Eğitim fakültesi akademisyenlerinin iyi oluşları: Nitel bir analiz

Abstract

Yüksek eğitim ve iyi oluş düzeyi, ulusların ve dolayısıyla dünya refahının göstergesidir. Eğitim fakültelerinde görev yapan akademisyenler de yetiştirdikleri öğretmenlerle milletlerin iyi oluşlarına katkı sağlayan temel yapı taşlarındandır. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, eğitim fakültelerinde görev yapan akademisyenlerin medeni durumlarının, idari görevlerinin ve mesleki kıdemlerinin iyi oluşlarını nasıl etkilediğine ilişkin görüşlerini araştırmaktır. Bu nitel fenomenolojik çalışmada, veriler derinlemesine görüşmeler yoluyla toplanmıştır. Katılımcıların çeşitliliğini ve veri zenginliğini sağlamak için kota örnekleme tekniği benimsenmiştir. Katılımcılar Türkiye'deki 7 farklı eğitim fakültesinde görev yapan toplam 20 akademisyendir. Veriler içerik analizi ile analiz edilmiş ve bulgular literatürde daha önce yapılan araştırmalarla ilişkilendirilerek tartışılmıştır. Araştırmanın sonucunda; medeni duruma ilişkin olarak hayatı paylaşma, dengeli ve destekleyici bir ilişkiye sahip olma, ebeveyn olma ve eş tarafından sağlanan motivasyonun akademisyenlerin iyi oluşlarını artırırken, aileye zaman ayırmak zorunda kalmaları ve bekar bireylere yönelik olumsuz sosyal tutumun iyi oluşu olumsuz etkilediği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. İdari görevlerle ilgili olarak, sorumluluk alma, başarıların takdir görmesi, sosyalleşme, başarma duygusu, dünya görüşünün gelişmesi ve geniş kaynaklara ulaşma iyi oluş üzerinde olumlu bir etkiye sahipken, kişisel çıkara dayalı ilişkiler ve idari görevlere akademik görevlerden daha fazla zaman ayırmak zorunda kalmanın iyi oluşu olumsuz etkilediği bulgularına ulaşılmıştır. Mesleki kıdemin ise, deneyim ve bilgi birikimi, unvan kazanma, sosyal ağların genişlemesi sebebiyle akademisyenlerin iyi oluşunu olumlu etkilerken, adaletsizlik, kadro alamama ve bürokratik engellerin iyi oluşu olumsuz yönde etki ettiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

• İyi oluş
• eğitim fakültesi
• akademisyen
• yükseköğretim
• PERMA

Well-being of academics teaching at faculties of education in Türkiye: A qualitative analysis

Abstract

Higher levels of education and well-being are the indicators of the prosperity of nations and consequently the world. The academics that work at faculties of education are among the building blocks that contribute to the well-being of nations through the teachers they educate. The main purpose of this study is to explore the views of academics teaching at faculties of education on how their well-being is affected by their marital status, administrative duties, and professional seniority. In this qualitative phenomenological study, the data were collected through in-depth interviews. The quota sampling technique was adopted to ensure the diversity of participants and the richness of data. The participants were A total number of 20 academics teaching at 7 different faculties of education in Turkey. The data were analyzed by content analysis and findings are discussed in relation to prior research in the literature. The results of the study suggest that; for marital status, that sharing life and having support in a balanced relationship, being a parent, and motivation provided by the partner increase academics’ well-being while having to spare time to family and the negative social attitude towards single individuals negatively affect it. Regarding the administrative duties, taking responsibilities, being recognized for accomplishments, socialization, feeling of achievement, widening perspective, and reaching vast sources have a positive effect on well-being while the relationships based on self-interest and spending more time to administrative duties than academic studies reduce it. As for the professional seniority, accumulation of experience and knowledge, gaining titles, and widening social networks positively affect academics’ well-being while injustice, not getting tenure, and bureaucratic obstacles have a negative effect.

