Examining the values of students in the physical education and sport departments

In this study, the values of students in the physical education and sport departments were examined according to their gender, age, grade, and departments. The questionnaire method was used in the study. As the data collection tool, the Portrait Values Questionnaire was applied. The study group consisted of a total of 389 students 126 of whom were female, and 263 were male; and selected from 4 different universities according to the Cluster Sampling Method. The Mann-Whitney U Test and Kruskal Wallis H Tests, which are among the common statistical tests, were used in the study. The significance level was selected as α=0.05 in the tests. The effect size of the tests was determined to be generally medium-size. As a conclusion, the ranking of the values of the students studying at Physical Education and Sports Departments were determined as “benevolence, universalism, security, achievement, stimulation, self-direction, hedonism, conformity, power and tradition”. While the power, tradition, conformity and security value points of the female students were found to be higher than the male students, the hedonism and stimulation points of the male students were higher than the female students. A difference was determined between the achievement, stimulation and conformity values according to the ages of the students. Although there was no difference between the value points according to the departments of the students, there was a difference between the value points according to their ages.


INTRODUCTION
Humans are social creatures, and they stick to rules and norms in the society as a requirement of their nature.They are influenced by the beliefs, attitudes, habits and values of the environment they live in.Most of the time, they have to obey the rules and norms within the society in a compulsory manner.When they do not obey these rules and norms, they face punishment, exclusion or various sanctions.However, they sometimes care for the social rules and apply them willingly and lovingly.In this sense, values are important for social order, and are gained with social interaction within the society (Grusec and Kuczynski, 1997;Rohan and Zanna, 1996).
The term "Value" was first used as a concept by Polish scientist Florian Witold Znaniecki, and was adopted in social sciences.It is derived from the Latin word "valere", which means "being valuable" or "being powerful" (Bilgin, 1995).The term "value" is expressed with the words "good", "beautiful" and "true" (Alavi and Rahimipoor, 2010).Value may be defined as the aim that is desired as beyond the current situations with changing importance serving as guiding principles in the functioning of the social institutions or in the life of the individuals (Schwartz, 1994).Rokeach (1973) defined values as permanent beliefs that determine whether the behaviors of a person or the results of a situation are acceptable or not for the individuals or for the society.Values are abstract and generalized behavioral principles that appear with the formation of a standard intended for special aims and actions with a strong emotional bond of the members of a social group (Theodorson and Achilles, 1969).Values are the beliefs that underlie in the intellectual and behavioral processes, and guide the continuous behaviors of an individual in certain situations about the latest status desired (Connor and Becker, 2003).
Values are related with cultural norms; however, they are more universal and abstract than the norms (Frouzanfar et al., 2012).It is accepted that on the one hand, values influence the individual attitudes and cognitive processes; and on the other hand, they also reflect the cultural patterns (Inglehart, 2008;Rokeach, 1973;Schwartz, 1996).Meanwhile, value priorities have an important role in predicting and understanding the behavioral decisions and attitudes of people (Myyry, 2008).Values are upper-level structures that guide the attitudes and behaviors independently from the situations and conditions (Schwartz, 1996); and they may motivate behaviors just like it is the case in needs (Bardi and Schwartz, 2001).Schwartz and Bilsky (1990, p.879) expressed the properties of values as follows: "1.Values are concepts or beliefs.2. Values are pertain to desirable end states or behaviors 3. Values transcend specific situations 4. Values are guide selection or evaluation of behavior and events 5. Values are ordered by relative importance" Many scientists have developed Value Hypotheses by investigating the existence, formation and properties of the value concept.Allport (1937 as cited in Allport, Vernon andLindzey, 1960) who expressed the first Value Hypothesis, claimed that value was a system consisting of six dimensions, and there were values in each system according to the individual differences of people.These values determine the lifestyles of people, guide them, and to determine their aims for living.Then, Graves (1965) developed a hypothesis, and separated human life into seven hierarchical stages and examined the roots of values with an existentialist approach at each level.Rokeach (1973) divided the values into two dimensions as instrumental and terminal in his value hypothesis, and Gullu 1813 grouped eighteen values under each dimension.He also developed a scale for this values relation.In his hypothesis, Schwartz (1992) determined 10 basic values that were applicable to all social structures, and that covered the basic needs of people.He also developed a measurement tool for these values.Hofstede (2001) who claimed the latest hypothesis on values, developed a method in which values are measured with a mental program, which is the software of the mind.He investigated the mental program by dividing it into three parts as "universal", "collective" and "individual".
In this study, the value hypothesis of Schwartz has been taken as the basis, and more information is given for this reason.Schwartz (1992Schwartz ( , 1996) ) conceptualized the values as cognitive representatives of three universal needs.These needs are, biological needs of individuals, the needs pertaining to regulating social interactions, and the needs about fulfilling the responsibilities as a group or society.Each group and individual reveals 56 universal values, which are the cognitive representatives of the relevant needs, in order to explain and justify their behaviors and establish coordination among them.The basic assumption of Schwartz is that there should not be any contradiction between each value and the other value following it in terms of psychological applications and social consequences (Schwartz and Boehnke, 2004).
Schwartz collected these 56 values under 10 main values (power, success, hedonism, stimulation, selfdirection, universalism, benevolence, traditionalism, conformity and security); and collected these 10 main values under 4 different dimensions (Self-enhancement, Self-transcendence, Openness to Change and Conservatism).He explained the 10 value types that were positioned according to all compliances and contrasts with a circular arrangement (Figure 1) (Schwartz, 1992(Schwartz, , 1996)).Then, Schwartz et al. (2001) developed the Portrait Values Questionnaire by taking this hypothesis as the basis.
It has been observed recently that many studies have been conducted on developing measurement tools for values.It is also observed that the studies intensify especially on educational institutions and teachers and students.Densford (1961) considered the education system or educational institutions as an important tool reflecting the values of the society.For this reason, countries teach universal values as well as the values that reflect their own cultures in their educational systems.For example, the following expression is given place among the aims of the Turkish Higher Education Institutions "Raising students, who consider the benefits of the society over their own benefits and full of love for their family, country and nation (Item 3), who know their duties and responsibilities for the State of Republic of Turkey, and who adopt these as behaviors (Item 4), who have free and scientific thinking power and a wide worldly  Schwartz's (1994, p.24) circular value hypothesis.
Here, both universal values and the values that are specific for the country are emphasized.Students are made to acquire knowledge, skills, behaviors and values with the help of the educational programs run with the guidance of the aims and values of the higher educational institutions.When the studies conducted with university students on values are examined, it is observed that the values such as student security, helpfulness, universalism (Bacanli, 1999;Bulut, 2012;Coskun and Yildirim, 2009;Yildiz and Kapu, 2012) are focused on.Again, Gumus (2009) conducted a study and determined that self-direction, benevolence and universal values were high in university students in America; and benevolence, universalism and self-direction values were high in university students in Turkey.Zavalsiz (2014) determined that the value priorities of the university students, who received optional Value Education Classes, were as follows; "religious, moral, social, political, aesthetical, theoretical-scientific and economic values".
Values may vary in universities in terms of general aims and values as well as in faculties and departments.The differences in the curricula in the departments or faculties may also influence the students' values as well.For example, the universalism or self-direction values of a student studying at a musical faculty may develop more while the traditionalism or security values of a student studying at faculty of theology may develop more.The purpose of this study is examining the values of the students studying at physical education and sports departments at universities according to their gender, grade, age and departments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
The Questionnaire Method, which is one of the descriptive study methods, was used in this study.In the Questionnaire method, the participants answer the questions asked in the interviews and questionnaires, and these answers are described (Jackson, 2009) and presented in meaningful tables.

