BibTex RIS Cite

Türkiye Yükseköğretim Sistemi'ndeki çeşitliliğin işlemselleştirilmesi

Year 2012, Volume: 2 Issue: 1, 38 - 51, 01.04.2012

Burak Kılanç

Abstract

Dünyanın "Bilgi Ekonomisi" gerçeklerini yaşadığı günümüzde, ülkelerin refah düzeyleri, bilgiyi üretebilme ve bu bilgiyi kullanabilme yeteneklerine doğrudan bağlıdır. Bu çerçevede, yükseköğretim politikaları ile ilgili konuların ve bu konular arasında yükseköğretim kurumlarının çeşitliliğinin, hükümetlerin öncelikli gündem maddelerinden olması beklenir. Türkiye'nin Yükseköğretim Sistemi için de durum farklı değildir. Bu makale, Türkiye'nin Yükseköğretim Sistemi üzerinde gelecekte yapılabilecek çeşitlilik/farklılık (diversity) çalışmalarına temel oluşturmayı hedeflemektedir. Makale, yükseköğretim sistemlerinin çeşitliliği konusunda geçmiş bilimsel çalışmaların detayları çerçevesinde öncelikle altı aşamadan oluşan bir "Araştırma Akışı" önermektedir. Sonraki aşamada Türkiye Yükseköğretim Sistemi'nin güncel yapısı dikkate alınarak sistemin temel bileşenleri (oyuncuları) belirlenmekte, yükseköğretim sistemlerinin "kendi kendini uyarlayabilen karmaşık sistemler" oldukları varsayımı ile Türkiye Yükseköğretim Sistemi'nin kavramsal yapısı şematik olarak çizilmektedir. Çalışma kapsamında çeşitliliğin işlemselleştirilmesi (operationalization) amacıyla, mümkün olan en geniş şekliyle bir Boyut-Seti geliştirilmiştir. Yükseköğretim sisteminin bileşenlerinin özsel (inherent) karakteristikleri ile bileşenler arasındaki etkileşimleri kapsayan bu Boyut-Seti ile ilgili veri ulaşılabilirliği ve/veya veri derleme yöntemleri ayrıca listelenmiştir. Geliştirilen Boyut-Seti ve önerilen "Araştırma Akışı"nın Türkiye Yükseköğretim Sistemi'ndeki çeşitliliğin inceleneceği bilimsel çalışmalara temel oluşturacağı düşünülmektedir.

Keywords

Çeşitlilik farklılaşma işlemselleştirme kendi kendini uyarlayabilen karmaşık sistemler yükseköğretim kurumları yükseköğretim sistemi sistem analizi.

References

  • Birnbaum, B. (1983). Maintaining diversity in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: John Murray.
  • Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labor in society. New York: The Free Press.
  • Erden, Z. (2006). Histories, institutional regimes and educational organiza- tions: The case of Turkish Higher Education. PhD, Sabancı University, Istanbul.
  • Ergüder, Ü., Sevük, S., Şahin, M., Terzioğlu, T., and Vardar, Ö. (2003). Yükseköğretimin yeniden yapılandırılması. Istanbul: Turkish Industrialist and Businessman Association (TÜSİAD).
  • Galbraith, P. L. (1998). System dynamics and university management. System Dynamics Review, 14, 69-84.
  • Huisman, J. (1995). Differentiation, diversity and dependency in higher edu- cation. Utrecht: Lemma.
  • Huisman, J. (2000). Higher education institutions: as different as chalk and cheese? Higher Education Policy, 13, 41-53.
  • Huisman, J., Meek, L., and Wood, F. (2007). Institutional diversity in higher education: A cross-national and longitudinal analysis. Higher Education Quarterly, 61, 563-577.
  • Kennedy, M. (1998). A Pilot System Dynamics Model to Capture and Monitor Quality Issues in Higher Education Institutions: Experiences Gained. Paper presented at the The 16th International Conference of The System Dynamics Society Quebec Canada.
  • Kılanç, B. (2007). Türkiye'nin ÖSS tercihleri. Accessed through <http://www.dogrutercih.com/turkiyenin-oss-tercihleri.php> on September 27, 2008.
  • Merton, R. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York: The Free Press.
  • Mızıkacı, F. (2006). Higher Education in Turkey. In P. J. Wells (Ed.), Monographs on higher education (pp. 1-185). Bucharest: UNESCO, CEPES.
  • Mızıkacı, F. (2010). Isomorphic and diverse institutions among Turkish Foundation Universities. Eğitim ve Bilim, 157, 128-139.
  • Parsons, T. (1966). Societies: Evolutionary and comparative perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Reavill, L. R. P. (1997). Quality assessment and the stakeholder model of higher education. Total Quality Management, 8, 246-252.
  • Salhieh, L., and Singh, N. (2003). A system dynamics framework for benchmarking policy analysis for a university system. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 10, 490-498.
  • Teziç, E., Tekeli, İ., Yarımağan, Ü., Ertepınar, A., Sevük, S., Şenatalar, B., Özgen, T., Eşme, İ., Şenses, S., Yüzbaşıoğlu, N., and Durman, M. (2007). Türkiye'nin yükseköğretim stratejisi. Ankara: T.C. Yükseköğretim Kurulu (YÖK).
  • van Vught, F. (2008). Mission diversity and reputation in higher educa- tion. Higher Education Policy, 21, 151-174.
  • von Bertalanffy, L. (1975). Perspectives on general system theory: scientific- philosophical studies. Edited by E. von Taschdjian. New York: George Braziller.

