1 International Journal of Sport Studies. Vol., 2 (11), , 2012 Available online at http: ISSN VictorQuest Publications A Comparative Study on Sport Safety in Public and Non-public Universities of Golestan, Iran Fatemeh Beigum Hosseini 1 *, Kourosh Ghahreman Tabrizi 2, Tahmures Nouraei 2 1- M.A. at Sport Management of Research and Science Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran 2- Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Education and Sports Sciences, Shahid Bahonar University, Kerman, Iran *Corresponding author: Abstract The purpose of the present study is to investigate and compare sport safety in public and nonpublic universities of Golestan (Iran). An applied causal-comparative research method is used. The statistical population consists of all sports facilities of public and non-public universities located in Golestan. A facility safety inspection checklist is used for which research reliability is calculated by Cronbach's alpha test (α = 0.87). Data are collected from sports facilities and analyzed by using descriptive and inferential statistical techniques.. The results show that there is no significant difference between public universities (213.63) and non-public universities in safety. Also, there is no significant difference for safety in sport buildings between public universities (109.08) and non public universities (106.94). Despite of such insignificancy, the acquired scores reveal that public universities are better than non-public universities for sport safety.. However, a significant difference is achieved for safety in sports equipment and facilities among public (179.45) and non-public universities (164.80). The result indicates public universities may be better than non-public universities for safety in sports facilities. Keywords: Safety, Sports Facilities, Universities, Golestan province. Introduction To develop the field of physical education and sports, as the preparing context of training healthy humans, is a part of national development plans. To this end, Increasing per capita sports facilities and equipment can be regarded. Because meeting the needs of a wide range of people, in particular school and university students, and achieving objectives of the physical education require constructing, equipping, maintaining, and repairing sports facilities and equipment (Mozafari et al., 2006). The role of sports within any community explains a perfect part of the cultural and social infrastructure of the community. Undoubtedly, young and talented students shape the framework of future, and their health and happiness equal to better and more open-minded individuals. Since developments in university sports is based on the key needs of students, to harness the potential range of university sports will be a useful means to improve the health of all community (Mirkazemi, 2009). Sports environment are the context to perform athletic activities, and their quality had direct impact on exercises and competitions and athletic programs. Constructing sports facilities requires high accuracy and care. Any neglect and delay in planning, designing, construction and maintenance in sports facilities and equipment will result in losing time, energy and money. This can impose undesirable impact on future performance, in particular sports programs and healthy recreation (Khajavi, 2001). 555
2 The proper implementation of physical education and sports programs requires providing a set of facilities and conditions among which the most important are using standard places, equipment and materials designed according to the international criteria and the rules approved by sport federations. To put it differently, this means establishing a better context to realize the goals of physical education, observing facilities, spaces, buildings, and knowing how to manage sports facilities in order to protect, maintain, and use sports facilities, which makes the matter more important. The shortage of sports facilities and equipment is the major problem in the field of physical education of the country that needs significant attention (Orufzadeh, 2004). Sports facilities and environments is the base and context of athletic programs and practices, and managing them properly will exert direct impact on facility productivity as well as on quality and quantity in sports events (Mozafari et al., 2006). When developed under proper condition, sports and physical education programs play a role in cultivating students' leisure and attendance in athletic competitions.. Different factors contribute in forming appropriate condition Such as: proper planning, professional coaches, supportive environment, good facilities and safety. The safety in sports fields and facilities are very important. Sports safety has been significantly considered by sports experts, sports medicine & health authorities. The expression "Safety at Work" should also be noted as a major topic in planning sports practices (Slack, 2004). Safety has been a big concern for sports experts & health authorities. From the most common problems are: undesirable design and the lack of safety and technical standards and principles in all phases of designing, supervision, construction and exploitation, using improper materials, failure in scheduling and planning for the maintenance which all can lead to legal suits, sports injuries, economical losses and athletic deficiency (Ismaeili, 2011). A look at famous universities around the world shows that the existence of sports facilities and equipment finds a great important. If university officials understand the importance of sports and physical activities among students; in other words, they realize the necessity of safety, then they will do their best to improve sports safety in facilities and equipment (Karimian et al., 2004). The shortages of sports facilities and places are triggered in