You are on page 1of 8

1 THE MAIN FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCES SECONDARY STUDENTS IN THE GANGSTERISM SOCIAL ACTIVITY Assoc. Prof.

Dr Azizi bin Hj Yahaya Yusof Boon Rosnah Binti Hj Buang Faculty of Education University Technology Malaysia, Skudai, Johor Malaysia Abstract The purpose of the study is to identify the main factor which influences secondary students in the gangsterism social activity focused in four states such as in Johore, Malacca, Negeri Sembilan and Selangor. In the research, 400 from 4 states were chosen. The data were collected using questionnaire which was adopted from Gangs Activities Perception Questionnaire (FAPQ) and Perceptions Toward Youth Gangs. The alpha cronbach for this instrument was 0.8432. Students reported that overall rate on the gangsterisme which is at moderate level of prevalence still remains at low level. 1.0 Introduction According to Utusan Malaysia (1998), the social phenomenon of gangsterisme has shown to increase the rate of vandalism, threatening and drug addicts among the teenagers. One third of 1560 secondary school in our country, Malaysia has high risk to being exposed with underground society (Berita Harian, 1997). By this group of teenagers who break the norms are often being categorized as a deviant and delinquent. They are often involved in drug addicting, playing truants, raping, homosexual and lesbian. Surprisingly, the number of female students and primary school students are increasingly involved in gangsterisme nowadays. According to Thrasher (1963), at the earlier stage of teenagers, they have higher tendency to form a gang. In the earlier report in 1961, Thrasher also defined gang as a group with same characteristics such as, appearance, action, conflict and planning. As a result of evolution, this group of gang will eventually develop into a group of gangster who often carries out activities that is anti-social. On the other hand, Miller in 1980 defined a gang who carries out illegal acts. In addition, Klein & Maxson who are agreeable with Miller, emphasized 3 criteria of a gang that can be concluded as being recognized negatively by society as well as the law of this country. Taylor in 1993 referred to 4 different criteria of a gang in terms of their function and activities that include their structure, leadership, territories and interaction among the group. 2 According to Haslina Hassan (2000), delinquents are often found in older males who do illegal acts outside school compound. This is in along with Bodinger-de-Uriarte (1993) who found that power and status are one of the major determinants for teenagers to join in the activities of gangsterisme in the United States of America. Gaustad (1991) found that the appearance of gangsters who had interfered the teaching and learning process in the school and affected other students study environment. Hence, we need to pay more attention and carry out strategies that can solve

above problem, as mentioned by Lal et. al. (1993). 2.0 Objectives In relevant with the above statements, this article aimed to identify (1)the major determinants of gangsterisme in school, looking into the aspect of peer group, individuals, family and media influences. It also explored (2) the prevalence of gangsterisme occurring among students as well as (3) the characteristics of gangster from the aspect of symbolism, attire and style. Besides, (4)activities such as threatening acts, clumsily painting at walls, not showing respect at teachers, scolding and insulting acts as well as playing truants are to be identified in its significant correlations with the academic achievement and family income. 3.0 The determinants of gangsterisme There are a few determinants of gangsterisme in school that includes influences from peer group, individual, family and mass media (Cindy, Tursman and Moore, 1930). According to Artwater in 1998, peer group is defined as the same age group of people who plays around, grow up together or buddy who strive together. Encyclopaedia edited in 1997 defined individuals as a person who is turning into adolescents, in the age of 12 to 21 years old. Freud 1953, cited in Fontana 1981 referred family as a combination of father and mother living in house with or without any children. Last but not least, the establishment of Multimedia Corridor (MSC) as well as few other station of television has proven its significance in the aspect of mass media towards the society (Haslina Hassan, 2000). 4.0 The prevalence of gangsterisme Thraser & Lal (1993) found that the occurrence of gangsterism is often out of the sight of the teacher. Therefore, the first step to evaluate the occurrence of gangsterisme is to identify its existence. 5.0 The characteristics among gangsters 3 Lal et. al (1993) showed that among gangsterisme, there are some significant differences in between the few similarity of characteristics among different gangsters that changes with time and venue. They also concluded that gangster has same ethnic, unity and shared the same vision and responsibility, including orders based on the hierarchy and identity as based to the territory of place and school. 6.0 The social activities of gangsterisme Futrell in 1996 stated that activities carried out by the gangsters in school consists of being harsh to teachers and school, in addition to threatening acts, stealing, obtaining jewelleries or money by force, speaking vulgar words and beating students. 7.0 Methodology Majid in 1998 defined descriptive research as a research that explains the ongoing happening of a phenomenon. This article aimed to investigate the factors that influence gangsterisme among 400 secondary students from 4 states, which are Johor, Selangor, Melaka and Negeri Sembilan. The instruments being used was questionnaire adopted from the Gangs Activities Perception Questionnaire and Perception toward Youth Gangs. The alpha croncbach for this instrument was 0.8432. 8.0 Findings Analyse of a few determinants of gangsterisme in school that includes influences from peer group, individual, family and mass media.

