BibTex RIS Cite

Türkiye’de yükseköğretim: Devlet üniversitelerinde özyönetime yönelik yeni eğilimler*

Year 2013, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 40 - 47, 01.04.2013

Abstract

1980li yıllardan itibaren, Yükseköğretim Kurulu (YÖK) ve devlet üniversiteleri arasındaki ilişki tartışmaların gölgesinde kalmıştır. Günümüzde, YÖK mevcut durumda bir değişiklik başlatmakta ve üniversite sisteminde özyönetime dayanan modelleri geliştirmektedir. YÖK Genel Kuruluna sunulan ön raporda açıklandığı üzere finansal özerkliğin kritik öneme sahip bir yapıtaşı olması nedeniyle yeni yönetim stratejisinin bir parçası olarak yeni fonlama modelleri geliştirilmelidir. Son otuz yıl içinde devlet ile üniversiteler arasında benzer bir reform yaşanan batılı ülkelerde, üniversitelerin devlet tarafından finansmanında formüle dayalı kaynak dağıtımı modeline kıyasla performansa dayalı kaynak dağıtımı modeline ağırlık verilmiştir. Formüle dayalı mekanizmalar finansmanı girdi değerlerine bağlarken, performansa dayalı fonlama modelleri kaynak dağıtımını çıktı değerlerine bağlamaktadır. Bu çalışmamızda, reform edilmiş yükseköğretim sistemlerinde alternatif fonlama modellerine değindikten sonra yeni bir fonlama modeli önermekte ve bu modelin Türkiyedeki yükseköğretim sisteminde işleyiş ve yönetimine ilişkin mekanizmaları tartışmaktayız.

References

  • Barr, N. (2004). Higher education funding. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 20(2), 264-283.
  • Barr, N. (2005). Financing higher education. Finance and Development, 42(2). Accessed through <http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/ 2005/06/barr.htm> on January 28th, 2013.
  • Clark, B. R. (1998). The entrepreneurial university: Demand and response. Tertiary Education and Management, 4(1), 5-16.
  • Clark, B. R. (2001). The entrepreneurial university: New foundations for collegiality, autonomy, and achievement. Journal of the Programme on Institutional Management in Higher Education, 13(2), 9-24.
  • Hata, T. (2003). What is enterprising universities, decentralization or central- ization? Working Paper. University of Hiroshima.
  • Hattie, J. (1990). Performance indicators in education. Australian Journal of Education, 34(3), 249-276.
  • Hearn, J. C., Lewis, D. R., Kallsen, L., Holdsworth, J. M., and Jones, L. M. (2006). Incentives for managed growth: A case study of incentives- based planning and budgeting in a large public research university. Journal of Higher Education, 77(2), 286-316.
  • Herbst, M. (2009). Financing public universities: The case of performance fund- ing. Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Massy, W. F. (Eds.). (1996). The economics of education: Resource allocation in higher education. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.
  • OECD (2012). Education Indicators in Focus, 2012/08 (October). Accessed through <http://www.oecd.org/edu/highereducationan- dadultlearning/EDIFE8.pdf> on January 28th, 2013.
  • OECD (2013). OECD Factbook 2013: Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics, OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/factbook-2013-en
  • Salmi, J., and Hauptman, A. M. (2006). Innovations in tertiary education financing: A comparative evaluation of allocation mechanisms. Washington DC: The World Bank Education Working Paper Series, Number 4, September 2006.
  • YÖK (2007). Türkiye’nin yükseköğretim stratejisi. YÖK: Ankara.
  • Technopolis (2010). Higher education teaching funding methods in other coun- tries: A report to HEFCE. Bristol: HEFCE.

Higher Education in Turkey: Trends Towards Self-Steering Public Universities*

Year 2013, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 40 - 47, 01.04.2013

Abstract

Since the 1980s, there has been a long-running debate on the relationship between the Turkish Council of Higher Education and public universities. Today, the council is initiating a change in the status quo and developing models based on the self-steering of these universities. As indicated in the preliminary report that was recently presented to the General Assembly of the Council, new funding models must be developed as part of this new steering strategy since financial autonomy is a crucial component and of critical importance for self-governing universities. In the Western World, where a similar reform in the relationship between governments and universities took place in the last three decades, the governmental funding of universities mainly focuses on the performance-based allocation of resources rather than on the formula-driven allocation of resources. Formula-driven mechanisms link funding to input measures whereas performance-based mechanisms tie resource allocation to output measures. After discussing these alternative funding models found in the reformed tertiary education systems, we propose in this paper a new funding model and discuss the mechanisms for its governance and management in Turkish higher education.