public and non-public universities. The decline of per capita sports facilities and the lack of safety can be regarded as preventive factors for participations of people in athletic activities. On the other hand, regardless of continuous constructions of sports facilities, an increase in the number of university students in different levels has been a big challenge. Immunizing sport spaces is not an action limited to a certain time; however, it is an inseparable part from sports facilities and buildings. Due to its importance, it should be followed in all levels (Farsi, 2006). By sports facilities, we mean all installations, equipment, space, maintenance, repaving, health and etc in which safety should be paid particular attention. Today, public sports facilities are undesirable in terms of operational efficiency and financial performance, and they are not considered satisfactory. Therefore, many sports facilities owned and managed by the government are encountered with the budgeting shortage. To enhance their athletic goals, many organizations tend to the private sector benefiting from more and better investments than public organizations (Ahmadi et al., 2006). Because of different budgets allocated for maintenance and repair of sports facilities, public universities are completely varied from non public ones in terms of supervision. Regarding this, Farsi (2006) found that sports facilities in public universities did not have desirable safety. Kozehchiyan (2011) concluded that there was deficiency in the quality of sports facilities, particularly in the safety. Due to the importance of interests in creating a sport culture among the community, needs for providing new perspectives about developments of sports facilities in the future, and also the lack of proper sports equipment and facilities are among the most problems departments of physical education and sports in schools and universities are faced, and since the facilities do not have proper requirements of quality and quantity, and finally because of unavailability of efficient facilities, it is important to develop a formal and proper plan in this area (Farahani et al., 2004) The students are main addressees of universities and regarded as the most source of national capital and social and economic growth. It is necessary to understand their needs and pave the way to develop and grow their talents. Thus, evaluating and studying the physical environment and safety in physical activities among these young groups are of great importance. And, reinforcing and improving this can prevent sports injuries and problems. In addition to control undesirable physical effects, it can positively affect students' tendency to physical activities and sports. Since sport facilities and places are the major means to offer athletic program and activities, they have to be designed, constructed and developed so that all people can use them. Such thought is necessary in both planning and using sports places. Also, increasing the number of students has its own consequences. Among these, the students' need to 556
3 mental and body health, increasing social relationships, and filling healthy leisure and recreation can be mentioned. It is necessary to construct sports facilities by proper planning targeted for promoting health levels, increasing skill styles and social interaction, and involving with leisure and recreation in an optimal manner (Katbi, 2009). Through comprehensive research on the safety in sports facilities, good solution can be achieved. When studied correctly, differences of safety in sports facilities will be comparable. Using the results of such research, it can be hoped that the safety in sports facilities become more and more standard, and, if possible, the safety and security in sports facilities may be e enhanced to global standards (Aghaie nia, 2004). Given there is not been a great number of studies on the safety issues in universities, due to the role of these importance factors and their outcomes play on sports injuries, and since there is a little research conducting on sports safety in public universities, the current paper seeks to investigate the safety in sports facilities in public and non-public universities of Golestan dealing with these questions: How is the level of sports safety in public and non-public universities of Golestan? And, is there any difference between public and non-public universities? Materials and Methods The purpose of this research is to compare the safety in sports facilities between public and nonpublic universities of Golestan. An applied causal-comparative research method is used. In order to test the research hypotheses, an independent t-statistic and descriptive statistic techniques are applied by using software SPSS software. Statistical population includes all sports facilities of six public and six non-public universities located in Golestan. Data are collected through the census. Standard checklists are applied to evaluate sports safety in public and non-public universities of Golestan. Results Table 1: General Status of Three Components Statistical Indices Fields Facilities Equipment Public Non-Public Fre. Mean + SD Status Fre. Mean + SD Status 6 213/63±18/21 Moderate 6 194/77±10/73 Moderate 6 109/08±10/94 Moderate 6 106/94±6/77 Low 6 179/45±17/42 Moderate 6 164/80±15/48 Moderate As seen in Table 1, the safety is of moderate and low in sports fields, facilities and equipment in public and non-public universities of Golestan Statistical Index Fields 557 Table 2: Comparative Results of T-test for safety in Sports Fields Type Number Mean + SD t P Public 6 213/63±18/ /054 Nonpublic 6 194/77±10/73 According to the results of above table (t= 2.185, p= 0.54), the hypothesis H 0 is satisfied, in other words, there is no significant difference between public and non-public universities in safety of sports fields.