Operationalization of Diversity in Turkish Higher Education System

Year 2012, Volume: 2 Issue: 1, 38 - 51, 01.04.2012

Burak Kılanç

Abstract

Considering the very obvious fact that the world has entered a phase of "knowledge economy", and countries' future welfare will highly depend on their ability to create and apply knowledge, one can quite easily infer that policy issues regarding higher education systems will be at the heart of governments' agenda, so the diversity and diversification. The case of Turkish Higher Education System will not be an exception. This paper attempts to develop a basis for prospective diversity studies on Turkish Higher Education System. At first, a six step "Research Stream" was proposed along with a detailed literature review evaluating previous research studies on HESs' diversity. In the light of the structure of contemporary Turkish HES, key components (players) of the system were determined and system's conceptual framework was depicted assuming that HESs are complex adaptive systems. A comprehensive Dimension-Setfor operationalization of diversity was then developed, reflecting inherent characteristics of and interactions between the components, at its widest possible extents. Data availability and/or data generation methods for each dimension were listed. The provided Dimension-Setand proposed "Research Stream" are deemed to foster prospective research studies on the diversity in Turkish HES.

Keywords

Research and Development Center Istanbul Kültür University Istanbul Turkey

References

  • Birnbaum, B. (1983). Maintaining diversity in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: John Murray.
  • Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labor in society. New York: The Free Press.
  • Erden, Z. (2006). Histories, institutional regimes and educational organiza- tions: The case of Turkish Higher Education. PhD, Sabancı University, Istanbul.
  • Ergüder, Ü., Sevük, S., Şahin, M., Terzioğlu, T., and Vardar, Ö. (2003). Yükseköğretimin yeniden yapılandırılması. Istanbul: Turkish Industrialist and Businessman Association (TÜSİAD).
  • Galbraith, P. L. (1998). System dynamics and university management. System Dynamics Review, 14, 69-84.
  • Huisman, J. (1995). Differentiation, diversity and dependency in higher edu- cation. Utrecht: Lemma.
  • Huisman, J. (2000). Higher education institutions: as different as chalk and cheese? Higher Education Policy, 13, 41-53.
  • Huisman, J., Meek, L., and Wood, F. (2007). Institutional diversity in higher education: A cross-national and longitudinal analysis. Higher Education Quarterly, 61, 563-577.
  • Kennedy, M. (1998). A Pilot System Dynamics Model to Capture and Monitor Quality Issues in Higher Education Institutions: Experiences Gained. Paper presented at the The 16th International Conference of The System Dynamics Society Quebec Canada.
  • Kılanç, B. (2007). Türkiye'nin ÖSS tercihleri. Accessed through <http://www.dogrutercih.com/turkiyenin-oss-tercihleri.php> on September 27, 2008.
  • Merton, R. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York: The Free Press.
  • Mızıkacı, F. (2006). Higher Education in Turkey. In P. J. Wells (Ed.), Monographs on higher education (pp. 1-185). Bucharest: UNESCO, CEPES.
  • Mızıkacı, F. (2010). Isomorphic and diverse institutions among Turkish Foundation Universities. Eğitim ve Bilim, 157, 128-139.
  • Parsons, T. (1966). Societies: Evolutionary and comparative perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Reavill, L. R. P. (1997). Quality assessment and the stakeholder model of higher education. Total Quality Management, 8, 246-252.
  • Salhieh, L., and Singh, N. (2003). A system dynamics framework for benchmarking policy analysis for a university system. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 10, 490-498.
  • Teziç, E., Tekeli, İ., Yarımağan, Ü., Ertepınar, A., Sevük, S., Şenatalar, B., Özgen, T., Eşme, İ., Şenses, S., Yüzbaşıoğlu, N., and Durman, M. (2007). Türkiye'nin yükseköğretim stratejisi. Ankara: T.C. Yükseköğretim Kurulu (YÖK).
  • van Vught, F. (2008). Mission diversity and reputation in higher educa- tion. Higher Education Policy, 21, 151-174.
  • von Bertalanffy, L. (1975). Perspectives on general system theory: scientific- philosophical studies. Edited by E. von Taschdjian. New York: George Braziller.
There are 20 citations in total.

Details

Other ID JA39VA59YA
Journal Section Original Empirical Research
Authors

Burak Kılanç This is me

Publication Date April 1, 2012
Published in Issue Year 2012 Volume: 2 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Kılanç, B. (2012). Türkiye Yükseköğretim Sistemi’ndeki çeşitliliğin işlemselleştirilmesi. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 2(1), 38-51.

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

34634     3463634637 34638  34988

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.