Study group
The Portrait Value Questionnaire ([PVQ], Schwarts et al., 2001) was applied to 40 university students studying at Physical Education and Sports School (PESS) prior to the determination of the Study Group; and the highest standard deviation value (M= 4.78, SD=±0.81) of the sub-dimensions of the scale was found in the "stimulation" sub-dimension.For the continuous data, the sampling size of the study should be at least 370 students according to the Cochran's sampling size determination formula (M=4.78SD=±0.81;Confidence Interval= %98 d=±0.04 point scale=6) (Bartlett et al., 2001).The Clustering Sampling Type was determined as the sampling type in the study.In the Clustering Sampling Type, the sub-clusters of the main body are taken to the sampling according to their representation rates (Kothari, 2004).In this study, the students were included in the study in an equal amount by considering the fact that they came basically from 3 departments (Physical Education and Sports Teachers, Trainer Education and Sports Management); which are Physical Education and Sports Schools, and Sports Sciences Faculty in Turkey.The grades (1, 2, 3 and 4 th Grades) and the gender rates in the grades (25% female and 75% male) were cared for 460 students, who were studying at PESS Departments of Inonu University, Bartın University, Dumlupınar University and Fırat University Sports Sciences Faculty in Turkey in 2015 to 2016 Academic year, and who volunteered to participate in the study, were included in the study.