Keywords

• Well-being
• faculty of education
• academics
• higher education
• PERMA

References

1. Acock, A.C., & Hurlbert, J.S. (1990). Social network analysis: A structural perspective for family studies. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7(2), 245–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407590072006
2. Akman, Y., Kelecioğlu, H., & Bilge, F. (2006). Öğretim elemanlarının iş doyumlarını etkileyen faktörlere ilişkin görüşleri [Academicians’ views on the factors which influence their job satisfaction]. H.U. Journal of Education, 30, 11–20.
3. Aras, M., & Karakiraz, A. (2013). Zaman temelli iş aile çatışması, düşük başarı hissi ve iş tatmini ilişkisi: Doktora yapan araştırma görevlileri üzerinde bir araştırma [Relationship among time-based work- family conflict, personal accomplishment and job satisfaciton: A study on doctoral research assistants]. Journal of Politics, Economics and Management Studies, 1(4), 2013.
4. Ardıç, K., & Polatçı, S. (2008). Tükenmişlik Sendromu Akademisyenler Üzerinde Bir Uygulama (GOÜ Örneği) [Emotional exhaustion: An application to academic personal (the case of Gazi Osman Pasa University)]. Gazi University Journal of the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 10(2), 69–96.
5. Armeli, S., Eisenberger, R., Fasolo, P., & Lynch, P. (1998). Perceived organizational support and police performance: The moderating influence of socioemotional needs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 288–297. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.288
6. Atakan, M.M., & Ersoy, A. (2016). Spor bilimleri fakülteleri ve beden eğitimi ve spor yüksekokullarında çalışan akademik personelin örgütsel bağlılık ve örgütsel adalet düzeylerinin incelenmesi [Determining of the level of academic staff, working in faculty of sport sciences and school of physical education and sports, organizational commitment and organizational justice]. Hacettepe Journal of Sport Sciences, 26(3), 90–104. https://doi.org/10.17644/sbd.237581
7. Azeem, S.M. & Nazir, N.A. (2008). A study of job burnout among university teachers. Psychology and Developing Societies, 20(1), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/097133360702000103
8. Bakan, İ., Taşlıyan, M., Taş, F. & Aka, N. (2015). Örgüt depresyonu ve iş tatmini arasındaki ilişki: Bir üniversitedeki akademisyenler üzerinde alan araştırması [Relationship between organizational depression and job satisfaction: A case study on academic staff in a university]. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University Journal of the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 4(1), 296–315.

