Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

İktisat Bölümlerinin İktisat Eğitimine Katkısına Dayalı Bir Türk Üniversite Liginin Oluşturulması

Year 2021, Volume: 11 Issue: 2 Pt 1, 255 - 262, 01.08.2021
https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.20.547618

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye'de bulunan üniversitelerin iktisat bölümlerinin lisans öğretimi boyunca öğrenciler üzerinde yarattığı katma değerin ölçülmesidir. Çalışmanın analiz kısmında, üniversitelerin iktisat bölümlerinin; 2000-2012 yılları giriş taban puanı girdi ve 2004-2016 yılları Kamu Personeli Seçme Sınavı (KPSS) iktisat testi net ortalaması ise çıktı olarak kullanılmıştır. Veriler min-max yöntemine göre normalize edilmiş ve "Borda count" metoduna göre puanlama yapılıp, üniversiteler sıralanmıştır. Sıralama sonuçlarına göre Ankara Üniversitesi ilk, Hacettepe Üniversitesi ikinci ve Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi (ODTÜ) üçüncü sırada yer almışlardır. Sıralamanın ilk on sırasının altısında başkent Ankara'da bulunan üniversiteler elde etmiştir. Ankara'nın ön plana çıkmasında şehirdeki üniversitelerin köklü oluşu, KPSS ile ilgili destekleyici eğitim ve materyallere ulaşım kolaylığı ve çeşitliliği, akademik personeldeki istikrar, şehirdeki üniversitelerin ağırlıklı olarak tekli eğitim yapması, ülkedeki kamu kurumlarının merkezlerinin burada olması ve böylece öğrencilerin üst düzey kamu görevlileri ile daha fazla irtibat halinde olmalarından dolayı motivasyonlarının artmasının etkili olduğu düşünülmektedir.

References

  • Dill, D. D., & Soo, M. (2005). Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross- national analysis of university ranking systems. Higher Education, 49(4), 495–533.
  • Doğan G., & Al, U. (2018). Standardization problem of university names in university ranking systems: The case of University Ranking by Academic Performance (URAP). [Article in Turkish] Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 8(3), 583–592.
  • Doğan, N., & Şahin, A. E. (2009). The variables predicting the appointment of candidate teachers to primary schools. İnönü University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 10(3), 183–199.
  • Jalaliyoon, N., & Taherdoost, H. (2012). Performance evaluation of higher education; a necessity. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5682–5686.
  • Kiraka, R., Maringe, F., Kanyutu, W., & Mogaji, E. (2020). University league tables and ranking systems in Africa: Emerging prospects, challenges and opportunities. In E. Mogaji, F. Maringe, & R. E. Hinson (Eds.), Understanding the higher education market in Africa (pp. 199–214). Abingdon, OX: Routledge.
  • ÖSYM (2016). Retrieved from http://dokuman.osym.gov.tr/pdfdokuman (February 5, 2017).
  • Saka, Y., & Yaman, S. (2011). University ranking systems; criteria and critiques. [Article in Turkish] Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 1(2), 72–79.
  • Shavelson, R. J., Domingue, B. W., Mariño, J. P., Molina Mantilla, A., Morales Forero, A., & Wiley, E. E. (2016). On the practices and challenges of measuring higher education value added: The case of Colombia. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(5), 695–720.
  • Usher, A., & Savino, M. (2007). A global survey of university ranking and league tables. Higher Education in Europe, 32(1), 5–15.
  • Yamak, R., & Topbaş, F. (2006). University league as the relative added value created by the departments of economics on the students in Turkey. Journal of Management and Economic Research, 4(6), 99–110.
  • Yeşilyurt, C. (2009). Measurement of relative performance of the DEA methods department of economics in Turkey: An application based on PPSE 2007 data. [Article in Turkish] Atatürk University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 23(4), 135–147.

