Türkiye'de Üniversite Rektörlerinin Sosyo-Demografik Özellikleri ve Kariyer Hazırlıkları

Year 2014, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 44 - 53, 01.04.2014

Nihat Erdoğmuş Murat Esen

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı Türkiye'de üniversitelerde görev yapan rektörlerin sosyo-demografik özellikleri ve kariyer hazırlıkları bakımından mevcut durumunu ortaya koymaktır. Çalışma betimsel bir araştırma olup devlet ve vakıf üniversitelerinde görev yapan 168 üniversite rektörünü kapsamaktadır. Veri toplama sürecinde üniversitelerin resmi Web sayfaları, rektörlerin kişisel Web sayfaları, Yükseköğretim Kurulu Web sayfası ve istatistikleri ile ÖSYM istatistiklerinden yararlanılmıştır. Türkiye'deki mevcut üniversite rektörleri sosyo-demografik özellikleri bakımından ağırlıklı olarak; erkek, rektörlüğünün ilk döneminde, ilk defa 45-55 yaş aralığında göreve başlamış, 50-60 yaş aralığında, Karadeniz ve İç Anadolu doğumlu bir profil sergilemektedir. Kariyer hazırlığı bakımından ise ağırlıklı olarak; İstanbul Üniversitesi, Atatürk Üniversitesi, Ankara Üniversitesi, ODTÜ ve İstanbul Teknik Üniversitelerinde eğitim görmüş; mühendislik, tıp, iktisadi ve idari bilimler ile fen-edebiyattan mezun; rektör olmadan bir önceki görevi bölüm başkanı, rektör yardımcısı ve dekanlık olan bir profile sahiptir.

Keywords

Kariyer hazırlığı, rektörler, sosyo-demografik özellikler, yükseköğretim.

The socio-demographic characteristics and career preparation of the rectors in Turkey

Abstract

The aim of this study is to demonstrate socio-demographic characteristics and career preparation of the rectors in Turkey. This is a descriptive study and includes the 168 state and foundation universities. Data were collected from official web pages of universities, rectors' personal web pages, the web page and statistics of the Council of Higher Education, and the statistics of Assessment Selection and Placement Center. In terms of the socio-demographic characteristics, the findings of the study showed that the majority of the rectors are male, between the ages of 50-60, initially appointed between 45-55 years of age, serving their first terms in their posts, and mainly from Black Sea and Central Anatolia Regions. In terms of career preparation, most of the rectors graduated from Istanbul University, Atatürk University, Ankara University, Middle East Technical University and Istanbul Technical University. They also predominantly graduated from the faculty of engineering, medicine, economics and administrative sciences, and science and art. Most rectors had been formerly as chair, deputy rector or dean prior to incumbency.

Keywords

Career preparation, higher education, rectors, socio-demographic characteristics.

References

• Bargh, C., Bocock, J., Scott, P., and Smith, D. N. (2000). University leader- ship: The role of the chief executive. Buckingham: SRHE/Open University Press.
• Breakwell, G. M., and Tytherleigh, M. Y. (2008). University leaders at the turn of the 21st century: Changing patterns in their socio-demograph- ic characteristics. Higher Education, 56(1), 109-127.
• Breakwell, G. M., and Tytherleigh M. Y. (2010). University leaders and university performance in the United Kingdom: is it ‘who’ leads, or ‘where’ they lead that matters most? Higher Education, 60(5), 491-506.
• Chaganti, R., and Sambharya, R. (1987). Strategic orientation and charac- teristics of upper management. Strategic Management Journal, 8(4), 393-402.
• Chin, M. K., Hambrick, D. C., and Trevino, L. K. (2013). Political ideolo- gies of CEOs: Illustrative evidence of the influence of executive values on corporate social responsibility. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(2), 197-232.
• Dearborn. D. C, and Simon, H. A. (1958). Selective perception: A note on the department identifications of executives. Sociometry, 21(2), 140- 144.
• Deem, R., and Brehony, K. (2005). Management as ideology: The case of ‘New Managerialism’ in higher education. Oxford Review of Education, 31(2), 217-235.
• Castro, D., and Tomàs, M. (2011). Development of manager-academics at institutions of higher education in Catalonia. Higher Education Quarterly, 65(3), 290-307.
• Cook, B. J. (2012). The American College President Study: Key findings and takeaways. 24 Mart 2014 tarihinde <www.acenet.edu> adresinden erişildi.
• Doğramacı, İ. (2007). Türkiye’de ve dünyada yükseköğretim yönetimi. Ankara: Meteksan A.Ş.
• Finkelstein, S., and Hambrick, D. (1996). Strategic leadership: Top executives and their effects on organizations. Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
• Günay, D. ve Kılıç, M. (2011). Cumhuriyet dönemi Türk yükseköğreti- minde rektör seçimi ve atamaları. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 1(1), 34-44.
• Hambrick, D. C., and Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organi- zation as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193-206.
• Harman, G. (2002). Academic leaders or corporate managers: Deans and heads in Australian higher education, 1977 to 1997. Journal of the Programme on Institutional Management in Higher Education, 14(2), 53
• Hoff, K. S. (1999). Leaders and managers: Essential skills required within higher education. Higher Education, 38(3), 311-331
• Küçükcan, T. ve Gür, B. S. (2009). Türkiye’de yükseköğretim: Karşılaştırmalı bir analiz. Ankara: SETA Yayınları.
• Miller, H. (1998). Managing academics in Canada and the United Kingdom. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 8(1), 3-24.
• Mutlu, L. (2009). Devlet ve vakıf üniversiteleri: Rektör seçiminin önemi. İstan- bul: Yalın Yayıncılık.
• Muzzin, L. J., and Tracz , G. S. (1981). Characteristics and careers of Canadian university presidents. Higher Education, 10(3), 335-351
• O’Meara, B. (2002). Recruitment and selection of vice-chancellors for Australian Universities. Unpublished PhD thesis, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
• O’Meara, B., and Petzall, S. (2008). What do we know about the chancel- lors of Australian universities? Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30(2), 187-199.
• Rowsley, D., and Sherman, H. (2003). The special challenges of academic leadership. Management Decision, 48(10), 1058-1063.
• Scott, G., Bell, S., Coates, H., and Grebennikov, L. (2010). Australian higher education leaders in times of change: The role of ProVice- Chancellor and Deputy Vice-Chancellor. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32(4), 401-418.
• Smith, D. (2008). Academics or executives? Continuity and change in the roles of pro-vice-chancellors. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(4), 340- 357.
• Stripling, J. (2012). Survey finds a drop in minority presidents leading col- leges. The Cronicle of Higher Education, March 12, 2012.
• Useem, M., and Karabel, J. (1986). Pathways to top corporate manage- ment. American Sociological Review, 51(2), 184-200.
• Whitchurch, C. (2007). Who do they think they are? The changing iden- tities of professional administrators and managers in UK higher educa- tion. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(2), 159-171.
• Zarate, R. L. (2007). Four trajectories of rectors in Mexican public univer- sities. Higher Education, 54(6), 795-817.