Data collection tool
The portrait values questionnaire (PVQ), which was developed by Schwartz et al. (2001), and which was adapted into Turkish by Demirutku and Sumer (2010), was used in the study as data collection tool.Smallest Space Analysis (SSA) was used to analyze the configuration of values by using the correlation matrix of 40 PVQ items as a similarity matrix for validity of PVQ.SSA analysis revealed that the theoretical model was confirmed by the empirical model.The coefficient of alienation was 0.21.Test-retest reliability coefficients of the all sub-dimensions were ranged between 0.65 and 0.81.Cronbach alpha coefficients of the all sub-dimensions were ranged between 0.61 and 0.84.The scale consisted of 40 questions, and was given points according to the 6-Point Likert Scale as "This is quite unlike me (1)", "This is unlike me (2)", "This is like me a little (3)", "This is barely like me (4)", "This is like me (5)" and "This is quite like me ( 6)".There are 10 sub-dimensions in the scale, and the values of these sub-dimensions are defined as follows (Schwartz et al., 2001): Power: This dimension expresses the auditing of the social position and respectability on people and resources; and consists of 2, 17 and 39 th Items.
Achievement: This dimension expresses the individual success direction that takes the social standards as bases; and consists of 4, 13, 24 and 32 nd Items.
Hedonism: This dimension expresses the individual satisfaction on pleasure and senses; and consists of 10, 26 and 37 th Items.

Stimulation:
This dimension expresses the excitement, challenging to life, and the search for innovation; and consists of 6, 15 and 30 th Items.

Self-direction:
This dimension expresses the preference of independent thinking and action, being an explorer, and creativity; and consists of 1, 11, 22 and 34 th Items.
Universalism: This dimension expresses the notions like being understanding, admiring, tolerant, and caring for the interests of people and the nature; and consists of 3, 8, 19, 23, 29 and 40 th Items.
Benevolence: This dimension expresses the notions like caring for, developing and protecting the benefits of people with whom the individual is in frequent relation; and consists of 12, 18, 27 and 33 rd Items.
Tradition: This dimension expresses the acceptance, devotion and respecting some traditions and ideas of a religion or a traditional culture; and consists of 9, 20, 25 and 38 th Items.
Conformity: This dimension expresses the limitations of motives and inclinations that bring the individual to actions like acting contrary to the social rules and expectations, disturbing others, or breaking-injuring them; and consists of 7, 16, 28 and 36 th Items.
Security: This dimension expresses the security, peace and stability of the society, relations and the individual; and consists of 5, 14, 21 31 and 35 th Items.

Data analysis techniques
The data of the 389 students, who completed the questionnaire Gullu 1815 form accurately and without any missing parts, were loaded into the statistical package program.The data of the students on the subdimensions of the PVQ were tested with the Kolmogrov-Smirnov Test (KS), and it was observed that the data of the sub-dimensions were not distributed normally (Table 1).For this reason, the Mann-Whitney U Test was used for pair wise comparisons, which is one of the nonparametric tests in statistical analyses; the Kruskal-Wallis H Test was used for multiple comparisons, and the Bonferroni Correction Mann-Whitney U Test was used for post-hoc test.The significance value for the critical point was determined as α=0.05.The effect size of the statistical tests was examined with Went's Rank-Biserial Correlation (rrb) (Wendt, 1972 as cited in Kerby, 2014).It was observed in the study that the effect size of the 47 statistical tests varied between 0.15 and 0.84; and the average value was 0.47.According to Cohen (1988) (between 0.10 to 0.30 is accepted as "small"; between 0.30 to 0.50 "medium" and between 0.50 to 1 "high" effect size), the average effect size of the statistical test results is at "medium" level.

