BibTex RIS Cite

Türkiye Üniversitelerinin Örgütsel Etkililik Boyutları

Year 2011, Volume: 16 Issue: 3, 285 - 309, 01.09.2011

  Yrd.doç.dr.ömer Lütfi Antalyalı

Abstract

Keywords

-

References

  • 1. ARGYRIS, C. (1964), Integrating the Individual and the Organization, John Willey & Sons, New York, USA.
  • 2. ASHWORTH, A. ve R. C. HARVEY (1994), Assessing Quality in Further and Higher Education, Jessica Kingsley, London, UK.
  • 3. ATAN, M., A. KAZAN ve Ş. ALTAN (2003), "Türk Üniversitelerinin Eğitimdeki Temel Kritelere Göre Sıralanması", İstatistik Araştırma Kongresi, 10-12 Aralık, Devlet İstatistik Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • 4. BARNETT, R. A. (1988), "Institutions of Higher Education: Purposes and 'Performance Indicators'", Oxford Review of Education, Cilt 14, Sayı 1, s. 97-112.
  • 5. BEYER, J. M. ve R. SNIPPER (1974), "Objecitive versus Subjective Indicators of Quality in Graduate Education", Sociology of Education, Cilt 47, Sayı 4, s. 541-557.
  • 6. BOLOGNA DECLARATION (1999), <http://www.bolognaberlin2003.de/en/main_documents/index.htm>, 02.10.2007.
  • 7. CAMERON, K. ve J. SMART (1998), "Maintaining Effectiveness Amid Downsizing and Decline in Institutions of Higher Education", Research in Higher Education, Cilt 39, Sayı 1.
  • 8. CAMERON, K. ve M. TSCHIRHART (1992), "Postindustrial Environments and Organizational Effectiveness in Colleges and Universities", Journal of Higher Education, Cilt 63, Sayı 1, s. 87-108.
  • 9. CAMERON, K. (1978), "Measuring Organizational Effectiveness in Institutions of Higher Education", Administrative Science Quarterly, Cilt 23 (Aralık).
  • 10. CAMERON, K. (1981), "Domains of Organizational Effectiviness in Colleges and Universities", Academy of Management Journal, Cilt 24, Sayı 1, s. 25-47.
  • 11. CAMERON, K. (1982), "The Relationship Between Faculty Unionism and Organizational Effectiveness", Academy of Management Journal, Cilt 25, Sayı 1, s. 6-24.
  • 12. CAMERON, K. (1986), "A Study of Organizational Effectiveness and its Predictors", Management Science, Cilt 32, Sayı 1.
  • 13. CARTTER, A. M. (1966), An Assessment of Quality in Graduate Education, American Council on Education, Washington D.C., USA.
  • 14. CLOTT, C. B. (1995), "The Effects of Environment, Strategy, Culture, and Resource Dependency on Perceptions of Organizational Effectiveness of Schools of Business", ASHE Conference, 2-5 Kasım, Texas A&M University, Florida.
  • 15. DE WEERT, E. (1990), "A Macro-Analysis of Quality Assessment in Higher Education", Higher Education, Cilt 19, Sayı 1, s. 57-72.
  • 16. DEVADOSS, M. ve R. MUTH (1984), "Power, Involvement, and Organizational Effectiveness in Higher Education", Higher Education, Cilt 13, Sayı 4, s. 379-391.
  • 17. ELLIOTT, S. M. (1987), Variables Associated with Organizational Effectiveness of Schools of Nursing, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Indiana University School of Nursing, USA, Haziran.
  • 18. ELTON, L. B. (1987), "Warning Signs", Times Higher Education Supplement, 11 Eylül, s.12.
  • 19. FJORTOFT, N. ve J. C. SMART (1994), "Enhancing Organizational Effectiveness: The Importance of Culture Type and Mission Agreement", Higher Education, Cilt 27, Sayı 4, s. 429-447.
  • 20. GIGLIOTTI, L. I. (1987), An Adaptation of Cameron's Model of Organizational Effectiveness at the Academic Department Level in Twoyear Community Colleges, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Syracuse University Education Administration, USA, Mayıs.
  • 21. HOECHET, A. (2006), "Quality Assurance in UK Higher Education: Issues of Trust, Control, Professional Autonomy and Accountability", Higher Education, Cilt 51, s. 541-563.
  • 22. HUTCHINS, J. M. (1977), “Interview with John Maynard Hutchins”, Chronicle of Higher Education, Cilt 14, 23 Mayıs, s. 5-6.
  • 23. JÄÄSKELÄINEN, H., S. RIIKKINEN ve U. KOTONEN (2004), "Measuring a University's Performance - Especially from the Viewpoint of Regional Effectiveness", The 8th International Research Symposium on Public Management, 31 Mart - 2 Nisan, Budapeşte, Macaristan.
