SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet / 2011 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 2

Sosyal hizmet öğrencilerinin toplumsal cinsiyet hakkındaki görüşleri: Bir niteliksel araştırma

Opinions of social work students on gender: A qualitative research

Sema BUZ
Özlem ÖNTAŞ CANKURTARAN
Burcu HATİBOĞLU
Aslıhan Burcu ÖZTÜRK
Pages
19–36
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

They explained gender roles within the socialization process and traditional role expectations, not within the context of male domination and subordination of the female.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to investigate the views of the students of the Department of Social Work at Hacettepe University regarding gender, based on focus group discussions.
📊
Key Findings & Data:We found that the student participants did not discuss about gender within the framework of power and oppression mechanisms in society.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:They explained gender roles within the socialization process and traditional role expectations, not within the context of male domination and subordination of the female.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the views of the students of the Department of Social Work at Hacettepe University regarding gender, based on focus group discussions. We found that the student participants did not discuss about gender within the framework of power and oppression mechanisms in society. They explained gender roles within the socialization process and traditional role expectations, not within the context of male domination and subordination of the female.

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Hizmet Bölümü öğrencilerinin toplumsal cinsiyete ilişkin görüşlerini odak grup tartışmalarına dayanarak incelemektir. Araştırmada öğrencilerin toplumsal cinsiyeti, toplumdaki güç ve ezme mekanizmaları çerçevesinde tartışmadıkları bulunmuştur. Öğrenciler toplumsal cinsiyet rollerini, erkek baskınlığı ve kadının ikincilleştirilmesi yerine; sosyalleşme süreci ve geleneksel rol beklentileri çerçevesinde açıklamışlardır.

🔖

Cite This Article

BUZ, S., CANKURTARAN, Ö. Ö., HATİBOĞLU, B., ÖZTÜRK, A. B. (2022). Sosyal hizmet öğrencilerinin toplumsal cinsiyet hakkındaki görüşleri: Bir niteliksel araştırma. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 2, 19–36. https://ajindex.com/articles/598394

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Anıl E., Berktay A. ve İlkkaracan P. (2002). The new legal status of women in Turkey, Women for Women Rights, www.wwhr.org/ id-736. Baber, K. M. (2000). Women’s sexualities. In M. Biaggio and M. Hersen (Eds.), Issues in the psychology of women. New York: Plenum Press.
  2. Barns, A. (2003). Social work, young women and femininity. Affilia, 18(2), 148-164.
  3. Bentley, K. J., Valentine, D. and Haskett, G. (1999). Women’s issues and social work accreditation: A status report, Affilia, 14, 344. Berktay, A. (1998). Cumhuriyet’in 75 yıllık serüvenine kadınlar açısından bakmak, 75 Yılda Kadınlar ve Erkekler. İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası ve Tarih Vakfı Yayınları.
  4. Boratav, H. B. (2002). Kuştepe gençliği: penceremden gördüklerim. Kuştepe Gençlik Araştırması (ed. Kazgan, G.) İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  5. Carli, L. L. and Bukatko, D. (2000). Gender, communication, and social influence: A developmental perspective. In Eckes, T. and Trautner, H. M. (Eds.), The Developmental Social Psychology of Gender, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum. Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mothering, psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender. London: University of California Press.
  6. Coltrane, S. (1998). Gender and families. New York: Rowman and Littlefield. Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  7. Connell, R.W. (2002). Hegemonic masculinity and violence: Response to Jefferson and Hall. Theoretical Criminology, 6(1), 89-99.
  8. Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd ed.). USA: University of California Press.
  9. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. CA: Thousand Oaks, Sage. Dipboye, R. L. and Colella, A. (2005). Discrimination at work: The psychology and organizational bases. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Dominelli, L. (2002). Feminist social work theory and practice. Hampshire: Palgrave and Macmillan. Featherstone, B. (2001). Why gender matters in child welfare and protection. Critical Social Policy, 26(2), 294-314.
  10. Figueira-Mcdonough, J., Netting, E. F. and Nichols-Casebolt, A. (2001). Subjugated knowledge in gender-integrated social work education: Call for a dialogue. Affilia, 16(4), 411-431.
  11. Grise- Owens, E. (2002). Sexism and the social work curriculum: A content analysis of the journal of social work education, Affilia, 17, 147-166.
  12. Heiliger, A. and Constance E. (1995). Sexuelle gewalt mannliche sozialisation und potentielle taterschaft. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag. Ilkkaracan, I. and Seral,