research 2017; 32(4): 364-373.
• 16. AbujamandMsY,Lillypet, S. Effectiveness of structured teaching programme on knowledge regarding good touch and bad touch among children. Christian Nurse International 2017; 9(4): 18-24.
• 17. The family safety toolkit, https://safersmarterkids.org, ErişimTarihi. 12.04.2019.
• 18. Safer activities and events, https://learning.nspcc.org.uk, ErişimTarihi. 12.04.2019.
• 19. How to Talk to Young Children about Body Safety, https://www.kidsfirstinc.org/how-to-talk-to-young-children-about-body-safety, ErişimTarihi. 12.04.2019
• 20. Teaching Touching Safety Rules: Safe and Unsafe Touching Activity, https://www.cfchildren.org/blog/2017/08/activity-teaching-touching-safety-rules-safe-and-unsafe-touching/, ErişimTarihi. 12.04.2019.
• 21. Kenny MC. Child sexual abuse education with ethnically diverse families: A preliminary analysis. Children and Youth Services Review 2010; 32(79: 981-989.
• 22. Kenny MC, Wurtele SK, Alonso L. Evaluation of a personal safety program with Latino preschoolers. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 2012;21(4): 368-385.
• 23. Kenny MC, Wurtele SK. Teaching preschooler’s safety rules: a pilot study of ınjury prevention. Children's Health Care 2015; 45(4):428-440.
• 24. Çıtak Tunç G. Kendi Bedenimin Patronuyum, Çocuklar için beden güvenliği eğitimi ebeveyn rehberi, Ankara Nobel Tıp Kitabevi; 2019. p. 30-50.
• 25. Watson Craig M, Errington G. Preventing unintentional injuries in children: successful approaches, Pediatrics and Child Health 2016;26(5): 194-199.
• 26. Köksal O, Dağal A, Duman A. Okul öncesi öğretmenlerinin okul öncesi eğitim programı hakkındaki görüşlerinin belirlenmesi. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies 2016; 46: 379-394.
• 27. Dilek H, Duman T. Okul öncesi eğitim programının değerlendirilmesi 2006. Gazi Üniversitesi Endüstriyel Sanatlar Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 2014; 33: 143-158.
• 28. El-Sabely AA, Abd El-Aziz IY, Salwa AZ. Mother’s education and her knowledge about home accident prevention among preschool children in rural area in sharkia governorate, IOSR Journal of Nursing and Health Science 2014; 3(1): 32-40.
• 29. El Seifi OS, Mortada EM, Abdo NM. Effect of community-based intervention on knowledge, attitude, and self-efficacy toward home injuries among Egyptian rural mothers having preschool children. PLoS ONE 2018; 13(6): e0198964.
• 30. Zhoua H, Fana LJ, Wub CA, Luob A, Mob C, Hea G, Ruana ZL, Jingc J, Jinc Y, Chena WO. Understanding the associations among parents teaching safety rules to children, safety behaviors and unintentional injuries in Chinese preschool children, Preventive Medicine 2019; 118: 98-103.
• 31. Çetinkaya B, Turan T. Preschool children’s knowledge about health and safety in Turkey, J Pak Med Assoc 2018; 1792-1797.