BibTex RIS Cite

-

Year 2013, Volume: 28 Issue: 28-1, 464 - 475, 01.06.2013

Sefer Yılmaz

Abstract

This study is an attempt to explore the development of a new hybrid model of a both state-funded and private-supported higher education in Turkey. While there have been such kind of structures throughout the world for a long time, this kind of a university being public but at the same time being supported by a philanthropic non-profit organization is quite new in Turkey. This quality is argued to add significant advantages to those universities enabling them to utilize both the public and private models’ benefits. However, there is not yet any specific legislation regulating this kind of models on a statutory basis. This paper, which puts forth the characteristics and advantages of this new hybrid model on the case of Abdullah GUL University (AGU), will present the need for a legal basis on which this kind of hybrid models representing both public and private characteristics will be able to rise and flourish freely.

Keywords

public-private partnership philanthropy non-profit organizations higher education Hybrid University

References

  • AGUF. (2012). Introductory Booklet. Kayseri: Media Maus.
  • Anheier, H. K. & Leat, D. (2006). Creative Philanthropy. London: Routledge.
  • Austin, M. J. (2003). The changing relationship between nonprofit organizations and public social service agencies in the era of welfare reform. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 3281, 97–114.
  • Bailey, K. D. (1987). Methods of Social Research. New York: free Press.
  • Ball, S. J. & Junemann, C. (2011). Education Policy and Philanthropy—The Changing Landscape of English Educational Governance. International Journal of Public Administration, 34(10), 646-661.
  • Brown, D. J. (1990). Decentralization and school-based management. New York: Falmer Press.
  • Buckingham, H. (2009). Competition and contracts in the voluntary sector: Exploring the implications for homeless service providers in Southampton. Policy and Politics, 37(2), 235–254.
  • Fengliang, L. (2012). Financing higher education: lessons from Chin. Irish Educational Studies, 31(2), 191-206.
  • Gazley, B., & Brudney, J. (2007). The purpose (and perils) of government nonprofit partnership. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36, 389–415.
  • Gothold, S. (1985). Partnership: Buzzword to Bonus. Thrust for Educational Leadership, 15(1), 28-31.
  • Grigore, L. J. (2004). Public-private partnership in secondary education. MA Dissertation, University of Calgary.
  • Heller, D. E. & Rogers, K. R. (2006). Shifting the burden: Public and private financing of higher education in the united states and implications for Europe. Tertiary Education and Management, 12(2), 91-117.
  • Independent Sector. (2001). The new nonprofit almanac in brief Facts and figures on the independent sector 2001. Washington, DC: Author.
  • Jezierski, L. (1990). Neighborhoods and Public-Private Partnerships in Pittsburgh. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 26(2), 217-249. Johnstone, D. B. & Marcucci, P. N. (2010). Financing higher education worldwide: Who pays? Who should pay? Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Kendall, J. & Knapp, M. (1996). The voluntary sector in the United Kingdom. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
  • Lewis, J. (2005). New Labour’s approach to the voluntary sector: Independence and the meaning of partnership. Social Policy and Society, 4(2), 121–131.
  • Liu, Y. W. (2006). Educational loan, student performance and graduates’ choice. MA Dissertation, Peking University.
  • Neil, W. G. (1983). The local education foundation: A new way to raise money for schools. Reston. VA: National Association of Secondary Principals.
  • Niederhaus, S. (1991). Marketing Partnership. Thrust for educational Leadership, 20(5), 22-23.