References

  • Barr, N. (2004). Higher education funding. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 20(2), 264-283.
  • Barr, N. (2005). Financing higher education. Finance and Development, 42(2). Accessed through <http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/ 2005/06/barr.htm> on January 28th, 2013.
  • Clark, B. R. (1998). The entrepreneurial university: Demand and response. Tertiary Education and Management, 4(1), 5-16.
  • Clark, B. R. (2001). The entrepreneurial university: New foundations for collegiality, autonomy, and achievement. Journal of the Programme on Institutional Management in Higher Education, 13(2), 9-24.
  • Hata, T. (2003). What is enterprising universities, decentralization or central- ization? Working Paper. University of Hiroshima.
  • Hattie, J. (1990). Performance indicators in education. Australian Journal of Education, 34(3), 249-276.
  • Hearn, J. C., Lewis, D. R., Kallsen, L., Holdsworth, J. M., and Jones, L. M. (2006). Incentives for managed growth: A case study of incentives- based planning and budgeting in a large public research university. Journal of Higher Education, 77(2), 286-316.
  • Herbst, M. (2009). Financing public universities: The case of performance fund- ing. Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Massy, W. F. (Eds.). (1996). The economics of education: Resource allocation in higher education. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.
  • OECD (2012). Education Indicators in Focus, 2012/08 (October). Accessed through <http://www.oecd.org/edu/highereducationan- dadultlearning/EDIFE8.pdf> on January 28th, 2013.
  • OECD (2013). OECD Factbook 2013: Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics, OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/factbook-2013-en
  • Salmi, J., and Hauptman, A. M. (2006). Innovations in tertiary education financing: A comparative evaluation of allocation mechanisms. Washington DC: The World Bank Education Working Paper Series, Number 4, September 2006.
  • YÖK (2007). Türkiye’nin yükseköğretim stratejisi. YÖK: Ankara.
  • Technopolis (2010). Higher education teaching funding methods in other coun- tries: A report to HEFCE. Bristol: HEFCE.
There are 14 citations in total.

Details

Other ID JA28HG54CF
Journal Section Original Empirical Research
Authors

Ali Coşkun This is me

Gözde Ünal This is me

Publication Date April 1, 2013
Published in Issue Year 2013 Volume: 3 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Coşkun, A., & Ünal, G. (2013). Türkiye’de yükseköğretim: Devlet üniversitelerinde özyönetime yönelik yeni eğilimler*. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 3(1), 40-47.

TÜBA Higher Education Research / Review (TÜBA-HER) is indexed in ESCI, TR Dizin, EBSCO, and Google Scholar.

Publisher
34633
112 Vedat Dalokay Street, Çankaya , 06700 Ankara, Türkiye

3415434156  34153 34146 34148 34155 34157 3415834160

TÜBA-HER Turkish Academy of Sciences Journal of Higher Education Research/Review (TÜBA-HER) does not officially endorse the views expressed in the articles published in the journal, nor does it guarantee any product or service advertisements that may appear in the print or online versions. The scientific and legal responsibility for the published articles belongs solely to the authors.

Images, figures, tables, and other materials submitted with manuscripts must be original. If previously published, written permission from the copyright holder must be provided for reproduction in both print and online versions. Authors retain the copyright of their works; however, upon publication in the journal, the economic rights and rights of public communication— including adaptation, reproduction, representation, printing, publishing, and distribution rights—are transferred to the Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA), the publisher of the journal. Copyright of all published content (text and visual materials) belongs to the journal in terms of usage and distribution. No payment is made to the authors under the name of copyright or any other title, and no article processing charges are requested. However, the cost of reprints, if requested, is the responsibility of the authors.

In order to promote global open access to scientific knowledge and research, TÜBA allows all content published online (unless otherwise stated) to be freely used by readers, researchers, and institutions. Such use (including linking, downloading, distribution, printing, copying, or reproduction in any medium) is permitted under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License, provided that the original work is properly cited, not modified, and not used for commercial purposes. For permission regarding commercial use, please contact the publisher.