Creation of a Turkish University League Based on the Contribution of their Economics Departments to Economics Education

Year 2021, Volume: 11 Issue: 2 Pt 1, 255 - 262, 01.08.2021
https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.20.547618

Abstract

This study aims to measure the added value created by the economics departments of the universities in Turkey for students throughout their undergraduate education. For the analysis section, the minimum admission scores of the universities' economics departments for the years from 2000 to 2012 were used as input and the net average scores obtained in the economics tests of Public Personnel Selection Examination (PPSE) for the years from 2004 to 2016 were used as output. The data were normalized using the min-max method and the universities were ranked using the "Borda count" method. According to the results, Ankara University ranked the 1st, Hacettepe University the 2nd and Middle East Technical University the 3rd. The first six positions in the top ten ranking are held by the universities located in the capital, Ankara. This is attributed to various factors such as the long-established character of the universities in the capital city, availability and diversity of training courses and materials for PPSE, permanency of the academic staff, prevalence of standard daytime education in these universities, and the role of the capital as the seat of public institutions, resulting in greater motivation among students as they have more contact with senior government officials.

References

  • Dill, D. D., & Soo, M. (2005). Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross- national analysis of university ranking systems. Higher Education, 49(4), 495–533.
  • Doğan G., & Al, U. (2018). Standardization problem of university names in university ranking systems: The case of University Ranking by Academic Performance (URAP). [Article in Turkish] Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 8(3), 583–592.
  • Doğan, N., & Şahin, A. E. (2009). The variables predicting the appointment of candidate teachers to primary schools. İnönü University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 10(3), 183–199.
  • Jalaliyoon, N., & Taherdoost, H. (2012). Performance evaluation of higher education; a necessity. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5682–5686.
  • Kiraka, R., Maringe, F., Kanyutu, W., & Mogaji, E. (2020). University league tables and ranking systems in Africa: Emerging prospects, challenges and opportunities. In E. Mogaji, F. Maringe, & R. E. Hinson (Eds.), Understanding the higher education market in Africa (pp. 199–214). Abingdon, OX: Routledge.
  • ÖSYM (2016). Retrieved from http://dokuman.osym.gov.tr/pdfdokuman (February 5, 2017).
  • Saka, Y., & Yaman, S. (2011). University ranking systems; criteria and critiques. [Article in Turkish] Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 1(2), 72–79.
  • Shavelson, R. J., Domingue, B. W., Mariño, J. P., Molina Mantilla, A., Morales Forero, A., & Wiley, E. E. (2016). On the practices and challenges of measuring higher education value added: The case of Colombia. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(5), 695–720.
  • Usher, A., & Savino, M. (2007). A global survey of university ranking and league tables. Higher Education in Europe, 32(1), 5–15.
  • Yamak, R., & Topbaş, F. (2006). University league as the relative added value created by the departments of economics on the students in Turkey. Journal of Management and Economic Research, 4(6), 99–110.
  • Yeşilyurt, C. (2009). Measurement of relative performance of the DEA methods department of economics in Turkey: An application based on PPSE 2007 data. [Article in Turkish] Atatürk University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 23(4), 135–147.
There are 11 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Studies on Education
Journal Section Original Empirical Research
Authors

Selim Baha Yıldız 0000-0002-0750-0556

Volkan Alptekin This is me 0000-0002-4579-6802

Sibel Selim This is me 0000-0002-8464-588X

Publication Date August 1, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021 Volume: 11 Issue: 2 Pt 1

Cite

APA Yıldız, S. B., Alptekin, V., & Selim, S. (2021). Creation of a Turkish University League Based on the Contribution of their Economics Departments to Economics Education. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 11(2 Pt 1), 255-262. https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.20.547618

Yükseköğretim Dergisi/TÜBA Higher Education Research/Review (TÜBA-HER) does not officially agree with the ideas of manuscripts published in the journal and does not guarantee for any product or service advertisements on both printed and online versions of the journal. Scientific and legal responsibilities of published manuscripts belong to their authors. Materials such as pictures, figures, tables etc. sent with manuscripts should be original or written approval of copyright holder should be sent with manuscript for publishing in both printed and online versions if they were published before. Authors agree that they transfer all publishing rights to the Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA), the publisher of the journal. Copyrights of all published contents (text and visual materials) belong to the journal. No payment is done for manuscripts under the name of copyright or others approved for publishing in the journal and no publication cost is charged; however, reprints are at authors' cost.

To promote the development of global open access to scientific information and research, TÜBA provides copyrights of all online published papers (except where otherwise noted) for free use of readers, scientists, and institutions (such as link to the content or permission for its download, distribution, printing, copying, and reproduction in any medium, without any changing and except the commercial purpose), under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND3.0) License, provided the original work is cited. To get permission for commercial purpose please contact the publisher.