COMMUNITY SERVICE LEARNING FROM THE ADMINISTRATORS' POINTS OF VIEW

Öz

Abstract The aim of this study is to evaluate the community service learning (CSL) appearing in teacher training curriculum in terms of the opinions of the governmental agency and non-governmental organization (NGO) administrators. The sample group consisted of nine administrators from six institutes. Semi-structured interview technique was used in the study. Interviews lasted about 30-35 minutes and were recorded by the use of tape recorder and then were analyzed. Descriptive analysis approach was used in the analysis of the opinions of the administrators. Followings are results of administrator opinions: (1) CSL had positive effects on application institutes. (2) Some problems exist in CSL application because of; ineffective relationship between instructors and institutions, inadequate knowledge of instructors and implication differences among different groups. (3) The problems, related on CSL application, especially centre on planning, coordination, students' not being acquainted with institutes, and inadequate preparation. (4) Relationship between university and institutes was not desired level due to bureaucracy, miscommunication between universities and institutes, and insufficient support of university for students.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• -

KURUM YÖNETİCİLERİNİN BAKIŞ AÇISIYLA TOPLUMA HİZMET UYGULAMALARI

Öz

Öz Bu araştırmada resmi kurum ve sivil toplum kuruluşu yöneticilerinin Topluma Hizmet Uygulamalarına (THU) ilişkin görüşleri incelenmiştir. Araştırmanın çalışma grubu altı kurumdaki dokuz yöneticiden oluşmaktadır. Çalışmada yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme tekniği kullanılmıştır. Görüşmeler ortalama 30-35 dakika sürmüş ve kayıt cihazına kaydedilerek analizi yapılmıştır. Yönetici görüşlerinin analizinde betimsel analiz yaklaşımı kullanılmıştır. Analizi sonucunda başlıca şu sonuçlara ulaşılmıştır: (1) THU uygulamaya gidilen kurumlar açısından olumlu sonuçlar doğurmuştur. (2) Etkin bir danışman-kurum işbirliğinin olmaması, danışmanların uygulamayı yeterince bilmemesi ve dersi işlemedeki uygulama farklılıkları nedeniyle sorunlar yaşanmaktadır. (3) Dersin uygulanması sürecinde karşılaşılan sorunlar özellikle planlama, eşgüdümleme, öğrencilerin kurumu tanımaması ve ön hazırlığının yetersiz olması gibi konularda yoğunlaşmaktadır. (4) Üniversite-kurum işbirliğinin arzu edilen düzeyde olmayışının temelinde bürokratik işlemler, kurumların amacı ve işleyişi konusundaki bilgi yetersizliği ve üniversite tarafından öğrenciye gerekli kolaylıkların sunulamaması gibi nedenler yatmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Topluma hizmet uygulamaları, yönetici, kurum, öğretmen adayı

Kaynakça

1. Anderson, J. B., Swick, K. J., & Yff, J. (Eds.). (2001). Service-learning in teacher education: Enhancing the growth of new teachers, their students, and communities. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education.
2. Astin, A. W. (1999). Promoting leadership, service, and democracy: What higher education can do. In R. G. Bringle, R. Games, and E. A. Malloy (Eds.), Colleges and Universities as citizens. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
3. Ayvacı, H. Ş. ve Akyıldız, S. (2009). Topluma hizmet uygulamaları dersinin bireye ve topluma kazandırdıkları ve toplumun beklentileri. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 184, 102-118.
4. Bailis, L. N. (2000). Taking service-learning to the next level: Emerging lessons from the national community development program. Springfield, VA: National Society for Experiential Education.
5. Basinger, N., & Bartholomew, K. (2006). Service-learning in nonprofit organizations: Motivations, expectations, and outcomes. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 13, 15-26.
6. Billig, S. H. (2004). Heads, hearts, and hands: The research on K-12 service-learning. In J. Kielsmeier, M. Neal, & M. McKinnon (Eds.), Growing to Greatness: The State of Service-Learning Project. St. Paul, MN: National Youth Leadership Council.
7. Boyle-Baise, M. (2002). Multicultural service-learning: Educating teachers in diverse communities. New York: Teachers College Press.
8. Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (1995). A service-learning curriculum for faculty. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 2, 112-122.