  • Noble, P. (1996). Characteristics of public-private partnerships in multi-sport facilities. MA Dissertation, University of New Brunwick.
  • O’Looney, J. (1992). Public-private partnerships in economic development: negotiating the trade-off between flexibility and accountability. Economic Development Review, 10(4), 14-22.
  • OECD. (2011). A review of university facilities in Turkey. CELE Exchange 2011/6.
  • OFFICIAL JOURNAL. (2012). 30/03/2012, No: 6287, Ankara: Başbakanlık.
  • ÖSYM. (2012). Süreli Yayınlar. [Available online at: http://www.osym.gov.tr/belge/1-128/sureli-yayinlar.html], Retrieved on January 03, 2013.
  • Otterbourg, S. D. (1989). School Partnerships Handbook: How to Set Up and Administer Programmes with Business, Government and Your Community. London: Prentice Hall.
  • Padover, W. (1993). A foundation for quality. Thrust for educational leadership, 22(4), 22-23.
  • Paton, R., Mordaunt, J., and Cornforth, C. (2007). Beyond nonprofit management education: Leadership development in a time of blurred boundaries and distributed learning. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(4), 148–162.
  • Pray, F. C. (Ed.) (1981) Handbook for educational fund raising: A guide to successful principles and practices for colleges, universities, and schools. San Fransisco, C.A.: Jossey-Bass.
  • Qunicy, J. (1977) The history of Harvard University. New York: Arno Press.
  • Rigden, D. W. (1991). Business-school partnerships: A path to effective restructuring (2nd ed.). New York: Council for Aid to Education.
  • Salamon, L. (1995). Partners in public service: Government-nonprofit relations in the modern welfare state. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Schachner, N. (1962). The medieval universities. New York: A.S. Barnes.
  • Shin S. & Kleiner, B. (2003). How to manage unpaid volunteers in organisations. Management Research News, 26, 63-71.
  • SPO (state Planning Organization). (2013). Annual Program. Ankara.
  • Stolinski, A. M., Ryan, C. S., Hausmann, L. R. M., Vernli, M. A. (2004). Empathy, Guilt, Volunteer Experiences, and Intentions to Continue Volunteering Among Buddy Volunteers in an AIDS Organization. Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, 9(1), 1-22.
  • Sweet-Holp, T. J. (2001). Public-private partnership in education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinati. Uhlic, K. S. (1997). Partnership, step by step: A Practical model of partnership formation. Journal of Parks and Recreation Administration, 13(4), 13-24.
  • Uphoff, N. (1995). Why NGOs are not a third sector: a sectoral analysis with some thoughts on accountability, sustainability and evaluation. In M. Edwards & D. Hulme (Eds.) Beyond the magic bullet: NGO performance and accountability in the post-cold-war world, London: Earthscan Publications.
  • Waddock, S. A. (1991). A Typology of Social Partnership Organizations. Administration & Society, 22(4), 480-515.
  • Woodhall, M. (1992). Economic development and higher education. In B. R. Clark & G. R. Neave (Eds.), Analytical Perspectives, The Encyclopedia of Higher Education (pp. 889-896). Pergamon Press.
  • Woods, P. (1986). Inside Schools: Ethnography in Education Research. London and New York: Routlege and Kegan Paul.
  • World Bank. (2003). World development report 2004: Making services work for poor people. Oxford University Press: Washington, DC.
  • World Bank. (2007). Turkey – Higher Education Policy Study. Report No. 39674 – TU.
  • Wunnava, P. V. & Lauze, M. A. (2001). Alumni Giving at a Small Liberal Arts College: Evidence from Consistent and Occasional Donors. Economics of Education Review, 20(6), 533-543.
  • Young, K. K. & Powell, P. (2011). Exploring higher education financing options. European Journal of Higher Education, 1, 1, 3Zhao, F. (2001). Impact of Diversification of Financing Sources on Higher Education Quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(5), 427-436.