Each aspect of the determinants were being categorised into 3 levels which are high level, moderate level and low level. Below are the results of categorization as based on min analysing. Value The Most Domain Factors 3.68-5.00 High 2.34-3.67 Moderate 1.0-2.33 Low a. Analyse of a few determinants of gangsterisme in school that includes influences from peer group Table 1: Dispersion of respondents according to the level of gangsterisme from the aspect of peer group. Level of gangsterisme from the aspect of peer group Number of respondents Percentage Low Moderate 147 225 36.8 56.2 4 High 28 7.0 Total 400 100 Table 1 showed the level of gangsterisme from the aspect of peer group collected from the respondents. The finding showed that the majority of respondent that is being influenced by their peer group was at moderate level, which is of 225 respondents (56.2%). Meanwhile, 147 respondents (36.8%) were influenced by their peer group at the low level. The rest of the 28 respondents (7.0%) were highly influenced by their peer group. b. Analyse of a few determinants of gangsterisme in school that includes influences from family. Table 2: Dispersion of respondents according to the level of gangsterisme from the aspect of family. Level of gangsterism from the aspect of family Number of respondents Percentage Low Moderate High 43 332 25 10.8 83.0 6.2 Total 400 100

Table 2 showed the level of gangsterism from the aspect of family collected from the respondents. The finding showed that the majority of respondent that is being influenced by their family was at moderate level, which is of 332 respondents (83.0%). Meanwhile, 43 respondents (10.8%) were influenced by their peer group at the low level. The rest of the 25 respondents (6.2%) were highly influenced by their family. c. Analyse of a few determinants of gangsterism in school that includes influences from mass media. Table 3: Dispersion of respondents according to the level of gangsterism from the aspect of mass media. Level of gangsterism from the aspect of mass media Number of respondents Percentage Low Moderate High 59 299 42 14.8 74.8 10.4 Total 400 100 Table 3 showed the level of gangsterism from the aspect of mass media collected from the respondents. The finding showed that the majority of respondent that is being influenced by mass media was at moderate level, which is of 299 respondents (74.8%). 5 Meanwhile, 59 respondents (14.8%) were influenced by mass media at the low level. The rest of the 42 respondents (10.4%) were highly influenced by family. d. Analyse of a few determinants of gangsterism in school that includes influences individually. Table 4: Dispersion of respondents according to the level of gangsterism from the aspect of individual. Level of gangsterism from the aspect of individual Number of respondents Percentage Low Moderate High 31 261 108 7.8 65.2 27.0 Total 400 100 Table 4 showed the level of gangsterism from the aspect of individual collected from the respondents. The finding showed that the majority of respondent that is being influenced individually was at moderate level, which is of 261 respondents (65.2%). Meanwhile, 108

respondents (27.0%) were influenced by their peer group at the high level. The rest of the 31 respondents (7.8%) were highly influenced by their family. e. The most domain factor that influence gangsterism. Table 5: Min for each factor of gangsterism. Factors of gangsterism Min Peer group 2.63 Family influences 2.93 Media influences 3.09 Individual influences 3.32 As based on table 5, the biggest factor that influences gangsterism was individual influence which is at min value of 3.32, followed by media influences with min value of 3.09, family influences with min value of 2.93 and the least factor by the peer group with min value of 2.63. f. Analyse of the difference prevalence of gangsterism among secondary students (verbal and physical). 6 Table 6: Differences of total min score and standard deviation of gangsterism acts verbally and physically. Gangsterism Acts Total Min Score Standard Deviation Verbal 2.50 0.90 Physical 2.02 0.72 Verbal and Physical 2.18 0.71 Table 6 showed the dispersion differences of total min score and standard deviation of gangsterism acts verbally and physically. As based on the above table shown, verbal gangsterism acts has the highest occurrence prevalence in secondary schools at the four states as the total min score was higher compared with the total min score of physical gangsterism acts. The prevalence of gangsterism acts among secondary schools from four states overall was at low level with min score of 2.18 and standard deviation of 0.71. g. Analyse of the level of gangsterism acts at four locations in school (classes, recess time, journey to schools, and journey back from schools). Table 7: Dispersion of respondents according to the level of gangsterism acts as based on locations. Level Number of Respondents Percentage Low Moderate High 261 107 32 65.2 26.8 8.0 Total 400 100 Table 7 showed the level of gangsterism acts as based on locations provided by the respondents. The findings showed that majority of the respondents, which is of 261 respondents (65.2%), carry out the gangsterism acts at low level of location. Meanwhile,