  • 24. KALAYCI, Ş. (2006), "Faktör Analizi", SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri, Ş. KALAYCI (der.), 2. Baskı, Asil Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara.
  • 25. KLEEMAN, G. L. (1984), Student Perceptions of Effectiveness at Three State Universities, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Arizona State University Philosophy, USA, Aralık.
  • 26. KOCH, J. V. ve J. L. FISHER (1998), "Higher Education and Total Quality Management", Total Quality Management, Cilt 9, Sayı 8, s. 659- 668.
  • 27. KWAN, P. ve A. WALKER (2003), "Positing Organizational Effectiveness as a Second-Order Construct in Hong Kong Higher Education Institutions", Research in Higher Education, Cilt 44, Sayı 6, s. 705-726.
  • 28. LYSONS, A. ve P. RYDER (1988), "An Empirical Test of Cameron's Dimensions of Effectiveness: Implications for Australian Tertiary Institutions" , Higher Education, Cilt 17, Sayı 3, s. 323-332.
  • 29. LYSONS, A. ve D. HATHERLY (1996), "Predicting a Taxonomy of Organisational Effectiveness in U.K. Higher Educational Institutions", Higher Education, Cilt 32, Sayı 1, s. 23-39.
  • 30. LYSONS, A., D. HATHERLY ve D. A. MITCHELL (1998), "Comparison of Measures of Organizational Effectiveness in U.K. Higher Education", Higher Education, Cilt 36, s. 1-19.
  • 31. LYSONS, A. (1990), "Dimensions and Domains of Organisational Effectiveness in Australian Higher Education", Higher Education, Cilt 20, Sayı 3, s. 287-300.
  • 32. MEYER, M. W. (1975), "Organizational Domains", American Sociological Review, Cilt 40, Sayı 5, s. 599-615.
  • 33. POUNDER, J. S. (2002), " Public Accountability in Hong Kong Higher Education: Human Resource Management Implications of Assessing Organizational Effectiveness", The International Journal of Public Sector Management, Cilt 15, Sayı 6, s. 458-474.
  • 34. RESMİ GAZETE, 22 Ekim 2002, Sayı: 24914, <http://rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr/ >, (16.07.2007).
  • 35. SAITO, T. ve H. MUTA (1998), "Effectiveness of the University of the Air of Japan", Higher Education, Sayı 35, s. 163-186.
  • 36. SMART, J. C. ve E. P. JOHN (1996), "Organizational Culture and Effectiveness in Higher Education: A Test of the "Culture Type" and "Strong Culture" Hypotheses", Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Cilt 18, Sayı 3, s. 219-241.
  • 37. SMART, J., G. D. KUH ve W. G. TIEMEY (1997), "The Roles of Institutional Cultures and Desicion Approaches in Promoting Organizational Effectiveness in Two-Year Colleges", The Journal of Higher Education, Cilt 68, Sayı 3, s. 256-281.
  • 38. SMART, J. (2003), "Organizational Effectiveness of 2-Year Colleges: The Centrality of Cultural and Leadership Coplexity", Research in Higher Education, Cilt 44, Sayı 6, 673-703.
  • 39. SORBONNE JOINT DECLARATION, (1998), <http://www.bolognaberlin2003.de/en/main_documents/index.htm>, (02.10.2007).
  • 40. STELLA, A. (2006), "Quality Assurance of Cross-border Higher Education", Quality in Higher Education, Cilt 12, Sayı 3, s. 257-276.
  • 41. SUNGUR, O. (2006), "Güvenilirlik Analizi", SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri, Ş. KALAYCI (der.), 2. Baskı, Asil Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara.
  • 42. THE TIMES (1992), "The Times Good University Guide", The Times, 12 Ekim, s. 35.
  • 43. VAN VAUGHT, F. A. ve D. F. WESTERHEIJDEN (1994), "Towards a General Model of Quality Assessment in Higher Education", Higher Education, Cilt 28, Sayı 3, s. 355-371.
  • 44. WEICK, K. E. (1976), "Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems", Administrative Science Quarterly, Cilt 21, Sayı 1, s. 1-19.
  • 45. WINN, B. A. ve K. CAMERON (1998), "Organizational Quality: An Examination of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Framework", Research in Higher Education, Cilt 39, Sayı 5, s. 491-512.
  • 46. YÖDEK (2006), Yüksek Öğretim Kurumlarında Akademik Değerlendirme ve Kalite Geliştirme Rehberi (Sürüm 1.0), YÖDEK, Ankara, <http://www.yodek.org.tr/?page=download#>, (18.09.2007).
  • 47. YÖDEK (2007), Yüksek Öğretim Kurumlarında Akademik Değerlendirme ve Kalite Geliştirme Rehberi (Sürüm 1.1), YÖDEK, Ankara, <http://www.yodek.org.tr/?page=download#>, (18.09.2007).