9. Başıbüyük, K. (2012). İlköğretim okulu öğretmenlerinin işe bağlılıkları ile moral durumları arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between the morale and job involvement of teachers who carry out duties in the public primary schools]. Master’s thesis. Maltepe University.
10. Batz, C., & Tay, L. (2017). Gender differences in subjective well-being. In E. Diener, S. Oishi, & L. Tay (Ed.), e-Handbook of Subjective Well-Being. West Lafayette, IN: Noba Scholar.
11. Bell, R.A., Roloff, M.E., Van Camp, K., & Karol, S.H. (1990). Is it lonely at the top? Career success and personal relationships. Journal of Communication, 40(1), 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1990.tb02247.x
12. Benjamin, D.J., Cooper, K.B., Heffetz, O., & Kimball, M. (2017). Challenges in constructing a survey-based well-being index. American Economic Review, 107(5), 81–85. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20171099
13. Boylu, Y., Pelit, E., & Güçer, E. (2007). Akademisyenlerin örgütsel bağlılık düzeyleri üzerine bir araştırma [A study on the level organisational commitment of academicians]. Finance, Politics and Economic Reviews, 44(511), 55–74.
14. Bradburn, N.M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago, IL: Aldine. https://doi.org/10.5980/jpnjurol1928.62.8_616
15. Bücker, S., Nuraydin, S., Simonsmeier, B.A., Schneider, M., & Luhmann, M. (2018). Subjective well-being and academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 74, 83–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRP.2018.02.007
16. Butler, J., & Kern, M.L. (2016). The PERMA-Profiler: A brief multidimensional measure of flourishing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 6(3), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v6i3.526
17. Çağlar, E. S. (2011). The impact of empowerment on work engagement mediated through psychological empowerment: moderating roles of leadership styles and work goals. Doctorate dissertation, Marmara University.
18. Can, A., & Tiyek, R. (2015). Tükenmişlik sendromu: Akademik personel üzerinde bir uygulama [Burnout syndrome: A research on academic staff]. Kırklareli University Journal of the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 4(1), 72–93.
19. Cheng, S.Y. (2014). The mediating role of organizational justice on the relationship between administrative performance appraisal practices and organizational commitment. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(8), 1131–1148. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.816864
20. Christensen, L.B., Johnson, R.B., & Turner, L.A. (2015). Research methods, design, and analysis (12th Ed). England: Pearson.
21. Çiçek Sağlam, A. (2011). Akademik personelin sosyo-demografik özelliklerinin tükenmişlik düzeyleri ile ilişkisi [Relationship of socio-demographic characteristics of academicians with their burnout levels]. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 8(15), 407–420.
22. Clark, A.E. (2009). Work, jobs, and well-being across the millennium. In E.Diener, D.Kahneman, & J.Helliwell (Eds.), International Differences in Well-Being (436-468). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199732739.003.0014
23. Cohen-Charash, Y., & Spector, P.E. (2001). The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2), 278–321. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2001.2958
24. Çöl, G., & Gül, H. (2005). Kişisel özelliklerin örgütsel bağlılık üzerine etkileri ve kamu üniversitelerinde bir uygulama [The effects of personal characteristics on organizational commitment and an application in public universities]. Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences University of Ataturk, 19(1), 291–306.
25. Coombs, R.H. (1991). Marital status and personal well-being: A literature review. Family Relations, 40(1), 97–102.
26. Creswell, J.W. (2013). Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri: Beş yaklaşıma göre nitel araştırma ve araştırma deseni. (M.Bütün & S.B.Demir, Trans.Ed.). Ankara: Siyasal.
27. De Neve, J.E., Diener, E., Tay, L., & Xuereb, C. (2013). The objective benefits of subjective well-being. In Helliwell, J., Layard, R., & Sachs, J. (Eds.), World Happiness Report 2013. New York: UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
28. Demir, R., Türkmen, E., & Doğan, A. (2015). Akademisyenlerin tükenmişlik düzeylerinin demografik değişkenler açısından incelenmesi [Examination of burnout level of academics in terms of demographic variables]. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 1(4), 986–1008.
29. Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N.K.Denzin & Y.S.Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (Third Ed). USA: Sage. https://doi.org/10.1108/17465640610666642
30. Derinbay, D. (2012). Öğretim elemanlarının iş doyumları ile mesleki tükenmişliklerinin incelenmesi (Pamukkale Üniversitesi örneği) [Examining the job satisfaction and professional burnout of academics (sample of Pamukkale University)]. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 7(3), 910–929.
31. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542–575. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118339893.wbeccp518
32. Diener, E. (2009). The science of well-being. In E. Diener (Ed.), the Science of Well-Being: The Collected Works of Ed Diener. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2350-6
33. Diener, E., & Kesebir, P. (2008). In pursuit of happiness: Empirical answers to philosophical questions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(2), 117–125.
34. Diener, E., & Ryan, K. (2009). Subjective well-being: a general overview. South African Journal of Psychology, 39(4), 391–406.
35. Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(4), 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
36. Diener, E., Suh, E.M., Lucas, R.E., & Smith, H.L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276
37. Doğan, T., & Eryılmaz, A. (2012). Akademisyenlerde işle ilgili temel ihtiyaç doyumu ve öznel iyi oluş [Work-related basic need satisfaction and subjective well-being among academicians]. Ege Academic Review, 12(3), 383–389.
38. Dost, M.T., & Cenkseven, F. (2008). Öğretim elemanlarının sosyodemografik değişkenlere ve üniversitelerini değerlendirmelerine göre iş doyumları [Faculty Members’ Job Satisfaction According to Socio‐Demographic Variables and Their Views on Circumstances of Their Respective Universities]. Education and Science, 33(148), 28–39.
39. Erdil, O., & Ertosun, Ö.G. (2011). The relationship between social climate and loneliness in the workplace and effects on employee well-being. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 505–525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.09.091
40. Fadlelmula, F.K. (2014). Akademisyenlerin tükenmişlik düzeyleri [Academicians’ burnout levels]. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Faculty of Education, 33(2), 424–438. https://doi.org/10.7822/omuefd.33.2.7
41. Fowler, J.H., & Christakis, N.A. (2009). Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: Longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham Heart Study. BMJ (Online), 338(7685), 23–26. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a2338
42. Gezer, E., Yenel, F., & Şahan, H. (2009). Öğretim elemanlarının tükenmişlik düzeyleri̇ ile sosyodemografi̇k değişkenleri̇ arasındaki ilişki̇ [Relationship between burnout level and socio-democraphic variables of academicians]. The Journal of International Social Research, 2(6), 243–250.
43. Ghorpade, J., Lackritz, J., & Singh, G. (2007). Burnout and personality: Evidence from academia. Journal of Career Assessment, 15(2), 240–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072706298156
44. Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
45. Huppert, F.A., & So, T.T.C. (2013). Flourishing across Europe: application of a new conceptual framework for defining well-being. Social Indicators Research, 110(3), 837–861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9966-7
46. İraz, R., & Ganiyusufoglu, A. (2011). Örgütlerde mesleki tükenmişlik ve akademisyenler üzerinde bir uygulama [An Application on Professional Burnout in Organizations and Academics]. The Journal of Social Economic Research, 11(21), 452–472.
47. Karakaya, H. (2015). İşe tutkunluk ve okul iklimi arasındaki ilişkinin bazı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi [The analysis of the relationship between work engagement and school climate in terms of some variables]. Master’s thesis, Zirve University. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.04.023
48. Kern, M.L., Waters, L.E., Adler, A., & White, M.A. (2015). A multidimensional approach to measuring well-being in students: Application of the PERMA framework. Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(3), 262–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2014.936962
49. Kessler, R.C., & J.D. McLeod (1985). Social support and mental health in community samples. In Social support and health. San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press
50. Khaw, D., & Kern, M.L. (2015). A cross-cultural comparison of the PERMA model of well-being. Undergraduate Journal of Psychology at Berkeley, 8, 10–23. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
51. Kinman, G., Jones, F., & Kinman, R. (2006). The well-being of the UK academy, 1998-2004. Quality in Higher Education, 12(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320600685081
52. Koç, M., & Keklik, İ. (2020). Predicting psychological well-being levels of research assistants working at Hacettepe University. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 35(1), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2018045370
53. Kutanis, R.Ö., & Karakiraz, A. (2013). Akademisyenlerde tükenmişliğin Kopenhag Tükenmişlik Envanteri (CBI) ile ölçülmesi: Bir devlet üniversitesi örneği [Measuring burnout level of academicians using Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI): The case of a state university]. The Journal of Business Science, 1(2), 13–30. https://doi.org/10.22139/IBD.66609
54. Lackritz, J.R. (2004). Exploring burnout among university faculty: Incidence, performance, and demographic issues. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(7), 713–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2004.07.002
55. Lee, R.T., & Ashforth, B.E. (1993). A further examination of managerial burnout: Toward an integrated model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14(1), 3-20.
56. Lent, R.W. (2004). Toward a unifying theoretical and practical perspective on well-being and psychosocial adjustment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(4), 482–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.51.4.482
57. Lucas, R.E., Clark, A.E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2003). Reexamining adaptation and the set point model of happiness: reactions to changes in marital status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), 527–539. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.527
58. McCallum, A.M. (2008). The role of faculty well-being in community college teaching effectiveness. Doctorate dissertation, University of Kansas.
59. McGregor, I., & Little, B.R. (1998). Personal projects, happiness, and meaning: On doing well and being yourself. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 494–512. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.74.2.494
60. Mellor, D., Stokes, M., Firth, L., Hayashi, Y., & Cummins, R. (2008). Need for belonging, relationship satisfaction, loneliness, and life satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(3), 213–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.03.020
61. Merriam, S.B. (2018). Nitel araştırma: Desen ve uygulama için bir rehber. Ankara: Nobel.
62. Oishi, S., Graham, J., Kesebir, S., & Galinha, I.C. (2013). Concepts of happiness across time and cultures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(5), 559–577. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213480042
63. Patton, M.Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th Ed.). USA: Sage.
64. Ryan, J., Curtis, R., Olds, T., Edney, S., Vandelanotte, C., Plotnikoff, R., & Maher, C. (2019). Psychometric properties of the PERMA Profiler for measuring wellbeing in Australian adults. PLoS ONE, 14(12), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225932
65. Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudemonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, (52), 141–166. https://doi.org/0066-4308/01/0201-0141$14.00
66. Ryff, C.D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081.
67. Ryff, C.D. & Keyes, L.M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of personality and social psychology, 69(4), 719–727. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719
68. Seligman, M.E.P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York, NY: Free Press. https://doi.org/9781439190753
69. Seligman, M.E.P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8_18
70. Shapiro, A., & Keyes, C.L.M. (2008). Marital status and social well-being: Are the married always better off? Social Indicators Research, 88(2), 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-007-9194-3
71. Shin, D.C., & Johnson, D.M. (1978). Avowed happiness as an overall assessment of the quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 5(1–4), 475–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00352944
72. Steptoe, A., & Wardle, J. (2011). Positive affect measured using ecological momentary assessment and survival in older men and women. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(45), 18244–18248. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1110892108
73. Stroebe, M., & Schut, H. (2015). Family matters in bereavement. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 873–879. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615598517
74. Walker, C.J., & Hale, N. (1999). Faculty well-being and vitality. In R. Menges (Ed.), Faculty in new jobs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
75. Waterman, A.S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(4), 678–691. https://doi.org/10.1177/004947550203200224
76. Winefield, H.R., Boyd, C., & Winefield, A.H. (2014). Work-family conflict and well-being in university employees. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 148(6), 683–697. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2013.822343
77. Wright, S.L. (2005). Organizational climate, social support, and loneliness in the workplace. The Effect of Affect in Organizational Settings. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1746-9791(05)01106-5
78. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences] (11th Ed.). Ankara: Seçkin.
79. Yılmaz, E. (2008). Organizational commitment and loneliness and life satisfaction levels of school principals. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 36(8), 1085–1096. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2008.36.8.1085
80. Yücel, G.F. (2006). Öğretmenlerde mesleki tükenmişlik ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı [Burnout and organizational citizenship behaviour of teachers]. Master’s thesis, Afyon Kocatepe University.