4 Table 3: Comparative Results of T-test for compare Facilities Statistical Type Number Mean + SD t P Index Facilities Public 6 109/08±10/ / /94±6/77 According to the results of above table (t= 0.408, p= 0.692) the hypothesis H 0 is proved, in other words, there is no significant difference between public and non-public universities in safety of sports facilities. Table 4: Comparative Results of T-test for safety in Sports Equipment Statistical Indices Type Number Mean + SD t P Equipment Public 6 179/45±17/ /047 Nonpublic Nonpublic 6 164/80±15/48 According to the results of above table (t= 2.262, p =0.047), the hypothesis H0 is proved, in other words, there is no significant difference between public and non-public universities in safety of sports equipment. It means that safety in sports equipment and materials of public universities is relatively better than non-public universities. 558 Discussion and Conclusion Regarding the mean scores, it can be concluded that there was no significant difference between public (213.63) and non-public (194.77) universities for safety in sports fields. Although the result was not significant, the scores obtained revealed that the safety in sports fields of public and non-public universities was of moderate. However, public universities achieved relatively better scores for mean and SD. This can be the result of regarding the structure of the fields, avoiding unnecessary objects, separating stands, changing rooms and hygiene systems, cleaning sports fields, existence of free space around the field for performing other sports, access to sports fields, determining flooring lines and distances of benches, regarding ground color in adequate difference from the hall. These have been observed in non-public universities, but the study showed some differences between these two universities. The results of this research is consistent with Farsi (2006) who found better lines and bounds for sports facilities in Tehran university compared to other components. Also, Bay (2008) concluded that the sport fields of Golestan had good safety. In addition, Finch et al. (2000) observed that sports fields in sports clubs of Hume, Australia, were good in safety. However, the present result is inconsistent with Shahabi's (2012) conclusion about the good safety in sports facilities of the Youth and Sports organization of Kerman. Achieving the moderate safety is the result of multi purposing structure of sports halls and requirements of compulsory distances in sports field of volleyball, basketball, badminton and using new flooring. The result revealed that safety in sport facilities and buildings of public and non-public universities of Golestan was of moderate by the mean scores of and , respectively. The findings were not significant, but the scores obtained showed that sports facilities of public and non-public universities had low safety. This can be the result the lack of audience distance in some halls, and using prefabricated or concrete seats,, failure to separate stands from the fields, type of guards used, tendency of entrances and exit doors to inside, unavailability and deficiency of hygiene systems for spectators and players, lack of cupboard and good space in halls, improper lights and temperature, failure to design and develop emergency kits, lack of guide boards in sports halls and buildings, lack of guards for windows and metal columns in few sports halls are the reasons why public universities are better in safety. In Iran, the ideas of sports experts and coaches are less
5 asked for building sports facilities, and yet, engineers and constructers play the key role. However, in many developed countries, sports facilities and technologies are built by engineers specializes in constructing sports facilities and buildings. This was inconsistent with the findings of Farsi (2006) who found sports facilities and stands and fields of Tehran University did not have proper safety, also Sayah et al. (2005) who found sport facilities of Kashan did not have proper safety. However, the result is consistent with Bay (2008) and Soleimani Moghaddam (2009) concluded that indoor sports facilities of Golestan and Kermanshah had moderate safety. Also, Shahabi(2012) concluded a good safety in sports facilities of the Youth and Sports organization of Kerman. Furthermore, the findings are consistent with Farsi (2007) about the improper safety of stands and sports facilities f public universities, and Sayah