TÜRKİYE ÜNİVERSİTELERİNİN ÖRGÜTSEL ETKİLİLİK BOYUTLARI

Year 2011, Volume: 16 Issue: 3, 285 - 309, 01.09.2011

  Yrd.doç.dr.ömer Lütfi Antalyalı

Abstract

Bu çalışmada Türkiye üniversitelerinin örgütsel etkililik boyutları araştırılmıştır. Araştırma ile üniversitelerin değerlendirilmesine yönelik ortaya konacak çabalara bir alt yapı oluşturulması hedeflenmiştir. Araştırma, öğretim üyelerinin görev yapmakta oldukları üniversiteleri ile ilgili algılarını ölçen 46 soruluk bir ölçekle gerçekleştirilmiştir. Analizler toplamda 23 devlet üniversitesinden sağlanan 1185 anket ile yapılmıştır. Analizlerde tanımlayıcı istatistikler, faktör analizi ve korelasyon analizi kullanılmıştır. Bu çalışmada elde edilen Türkiye üniversitelerin örgütsel etkililik boyutları boyutlar şunlardır: Öğrencilerin Eğitimden Aldıkları Memnuniyet, Öğrencilerin Akademik ve Kişisel Gelişimleri, Öğrencilerin Kariyer Gelişimleri, Personel Tatmini, Uzmanlık Gelişimi ve Fakültenin Kalitesi, Sistemin Açıklığı ve Toplumsal Etkileşim, Kaynaklara Ulaşma Yeteneği, Sağlıklı İletişim, Örgütsel Sağlık