107 respondents (26.8%) carry out the gangsterism acts at moderate level of location where as the rest of the 32 respondents (8.0%) carry out the gangsterism acts at high level of location. h. Analyse of dispersion level of characteristics of gangsterism among secondary students. Table 8: Dispersion levels of characteristics of gangsterism. Level Number of Respondents Percentage Low Moderate High 309 83 8 77.2 20.8 2.0 Total 400 100 Table 8 showed the level of characteristics of gangsterism gathered from the respondents. The findings showed that majority of respondents have low level characteristics of 309 7 respondents (77.2%). Meanwhile, 83 respondents (20.8%) have moderate level of gangsterism characteristics. The rest of the 8 respondents (2.0%) have high level of gangsterism characteristics. i. Analyse of the main activities of gangsterism in the school in the aspect of threatening, clumsily painting at walls, not showing respect at teachers, scolding and insulting acts as well as playing truants. Table 9: Min of each activity of gangsterism. Activities of gangsterism Min Threatening Acts 1.89 Clumsily painting at walls 1.88 Not showing respect at teachers 1.82 Scolding and insulting acts 1.99 Playing Truants 1.84 Table 9 showed the main activities of gangsterism which is scolding and insulting acts with min value of 1.99, followed by threatening act with min value of 1.89, clumsily painting at walls with min value of 1.84 as well as not showing respect at teachers with min value of 1.82, which is of the lowest act of gangsterism activities. j. Correlation analyse. Table 10: Correlation between social activity of gangsterism and family income. Social activity of gangsterism Family income (r) Threatening Clumsily painting at walls Not showing respect at teachers Scolding and insulting others Playing truants -0.091

-0.082 -0.098 -0.132** -0.099* Table 11: Correlation between social activity of gangsterism and academic performances. Social activity of gangsterism Academic performance (r) Threatening Clumsily painting at walls Not showing respect at teachers Scolding and insulting others Playing truants -0.096 -0.047 -0.065 -0.100* -0.083 8 9.0 Discussion The results showed that: (1) Students reported that overall rate on the gangsterism which is at moderate level of prevalence were still remains at low level. (2) Friends were the most influences referred to by the students as compared to their family. (3) There were no significant correlations between factors which influences secondary students in the gangsterism social activity with the academic achievement and family income. The influences from peer group, individual, family and mass media towards gangsterism were found to be at low level. As gangsterism can occur outside the school compound, participation from the community as well as police force are required to ensure that the prevalence of gangsterism occurring is at moderate level. The characteristics shown from the aspect of symbol, attire and style were at low level. Interestingly, the social activities carried out by the gangsters in school such as threatening acts, clumsily painting at walls, not showing respect at teachers and playing truants from the 4 states were at low level as the respondents from this research might be better informed of the activities of gangsterism. 10.0 Conclusion As a conclusion, the level of factors which influences secondary students in the gangsterism social activity was found as low level. 11.0 References Artwater, D. (1981) Learning and earning. The value of working for urban student.(On Line). Available Bodinger-der-Uriarte. (1993). Schools Rough Place: Youth, Drugs users, and Family Life in Los Angleses. Washington, DC. U.S. Department Education, Office Of Educational Research and Improvement Cindy Tursman & Moore J. (1930).The politics of education and recent immigrants as gang members.Washington, D.C:Author

Erikson, E. (1968). Identity Youth and Crisis. New York: Norton Fotana, M.(1981). Contributions of delinquency and substance use to school droupout Youth Soc.,21:306-354 Freud, S.F. (1953). Circle of friends:The role of gender and networks in delinquent group dynamic. Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Chicago,IL Futrell, M. (1996). Social processes of delinquency and drug use among urban games. In huff,C.R. (ed) Gangs in America. Sage, newbury Park, CA:pp 183219 Haslina, H. (2000). Gejala Gengsterisme di kalangan Pelajar.Fenomena yang semakin meresahkan. Dewan Masyarakat (Jun). 14-27 9 Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia,(1999). Kajian Gengsterisme di Sekolah Menengah Harian. Kuala Lumpur: Bahagian Perancangan Dan Penyeldikan Dasar Pendidikan Lal, S. (1993). Handbook on gangs in schools: Strategies to reduce gang-related activities. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press Mohd Majid Konting. (1998). Kaedah penyelidikan pendidikan.Kuala Lumpur. DBP Miller, S. (1980). One of The Guys: Girls, Gangs, and Gender. New York:Oxford University Press Moles, O. (1992). Collaboration Between Schools and Disadvangted Parents: Obstacles and Opening. In. N.F.Chavkin (ed). Families and Schools in a Pluraistic Society. Albany. NY: SUNY Press Taylor,C.(1993).Dangerous Society.East lansing,MI:MSU Press Trasher, F.M. (1963). The Gangs: A study of 1,313 Gangs in Chicago (Rev.ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press Acknowledgement Researcher would like to convey appreciation to MOHE for giving the opportunity to conduct research on FRGS vote 78114. My appreciation also goes to RMC, UTM Skudai for the splendid cooperation by giving good guidance to ensure that the topic of this research is accepted by MOHE. Thank you very much.