Nejad (2008) due to the lack of strong management on equipment, unavailability to principles for the safety in sports facilities, the lack of supervision committee dealing with the safety in sports facilities of non-public universities. The research result showed that there was no significant difference on the safety in sports equipment and materials between public and non-public universities by the mean scores of and , respectively. This was the result of the lack of standard material and strengths of goal posts in some university halls, the lack of proper surface on basketball and volleyball bases, and the lack of good antenna and nets in sports halls led to this result that public universities had moderate safety in sports equipment and materials compared than non-public universities. The findings of this study were consistent with Farsi (2007) about good safety in sport equipment in public universities, and Marshal, et al. (2005) who Marshall et al. (2004) concluded that due to monitoring how sports equipment supplied, most sports clubs applied proper equipment. Also, Shahabi(2012) concluded that sports equipment of the Youth and Sports organization of Kerman had moderate safety. However, this is inconsistent with Sayah et al. (2005) who found sport equipment of Kashan did not have proper safety. Such inconsistency can be the product of difference in location and population of the study.. References Aghaie nia H, Sports laws. Mizan publication, eighth edition, Tehran. Bay N, Evaluation of Safety of Sport Facilities in Golestan. Master's thesis. Faculty of Physical Education and Sports Science, Tehran University. Esmaily Mr, pashapur B, vazqani H, pashapoor B, 2011.Evaluation of Safety of indoor sports halls with stands in East Azerbaijan. The first national conference on new scientific achievements in development of sports sciences and physical education. Farsi AR, Evaluation of safety in sports facilities in universities of Tehran with Proper Solutions. Research project, Institute of Physical Education and Sports Sciences. Finch F, Hennessy M, The Safety Practices of sporting Club/Centers in the City of Hume. Journal of Physical Education. Recreation and Dance Khajavi D, Identification of sport places and facilities. Edit and publication organization of Iranian Books. Katbi F, Evaluation of safety in sports facilities in universities of Yazd. Master's thesis. Tehran Payam Noor University. Karimian J, Tondnevis F, Relationships between human resource. Budgeting. areas of buildings and facilities on the increase of extracurricular athletic activities in colleges. Motor Science Journal. Vol. I. No. 3. pp Kouzeh chian H, Goodarzi M, Khavanin A, Farzan F, Analysis on safety and explanation of patterns in indoor sports halls in Faculties of physical education and sports sciences. Sports Management Journal. No. 11. pp Mozaffari SAA, Heidar N, Mohaghar S, Assessment on efficiency of departments and faculties of physical education and sports sciences in public universities using data envelopment analysis, Quarterly of Olympic. No. 7. pp MirKazemi O, Designing an efficiency model for physical education a sports organizations of universities. PhD Thesis. University of Guilan. Faculty of Physical Education and Sports Sciences. Marshall W, Loomis S, Waller DE, Evaluation of protective equipment for prevention of injuries in rugby union. International Journal of Epidemiology. 34: Orouf Zadeh S, A survey and comparison of sports facilities status in Isfahan with available standards in academic year Rsearch plan. Isfahan education and training organization. Research council. Soleimani Moghaddam R, Study on safety of indoor sports halls in Kermanshah. Master's thesis. Faculty of human sciences. Tarbiat Modarres University. 559
6 Sayah M, Arab Ameri E, Evaluation of safety in sports facilities of Kashan. Safety conference of Tehran. Sayarnejad J, Evaluation of safety in sports facilities and spaces from views of the Board of Directors of Physical Education and sports of Mazandaran. Project of Physical Education and Sports Organization of Mazandaran. Shahabi M, Evolution of safety in sport halls of the youth and sports organization of Kerman. Master's thesis. Faculty of physical education and sports sciences. Slack DA, Risk management health care practices in NCAA athletic programs. Doctoral dissertation. Department of Exercise and Sport Science the University of Utah. Copyright by Request Information and Learning Company. 560