Keywords

Örgütsel Etkililik Kalite Performans Üniversite

References

  • 1. ARGYRIS, C. (1964), Integrating the Individual and the Organization, John Willey & Sons, New York, USA.
  • 2. ASHWORTH, A. ve R. C. HARVEY (1994), Assessing Quality in Further and Higher Education, Jessica Kingsley, London, UK.
  • 3. ATAN, M., A. KAZAN ve Ş. ALTAN (2003), "Türk Üniversitelerinin Eğitimdeki Temel Kritelere Göre Sıralanması", İstatistik Araştırma Kongresi, 10-12 Aralık, Devlet İstatistik Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • 4. BARNETT, R. A. (1988), "Institutions of Higher Education: Purposes and 'Performance Indicators'", Oxford Review of Education, Cilt 14, Sayı 1, s. 97-112.
  • 5. BEYER, J. M. ve R. SNIPPER (1974), "Objecitive versus Subjective Indicators of Quality in Graduate Education", Sociology of Education, Cilt 47, Sayı 4, s. 541-557.
  • 6. BOLOGNA DECLARATION (1999), <http://www.bolognaberlin2003.de/en/main_documents/index.htm>, 02.10.2007.
  • 7. CAMERON, K. ve J. SMART (1998), "Maintaining Effectiveness Amid Downsizing and Decline in Institutions of Higher Education", Research in Higher Education, Cilt 39, Sayı 1.
  • 8. CAMERON, K. ve M. TSCHIRHART (1992), "Postindustrial Environments and Organizational Effectiveness in Colleges and Universities", Journal of Higher Education, Cilt 63, Sayı 1, s. 87-108.
  • 9. CAMERON, K. (1978), "Measuring Organizational Effectiveness in Institutions of Higher Education", Administrative Science Quarterly, Cilt 23 (Aralık).
  • 10. CAMERON, K. (1981), "Domains of Organizational Effectiviness in Colleges and Universities", Academy of Management Journal, Cilt 24, Sayı 1, s. 25-47.
  • 11. CAMERON, K. (1982), "The Relationship Between Faculty Unionism and Organizational Effectiveness", Academy of Management Journal, Cilt 25, Sayı 1, s. 6-24.
  • 12. CAMERON, K. (1986), "A Study of Organizational Effectiveness and its Predictors", Management Science, Cilt 32, Sayı 1.
  • 13. CARTTER, A. M. (1966), An Assessment of Quality in Graduate Education, American Council on Education, Washington D.C., USA.
  • 14. CLOTT, C. B. (1995), "The Effects of Environment, Strategy, Culture, and Resource Dependency on Perceptions of Organizational Effectiveness of Schools of Business", ASHE Conference, 2-5 Kasım, Texas A&M University, Florida.
  • 15. DE WEERT, E. (1990), "A Macro-Analysis of Quality Assessment in Higher Education", Higher Education, Cilt 19, Sayı 1, s. 57-72.
  • 16. DEVADOSS, M. ve R. MUTH (1984), "Power, Involvement, and Organizational Effectiveness in Higher Education", Higher Education, Cilt 13, Sayı 4, s. 379-391.
  • 17. ELLIOTT, S. M. (1987), Variables Associated with Organizational Effectiveness of Schools of Nursing, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Indiana University School of Nursing, USA, Haziran.
  • 18. ELTON, L. B. (1987), "Warning Signs", Times Higher Education Supplement, 11 Eylül, s.12.
  • 19. FJORTOFT, N. ve J. C. SMART (1994), "Enhancing Organizational Effectiveness: The Importance of Culture Type and Mission Agreement", Higher Education, Cilt 27, Sayı 4, s. 429-447.
  • 20. GIGLIOTTI, L. I. (1987), An Adaptation of Cameron's Model of Organizational Effectiveness at the Academic Department Level in Twoyear Community Colleges, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Syracuse University Education Administration, USA, Mayıs.
  • 21. HOECHET, A. (2006), "Quality Assurance in UK Higher Education: Issues of Trust, Control, Professional Autonomy and Accountability", Higher Education, Cilt 51, s. 541-563.
  • 22. HUTCHINS, J. M. (1977), “Interview with John Maynard Hutchins”, Chronicle of Higher Education, Cilt 14, 23 Mayıs, s. 5-6.
  • 23. JÄÄSKELÄINEN, H., S. RIIKKINEN ve U. KOTONEN (2004), "Measuring a University's Performance - Especially from the Viewpoint of Regional Effectiveness", The 8th International Research Symposium on Public Management, 31 Mart - 2 Nisan, Budapeşte, Macaristan.
  • 24. KALAYCI, Ş. (2006), "Faktör Analizi", SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri, Ş. KALAYCI (der.), 2. Baskı, Asil Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara.
  • 25. KLEEMAN, G. L. (1984), Student Perceptions of Effectiveness at Three State Universities, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Arizona State University Philosophy, USA, Aralık.
