Gelecek Vizyonlar Dergisi - Future Visions Journal
           
Anasayfa  |  Künye   |  Haberler  |  İletişim  

Hızlı Erişim


Bu Dergi DOI ve Crosscheck üyesidir


Creative Commons Lisansı
Bu eser Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

Özet


Comparison of constraints on participation in recreational physical activity of university students

People are moving less and less every day with the conveniences and possibilities that have come from past to present. With industrialization, mechanization and technology, immobility environments have increased more (Akgün, 1980).

Recreation refers to relaxing and entertaining activities that are carried out on the basis of volunteerism in the leisure of personal or social clusters (Karaküçük, 2005). These activities can relieve feelings like relaxation, renewal, change, escape from everyday events, and clear body, soul and thought (Bammel and Brus-Bammel, 1996).

It can be mentioned that recreational activities that individuals perform during their free time are unique characteristics of the recreation because of their choice in the direction of their own desires (Kılbaş, 2004).

Exercise for a healthy life should be part of people's daily life and lifestyle. Exercise and physical activity help achieve better physical and mental health, increase quality of life and prolong life (Şahin, 2002).

The aim of the study was to compare constraints on participation in recreational physical activities of the university students. In the field study, it was conducted by applying a questionnaire to faculty and college students continuing education at Karabük University in the autumn period of 2018-2019.

The "participation to recreational activities scale" was used as a data collection tool in the survey which was previously used in various researches (Müderrisoğlu et al., 2005; Tütüncü et al., 2011) in Turkey.

Demographic information of the participants was measured by descriptive and percentage frequency analysis. For statistical analysis, normality test was applied and the data were normal distributed. As a result of the normal distribution of the data, the independent sample t-test was used to compare the two groups and the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was used for the comparison of more than two groups. Homogeneity test was also applied during the ANOVA test. As a result of the ANOVA test, Post-hoc TUKEY test was performed because of the homogeneous distribution of the variances in order to determine which group was caused by the difference.

In the sub-dimensions of the state and economic situation of the areas, it is seen that the average of the faculty students is higher than the college students and the result is statistically significant difference at the level of p <0,05. While a statistically significant difference was found at p <0,05 level in the physical facilities and status of area sub-dimensions, which were compared between males and females, it was found that in the other sub-dimensions (negative internal experiences, economic conditions, side causes, organizational elements and psychological reasons) no difference was found. As a result of the class-based examination of the participation barriers to recreational activities (Table 5), statistically significant difference (p <0,05) was found in the physical characteristics, the state of the areas, economic situation and organizational elements sub-dimensions, but no significant difference was found in the other sub-dimensions.

As a result, there were statistically significant differences between the physical facilities and the status of the areas of participation in recreational physical activity, and between the physical characteristics and the status of the areas according to the class distribution and the status of the fields in the comparison of the faculty and college students.As a result, according to gender there were statistically significant differences between the physical characteristics and the status of the areas of participation in recreational physical activity.  In addition, according to the class distribution there was a significance difference between 3rd class and other classes the physical characteristics and the status of the areas. It can be said that it will increase information and good advertisement participation. According to these results, the following suggestions can be made about the research:

•       Increasing the number of recreational spaces on the university campus and improving the conditions of use,

•       To make the students learn more about recreational activities,

•       Regulation of recreational areas and facilities on university campus according to welfare level of students,

•       Placement of courses for recreational training in curriculum programs,

•       Comparing the special talent exam with the students who read and do not study at university,

•       Including research groups of different subject groups and comparing groups,

•       Increasing hobby lessons in Universities.

 



Anahtar Kelimeler
Comparison of constraints on participation in recreational physical activity of university students

Kaynakça

Alpözgen, A. Z., & Özdinçer, A. R. (2016). Fiziksel aktivite ve koruyucu etkileri.HSP, 3(1), 66-72.

Akgün, N. (1980). Egzersiz Fizyoloji, 2. Baskı, İzmir: Ege Üniversitesi Basımevi.

Balcı, V. (2003). Ankara'daki Üniversite Öğrencilerinin BoşZaman Etkinliklerine Katılımlarının Araştırılması. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 158, 161-173.

Baltacı, G. (2008). Çocuk ve Spor. Klasmat Matbaacılık, Ankara.

Bammel, G.,& Burrus-Bammel, L. L. (1996). Leisureandhuman behavior, 3rd edition. United States of America (Madison): Brown & Benchmark Publishers.

Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2018). Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri, 25. Baskı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

Crawford, D. W., Jackson, E. L.,& Godbey G. (1991). A hierarchical model of leisure constraints. Leisure Sciences, 13, 309-320.

Demirel, M., &Harmandar, D. (2009). Üniversite öğrencilerinin rekreasyonel etkinliklere katılımlarında engel oluşturabilecek faktörlerin belirlenmesi. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1), 8-17.

Ercan, İ., &Kan, İ. (2004). Ölçeklerde güvenirlik ve geçerlik. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(3), 211-216.

Ergül, K. (2008). Üniversitegençliğinin sportif rekreasyon etkinliklerine yönelik ilgileri ve katılma düzeylerinin belirlenmesi, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Celal Bayar Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Manisa.

Jackson E. L., &Rucks V. C. (1995). Negotiation of leisure constrain. Ts by junior-high and high-school students: An exploratory study. Journal of Leisure Research, 27(1), 85-105.         

Karaküçük, S. (2005). Rekreasyon: Boş Zamanları Değerlendirme.Ankara: Gazi Kitapevi.

Karaküçük, S.& Gürbüz, B. (2007). Rekreasyon ve Kentleşme. Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara.

Karasar, N. (1994). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi, 5. Baskı. Ankara: 3A Araştırma Eğitim Danışmanlık.

Kılbaş, Ş. (2004). Rekreasyon, Boş Zamanı Değerlendirme, 3.Baskı. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.

Müderrisoğlu, H., Kutay, E. L.,& Eşen, S. Ö. (2005). Kırsal rekreasyonel faaliyetlerde kısıtlayıcılar. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 11(1), 40-44.

Özer, K. (2006). Fiziksel uygunluk, 2. Baskı. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.

Şahin, Z. (2002). Ergenlerde fiziksel aktivite düzeyinin değerlendirilmesi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.

Schwilgin, F. A. (1974). Town Planning Guidelines. Department of Public Works. Ottowa (Revised Edition).

Tekin, A. (2009). Rekreasyon, 1. Baskı Ankara: Ata Ofset Matbaacılık.

Türkiye Halk Sağlığı Kurumu (2014). Türkiye Fiziksel Aktivite Rehberi.Ankara: Türkiye Halk Sağlığı Kurumu, Sağlık Bakanlığı Yayın No:940.

Tütüncü, Ö., Aydın, İ., Küçükusta, D., Avcı, N., &Taş, İ. (2011). Üniversite öğrencilerinin rekreasyon faaliyetlerine katiliminim etkileyen unsurların analizi. Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 22(2), 69-83.

Vural, Ö. (2010). Masa başıçalışanlarda fiziksel aktivite düzeyi ve yaşam kalitesi ilişkisi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.

Yaman, V., Yaman, F., & Burgul, N. (2004). Beden eğitimi ve spor yüksekokullarında öğrenim gören öğrencilerin serbest zaman alışkanlıkları içeresindeki sporun yeri ve rolü (Ankara örneği).The 10th ICHPER•SD European Congressand the TSSA 8th International Sports 66 Science Congress, Antalya.

Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri, 5. Baskı. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.

Yıldırım, M., Akyol, A., &Ersoy, G. (2008). Şişmanlık (Obezite) ve fiziksel aktivite. Ankara: Klasmat Matbaacılık.

Gelişmiş Arama


Duyurular

    YENİ SAYI CİLT:3 SAYI:2 YAYINDA

    Dergimizin yeni sayısı (Cilt:3 Sayı:2) yayınlanmıştır. 

    Açık erişim ve kör hakemlik sistemi ile bilimsel yayın yapan Gelecek Vizyonlar Dergisinin 2019 Haziran sayısı (Cilt:3, Sayı:2) beş makale ile yayınlanmıştır. Bu sayıda makalesi yayınlanan bilim insanlarını tebrik ediyor, çalışmalarında başarılar diliyoruz. Gelecek sayılar için makale kabulü devam etmektedir.



Adres : Prof. Dr. Adem SEZER Uşak Üniversitesi 1 Eylül Kampüsü İzmir Yolu 8. Km, Bir Eylül Kampüsü Merkez/UŞAK - 64200
Telefon :0276 221 21 30 Faks :
Eposta :info@futurevisionsjournal.com

Web Yazılım & Programlama Han Yazılım Bilişim Hizmetleri