Hybrid University: A Case Study of Private-Public Partnership in Turkey

Year 2013, Volume: 28 Issue: 28-1, 464 - 475, 01.06.2013

Sefer Yılmaz

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Türkiye’de hem devlet tarafından finanse edilen ve hem de özel sektör tarafından desteklenen hibrid bir yüksek öğretim modelinin gelişimini anlamaya yönelik bir girişimdir. Her ne kadar bu tür yapılar dünyada uzun zamandan beri var olsalar da, bir üniversitenin devlet üniversitesi olup aynı zamanda kar amacı gütmeyen hayırsever örgütler tarafından desteklenmesi, Türkiye’de son derece yeni bir olgu. Bu niteliğin, bu üniversitelere hem kamu hem de özel vakıf) üniversite modellerinin faydalarından yararlanma gibi önemli avantajlar sağlayacağı öne sürülmektedir. Ancak halı hazırda, bu tür yeni modelleri yasal bir zemin üzerinde yapılandıracak özel bir hukuki düzenleme bulunmamaktadır. Bu makale, Abdullah GÜL Üniversitesi (AGU) modelinden yola çıkarak bu yeni hibrid /karma modelin nitelik ve avantajlarını ortaya koyduktan sonra, hem kamu hem de özel nitelikler arz eden bu tür hibrid/karma modellerin ortaya çıkabilmesi ve özgürce gelişimi için yasal bir zemine ihtiyaç bulunduğunu öne sürecektir.

Keywords

kamu-özel işbirliği hayırseverlik kar amacı gütmeyen örgütler yükseköğretim Hibrid Üniversite