  • 26. KOCH, J. V. ve J. L. FISHER (1998), "Higher Education and Total Quality Management", Total Quality Management, Cilt 9, Sayı 8, s. 659- 668.
  • 27. KWAN, P. ve A. WALKER (2003), "Positing Organizational Effectiveness as a Second-Order Construct in Hong Kong Higher Education Institutions", Research in Higher Education, Cilt 44, Sayı 6, s. 705-726.
  • 28. LYSONS, A. ve P. RYDER (1988), "An Empirical Test of Cameron's Dimensions of Effectiveness: Implications for Australian Tertiary Institutions" , Higher Education, Cilt 17, Sayı 3, s. 323-332.
  • 29. LYSONS, A. ve D. HATHERLY (1996), "Predicting a Taxonomy of Organisational Effectiveness in U.K. Higher Educational Institutions", Higher Education, Cilt 32, Sayı 1, s. 23-39.
  • 30. LYSONS, A., D. HATHERLY ve D. A. MITCHELL (1998), "Comparison of Measures of Organizational Effectiveness in U.K. Higher Education", Higher Education, Cilt 36, s. 1-19.
  • 31. LYSONS, A. (1990), "Dimensions and Domains of Organisational Effectiveness in Australian Higher Education", Higher Education, Cilt 20, Sayı 3, s. 287-300.
  • 32. MEYER, M. W. (1975), "Organizational Domains", American Sociological Review, Cilt 40, Sayı 5, s. 599-615.
  • 33. POUNDER, J. S. (2002), " Public Accountability in Hong Kong Higher Education: Human Resource Management Implications of Assessing Organizational Effectiveness", The International Journal of Public Sector Management, Cilt 15, Sayı 6, s. 458-474.
  • 34. RESMİ GAZETE, 22 Ekim 2002, Sayı: 24914, <http://rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr/ >, (16.07.2007).
  • 35. SAITO, T. ve H. MUTA (1998), "Effectiveness of the University of the Air of Japan", Higher Education, Sayı 35, s. 163-186.
  • 36. SMART, J. C. ve E. P. JOHN (1996), "Organizational Culture and Effectiveness in Higher Education: A Test of the "Culture Type" and "Strong Culture" Hypotheses", Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Cilt 18, Sayı 3, s. 219-241.
  • 37. SMART, J., G. D. KUH ve W. G. TIEMEY (1997), "The Roles of Institutional Cultures and Desicion Approaches in Promoting Organizational Effectiveness in Two-Year Colleges", The Journal of Higher Education, Cilt 68, Sayı 3, s. 256-281.
  • 38. SMART, J. (2003), "Organizational Effectiveness of 2-Year Colleges: The Centrality of Cultural and Leadership Coplexity", Research in Higher Education, Cilt 44, Sayı 6, 673-703.
  • 39. SORBONNE JOINT DECLARATION, (1998), <http://www.bolognaberlin2003.de/en/main_documents/index.htm>, (02.10.2007).
  • 40. STELLA, A. (2006), "Quality Assurance of Cross-border Higher Education", Quality in Higher Education, Cilt 12, Sayı 3, s. 257-276.
  • 41. SUNGUR, O. (2006), "Güvenilirlik Analizi", SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri, Ş. KALAYCI (der.), 2. Baskı, Asil Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara.
  • 42. THE TIMES (1992), "The Times Good University Guide", The Times, 12 Ekim, s. 35.
  • 43. VAN VAUGHT, F. A. ve D. F. WESTERHEIJDEN (1994), "Towards a General Model of Quality Assessment in Higher Education", Higher Education, Cilt 28, Sayı 3, s. 355-371.
  • 44. WEICK, K. E. (1976), "Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems", Administrative Science Quarterly, Cilt 21, Sayı 1, s. 1-19.
  • 45. WINN, B. A. ve K. CAMERON (1998), "Organizational Quality: An Examination of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Framework", Research in Higher Education, Cilt 39, Sayı 5, s. 491-512.
  • 46. YÖDEK (2006), Yüksek Öğretim Kurumlarında Akademik Değerlendirme ve Kalite Geliştirme Rehberi (Sürüm 1.0), YÖDEK, Ankara, <http://www.yodek.org.tr/?page=download#>, (18.09.2007).
  • 47. YÖDEK (2007), Yüksek Öğretim Kurumlarında Akademik Değerlendirme ve Kalite Geliştirme Rehberi (Sürüm 1.1), YÖDEK, Ankara, <http://www.yodek.org.tr/?page=download#>, (18.09.2007).
There are 47 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Articles
Authors

  Yrd.doç.dr.ömer Lütfi Antalyalı This is me

Publication Date September 1, 2011
Published in Issue Year 2011 Volume: 16 Issue: 3

Cite

APA Antalyalı, .Y.L. (2011). TÜRKİYE ÜNİVERSİTELERİNİN ÖRGÜTSEL ETKİLİLİK BOYUTLARI. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(3), 285-309.