RESULTS
The ranking of the value points of the physical education and sports department students is observed in As observed in Table 2, the power ( X =4.71 SD=+0.54),tradition ( X =4.22 SD=+0.76),conformity ( X =4.78 SD=+0.62) and security ( X =5.11 SD=+0.52)value points of the female students studying at physical education and sports departments are higher than those of the male students.The hedonism ( X =4.76 SD=+0.48) and stimulation ( X =4.94 SD=+0.64) points of the male students are higher than those of females.These results are statistically significant (p<0.05).However, it is observed in Table 2 that there are no statistical differences between the success, self-direction, universalism and benevolence value points of the university students according gender (p>0.05).
As observed in Table 3, there is a statistical difference between the achievement value points of the students studying at physical education and sports departments (H=21.500p<0.05).It is also observed that this difference stems from the difference between the value points of 18-19-year-old students and 20-21-year-old students, and between the value points of 18-19-year-old and 22-27year-old ones (p<0.016r rb =0.29).In Table 3, there is a statistical difference between the stimulation value points according to the ages of the students (H=7.493p<0.05).
It is observed that this difference stems from the value points of the 18-19-year-old and 20-21-year-old students (p<0.016r rb =0.20).In addition, there is a difference between the conformity value points according to the ages of the students (H=7.845p<0.05).It is also observed that this difference stems from the value points of the 18-19-year-old students and 20-21-year-old ones (p<0.016r rb =0.23).
It is observed in Table 4 that there are no statistically significant differences among the power, achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism, benevolence, tradition, conformity and security values of the students studying at physical education and sports departments (p>0.05) .
As observed in Table 5, there are statistically significant differences among the power (H=49.850p<0.05), achievement (H=132.746p<0.05), hedonism (H=38.739p<0.05), stimulation (H=37.015p<0.05), self-direction Upon the Bonferroni Correction Mann-Whitney U test, which was conducted to determine among which this difference was detected, it was determined that there were differences nearly among all paired groups (p<0.008).
It was observed that the effect size of the statistical analysis conducted between the paired groups was between 0.24 and 0.84; however, it was also observed that the majority of the effect sizes were at the medium and high levels.

DISCUSSION
It is observed in Table 1 that the ranking of the value points of the physical education and sports department students according to the highest values are benevolence, universalism and security values, respectively.It is meaningful that the highest values of the students are observed in the benevolence value.Schwartz (1992, p.11) explained "benevolence value" as "This is a more narrowly defined version of the earlier prosaically value type.Whereas prosaically referred to concern for the welfare of all people in all settings, benevolence focuses on concern for the welfare of close others in everyday interaction".In addition, he also stated that it was among the universal needs of an individual as an organism  (Schwartz, 1992).This situation may stem from the belief of the university students that the universal knowledge they learn and the skills they acquire in classes at university will be helpful for the society in which they live or for the individuals; and this knowledge and skill will take the society to a further point from the present point.This situation may also be valid for the universalism and security values.In order for a society to develop, the individuals must live in security; have a wide viewpoint, and a sense of social justice.It is no surprise that the university students understand this situation in the best way and have the benevolence, universalism and security as the highest beliefs.Studies conducted so far also support the results of this study.Yildiz and Kapu (2012) conducted a study and found that the security, helpfulness and universalism values were at the highest level for university students.Bacanli (1999) reported in his study that the security, charity and universalism values of the students, who studied at educational faculties, were higher than the other values.Demirutku (2007) conducted a study and found that the highest values in university students were self-direction, universalism, hedonism and benevolence.Gumus (2009) conducted a study and found that the selfdirection, benevolence and universal values of the American university students were high, while the benevolence, universalism and self-direction values were high in Turkish university students.These results show that although university students study at different universities, in different countries and even in different faculties, their values are close to each other.
It is observed in Table 2 that the power, tradition, conformity and security value points of the female students studying at physical education and sports departments are higher than the male students; and the hedonism and stimulation values of the male students are higher than the female students.This situation stems from the difference in the spiritual and perceptional levels of the students according to their genders.Female students may perceive values deeply due to their spiritual nature.The studies conducted so far (Coskun and Yildirim, 2009) show that the value perception levels of female university students are higher than the male students.Eagly (1995) explains this situation in his Social Role Theory as the different family and job roles given to the men and women within the society being the basis of these gender-based expectations.It is expected in the society that women are hot-blooded, friendly, maternal and helpful; while men are brave and kind.
When the studies similar to the one of this study are examined, it is observed that similar results are reported.For example Feather (1984) conducted a study and observed that women participants cared more about love, honesty, internal harmony and respectability.He also concluded that male participants cared more about a comfortable life and logic than women participants.Again, Bacanli (1999) conducted a study and determined that female university students cared more about universal and peaceful values, and male university students cared more about being connected to traditions and being religious.Ryckman and Houston (2003) conducted another study and found that female university students cared more about helpfulness, universalism and security values.Schwartz and Rubel-Lifschitz (2005) reported that male participants cared more about power, stimulation, hedonism, achievement and self-direction values than female participants; and female participants cared less about helpfulness and universalism values.Schwartz and Rubel-Lifschitz (2009) conducted a study in seventy countries and found that male participants cared more about power, stimulation, hedonism, achievement and self-direction values than female participants; and female participants cared more about helpfulness and humanism values more than the male participants.Dirilen-Gumus and Buyuksahin-Sunal (2012) conducted a study and reported that female university students cared more about hedonism, humanism, helpfulness and security values than female university students.Bulut (2012) conducted a study in the Educational Faculty, and observed that the stimulation values of male students were higher than the benevolence, conformity and security values of the female students.
It is observed in Table 3 that there is a differentiation among the achievement, stimulation and conformity value points according to the ages of the physical education and sports department students.It was determined that the main reason for this stemmed from the difference between 18 to 19 age group and 20 to 21 age group.Since the age group 18 to 19 is just after teenage years and high school years (Bacanli, 2002), their feelings may be stronger.In addition, Schwartz (1992) expressed that success value is related with skills, efficiency, social and individual success; and the stimulation value is related with a brave, colorful and exciting life.For this reason, it is a natural result that students' success and stimulation values are high in 18-19 years of age, when the life energy of the individuals after teenage years are at the top level.
In Table 4, it is observed that there are no statistically significant differences between the value points of the physical education and sports department students according to their departments.Physical education and sports teachers department trains teachers; trainer department educates trainers; and Sports Management department raises sports managers.Although there are different programs in these departments, the curricula are similar to each other; and they continue education and training activities in the same sports facilities, in the same building, with the same lecturers and have similar conditions.The values' being similar in different departments might have stemmed from this situation.
In Table 5, it is observed that there are statistically significant differences between all the value points of the physical education and sports department students according to their grades.In the statistical process that was conducted in order to determine from which paired groups these differences stemmed from, it was observed that the differences existed nearly in all paired comparisons.This situation shows that the grade variable influences the student values at a significant and high level.
The basic aims of the Turkish higher education institutions are "raising students, who consider the benefits of the society over his/her own benefits and full of love for their family, country and nation" and "who have free and scientific thinking power and a wide worldly view and respectful for human rights" (TOG, 1981, p.5350).For this reason, students have internalized the values stated in these aims at a certain density in each year of their university education, which lasted for four years.These results show that students change their values in a different direction and at a different density with the help of the universal knowledge, skills and attitudes given throughout the university years.The studies conducted so far have shown that the values like empowering themselves and being open for changes of the young people are higher (Morsumbul, 2014).

