Ideological Tendencies of the Teachers about the Causes of Vandalism in Schools and Solution Proposals

Aggression is a behavior that cannot be approved by the society. Vandalism which is aggression towards objects is an action that tends to damage public or personal property. The behaviors that are described as vandalism can often be observed in the schools as well. According to Zwier and Vaughan (1) previous research about the reasons of and precautionary measures for vandalism in schools can be grouped in three tendency categories: conservative, liberal and radical. In this context, the main aim of this study is to discover which ideological tendency of the reasons of school vandalism is adopted by the teachers and what are their physical, environmental, school system and societal solutions for vandalism. A total of 200 teachers participated in this study, and the mean age was 34.20 years (SD = 6.54). The sample was made up of 109 females and 91 males. For the analysis of the data, SPSS 15.00, frequency, percentage, and t-test were used. The research showed that the teachers have tendencies in the order of conservative, liberal and radical for the reasons of vandalism. The research also showed that the teachers do not have any tendency for eliminating vandalism physically and general solutions on the level of society; on the other hand they mostly adopt a conservative tendency in terms of precautions against vandalism in the school system. Second most, they adopt the liberal tendency in terms of precautions against vandalism in the school system. . It is observed that the findings of this study are comparable to the existing literature on the subject. Future studies should be conducted with multiple variants and bigger sampling.

Authors:

• Sevgi Birsel Nemlioğlu
• Hasan Atak

Keywords:

• Vandalism
• School
• Vandal
• Turkey
• Teacher
• Tendency.

References:

[1] Zwier, G., & Vaughan, G. M. (1984). Three ideological orientations in
school vandalism research: Review of Educational Research Vol 54(2)
Sum 1984, 263-292.
[2] Freedman, J.L., Sears, D.O. ve Carlsmith, J.M.(1989) Sosyal
Psikoloji,(├çev.) A. Dönmez, Ankara: Ara Yay.
[3] Cohen, S. (1973), Property Destruction Motives and meanings
vandalism (Ed. Ward. C), s.23-53. The Architectural Press, London.
[4] Samdahl, D.M. and Christensen, H.H. (1985). Environmental cues and
vandalism: An exploratory study of picnic table carving. Enviroment and
Behavior, 17 (4),445-458.
[5] Ward, C. (1973) Introduction. Vandalism (Ed.). 13-22. London: The
Architecturel Press.
[6] Stallings, J., and G. Mohlman. School Policy, Leadership Style, Teacher
Change, and Student Behavior in Eight Schools, Final Report. Mountain
View, Calif.: Stallings Teaching and Learning Institute, 1981.
[7] Goldstein, A. P. (2004). Controlling Vandalism: The Person-
Environment Duet. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
[8] ├û─ƒ├╝lm├╝┼ƒ, S. (1995). Violence and Aggression at High School. ┼×iddet ve
Sald─▒rganl─▒k, Unpublished Research Report, Ankara University.
[9] Yavuzer, H. (1998). Yayg─▒n Ana-Baba Tutumlar─▒, Ana-Baba Okulu.
─░stanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.