References

  • AGUF. (2012). Introductory Booklet. Kayseri: Media Maus.
  • Anheier, H. K. & Leat, D. (2006). Creative Philanthropy. London: Routledge.
  • Austin, M. J. (2003). The changing relationship between nonprofit organizations and public social service agencies in the era of welfare reform. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 3281, 97–114.
  • Bailey, K. D. (1987). Methods of Social Research. New York: free Press.
  • Ball, S. J. & Junemann, C. (2011). Education Policy and Philanthropy—The Changing Landscape of English Educational Governance. International Journal of Public Administration, 34(10), 646-661.
  • Brown, D. J. (1990). Decentralization and school-based management. New York: Falmer Press.
  • Buckingham, H. (2009). Competition and contracts in the voluntary sector: Exploring the implications for homeless service providers in Southampton. Policy and Politics, 37(2), 235–254.
  • Fengliang, L. (2012). Financing higher education: lessons from Chin. Irish Educational Studies, 31(2), 191-206.
  • Gazley, B., & Brudney, J. (2007). The purpose (and perils) of government nonprofit partnership. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36, 389–415.
  • Gothold, S. (1985). Partnership: Buzzword to Bonus. Thrust for Educational Leadership, 15(1), 28-31.
  • Grigore, L. J. (2004). Public-private partnership in secondary education. MA Dissertation, University of Calgary.
  • Heller, D. E. & Rogers, K. R. (2006). Shifting the burden: Public and private financing of higher education in the united states and implications for Europe. Tertiary Education and Management, 12(2), 91-117.
  • Independent Sector. (2001). The new nonprofit almanac in brief Facts and figures on the independent sector 2001. Washington, DC: Author.
  • Jezierski, L. (1990). Neighborhoods and Public-Private Partnerships in Pittsburgh. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 26(2), 217-249. Johnstone, D. B. & Marcucci, P. N. (2010). Financing higher education worldwide: Who pays? Who should pay? Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Kendall, J. & Knapp, M. (1996). The voluntary sector in the United Kingdom. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
  • Lewis, J. (2005). New Labour’s approach to the voluntary sector: Independence and the meaning of partnership. Social Policy and Society, 4(2), 121–131.
  • Liu, Y. W. (2006). Educational loan, student performance and graduates’ choice. MA Dissertation, Peking University.
  • Neil, W. G. (1983). The local education foundation: A new way to raise money for schools. Reston. VA: National Association of Secondary Principals.
  • Niederhaus, S. (1991). Marketing Partnership. Thrust for educational Leadership, 20(5), 22-23.
  • Noble, P. (1996). Characteristics of public-private partnerships in multi-sport facilities. MA Dissertation, University of New Brunwick.
  • O’Looney, J. (1992). Public-private partnerships in economic development: negotiating the trade-off between flexibility and accountability. Economic Development Review, 10(4), 14-22.
  • OECD. (2011). A review of university facilities in Turkey. CELE Exchange 2011/6.
  • OFFICIAL JOURNAL. (2012). 30/03/2012, No: 6287, Ankara: Başbakanlık.
  • ÖSYM. (2012). Süreli Yayınlar. [Available online at: http://www.osym.gov.tr/belge/1-128/sureli-yayinlar.html], Retrieved on January 03, 2013.
  • Otterbourg, S. D. (1989). School Partnerships Handbook: How to Set Up and Administer Programmes with Business, Government and Your Community. London: Prentice Hall.
  • Padover, W. (1993). A foundation for quality. Thrust for educational leadership, 22(4), 22-23.
  • Paton, R., Mordaunt, J., and Cornforth, C. (2007). Beyond nonprofit management education: Leadership development in a time of blurred boundaries and distributed learning. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(4), 148–162.
  • Pray, F. C. (Ed.) (1981) Handbook for educational fund raising: A guide to successful principles and practices for colleges, universities, and schools. San Fransisco, C.A.: Jossey-Bass.
  • Qunicy, J. (1977) The history of Harvard University. New York: Arno Press.
  • Rigden, D. W. (1991). Business-school partnerships: A path to effective restructuring (2nd ed.). New York: Council for Aid to Education.
  • Salamon, L. (1995). Partners in public service: Government-nonprofit relations in the modern welfare state. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Schachner, N. (1962). The medieval universities. New York: A.S. Barnes.
  • Shin S. & Kleiner, B. (2003). How to manage unpaid volunteers in organisations. Management Research News, 26, 63-71.
  • SPO (state Planning Organization). (2013). Annual Program. Ankara.
  • Stolinski, A. M., Ryan, C. S., Hausmann, L. R. M., Vernli, M. A. (2004). Empathy, Guilt, Volunteer Experiences, and Intentions to Continue Volunteering Among Buddy Volunteers in an AIDS Organization. Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, 9(1), 1-22.
  • Sweet-Holp, T. J. (2001). Public-private partnership in education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cincinati. Uhlic, K. S. (1997). Partnership, step by step: A Practical model of partnership formation. Journal of Parks and Recreation Administration, 13(4), 13-24.
  • Uphoff, N. (1995). Why NGOs are not a third sector: a sectoral analysis with some thoughts on accountability, sustainability and evaluation. In M. Edwards & D. Hulme (Eds.) Beyond the magic bullet: NGO performance and accountability in the post-cold-war world, London: Earthscan Publications.
  • Waddock, S. A. (1991). A Typology of Social Partnership Organizations. Administration & Society, 22(4), 480-515.
  • Woodhall, M. (1992). Economic development and higher education. In B. R. Clark & G. R. Neave (Eds.), Analytical Perspectives, The Encyclopedia of Higher Education (pp. 889-896). Pergamon Press.
  • Woods, P. (1986). Inside Schools: Ethnography in Education Research. London and New York: Routlege and Kegan Paul.
  • World Bank. (2003). World development report 2004: Making services work for poor people. Oxford University Press: Washington, DC.
  • World Bank. (2007). Turkey – Higher Education Policy Study. Report No. 39674 – TU.
  • Wunnava, P. V. & Lauze, M. A. (2001). Alumni Giving at a Small Liberal Arts College: Evidence from Consistent and Occasional Donors. Economics of Education Review, 20(6), 533-543.
  • Young, K. K. & Powell, P. (2011). Exploring higher education financing options. European Journal of Higher Education, 1, 1, 3Zhao, F. (2001). Impact of Diversification of Financing Sources on Higher Education Quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(5), 427-436.
There are 44 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Sefer Yılmaz This is me

Publication Date June 1, 2013
Published in Issue Year 2013 Volume: 28 Issue: 28-1

Cite

APA Yılmaz, S. (2013). Hybrid University: A Case Study of Private-Public Partnership in Turkey. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(28-1), 464-475.