Conclusion
It has been determined that the ranking of the values in physical education and sports departments students are as follows; "benevolence, universalism, security, achievement, stimulation, self-direction, hedonism, conformity, power and tradition".It has also been determined that the power, traditionalism, conformity and security value points of the female students are higher than the male students, and the hedonism and stimulation points of the males are higher than the females.Differences have also been observed among the achievement, stimulation and conformity values of the students according to their ages.Although no differences have been observed between the value points of the students according to their departments, differences have been observed between the value points of the students according to their ages.
Obeying the rules of the game is very important in Physical Education and Sports.However, in our study, the points of the Conformity Values were observed to be lower than the other values.For this reason, it is recommended that Conformity Value Education should be conducted for the students of Physical Education and Sports departments.In addition, it is also recommended that optional Values Education Classes should be added to the curricula of Physical Education and Sports departments by considering the genders and grades of the students.It is recommended to the researchers who will conduct similar studies to design detailed studies with the Mixed Method in which the qualitative and quantitative research methods are used together.

Table 1
. While it is observed that the students' benevolence value points ( X =5.04 SD=±0.59) are at the highest level, it is also observed that traditionalism values are at the lowest level.The ranking of the students' values from the highest to the lowest is as follows; Benevolence ( X =5.

Table 1 .
Distribution of the values of students in the Departments of the Physical Education and Sports.

Table 2 .
Distribution of the values of students in the Departments of the Physical Education and Sports according to Gender. *p<0.05.

Table 3 .
Distribution of the values of students in the Departments of the Physical Education and Sports according to Age.

Table 4 .
Distribution of the values of students in the Departments of the Physical Education and Sports according to Age.

Table 5 .
Comparison of the values of students in the Departments of the Physical Education and Sports according to Grades.