9. Butcher, J., Howard, P., Labone, E., Bailey, M., Smith, S. G., & Mcfadden, M. (2003). Teacher education, community service learning and student efficacy for community engagement. Asia- Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 31(2), 109-124.
10. Canadian Alliance for Community Service Learning. (2009). What is community service-learning? [Online] tarihinde ziyaret edilmiştir. 07/09/2009
11. Coşkun, H. (2009). Topluma Hizmet Uygulamaları. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
12. Damon, W., Menon, J., & Bronk, K.C. (2003). The development of purpose during adolescence. Applied Developmental Science, 7, 119–128.
13. Driscoll, A., Holland, B., Gelmon, S., & Kerrigan, S. (1996). An assessment model for service- learning: Comprehensive case studies of ımpact on faculty, students, community, and ınstitutions. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 3, 66-71.
14. Enos, S., & Morton, K. (2003). Developing a theory and practice of campus-community partnerships. In Jacoby, B., & Associates (Ed.) Service-Learning in Higher Education. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
15. Eyler, J., & Giles, D. E., Jr. (1999). Where’s the learning in service-learning? San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
16. Ferrari, J. R., and Worrall, L. (2000). Assessments by community agencies: How “the other side” sees service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 7, 35-40.
17. Grobe, T. (1990). Synthesis of existing knowledge and practice in the field of educational partnerships. Waltham, MA: Brandeis University Center for Human Resources.
18. Hatcher, J. A., & Erasmus, M. A. (2008). Service-learning in the United States and South Africa: A comparative analysis informed by John Dewey and Julius Nyerere, Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning,15(1), 49-61.
19. Hedrick, D. K. (1997). Community agency member. In R. C. Wade (Ed.) Community Service- Learning : A Guide to Including Service in the Public School Curriculum NY: State University of New York Press.
20. Jacoby, B. (2003). Fundamentals of service-learning partnerships. In Jacoby, B., & Associates (Ed.) Service-Learning in Higher Education. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
21. Jacoby, B. (Ed.). (1996). Service-learning in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
22. Jones, S. R. (2003). Principles and profiles of exemplary partnerships with community agencies. In B. Jacoby & Associates (Eds.), Building partnerships for servicelearning. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
23. Kalof, L., Dan, A., & Dietz, T. (2008). Essentials of social research. Berkshire, England: Open University.
24. Kamer, S. T. (2009). Topluma hizmet uygulamalarının tanımı, ilkeleri, önemi ve amacı. K. Kuzucu ve S. T. Kamer (Ed.) Topluma Hizmet Uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
25. Lazarus, J., Erasmus, M., Hendricks, D., Nduna, J., & Slamat, J. (2008). Embedding Community engagement in South African higher education. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 3(1), 57-83.
26. Merey, Z. (2009). Topluma hizmet uygulamaları kapsamında sivil toplum kuruluşları. B. Aksoy, T. Çetin ve Ö. F. Sönmez (Ed.) Topluma Hizmet Uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
27. Miron, D., & Moely, B. E. (2006). Community agency voice and benefit in service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 13, 27-37.
28. Nigro, G., & Wortham, S. (1998). Service-learning through action research. In R. G. Bringle & D. K. Duffy (Eds.) Collaborating with the Community: Psychology and Service- Learning. Washington DC: American Association for Higher Education.
29. Payne, C. A. (2000). Changes in involvement preferences as measured by the community service involvement preference inventory. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 7, 41- 45.
30. Peterson, L. (2009). A brief history of service learning in LIS. In L. Roy, K. Jensen, and A. H. Meyers. (Eds.) Service Learning: Linking Library Education and Practice. Chicago: American Library Association.
31. Sax, L. J., & Astin, A. W. (1997). The benefits of service: Evidence from undergraduates. Educational Record, 78, 25–33.
32. Seidman, A., & Tremper, C. (1994). Legal issues for service-learning programs: A community service brief. Washington, D.C.: Nonprofit Risk Management Center.
33. Sigmon, R. (1996). Anatomy of a university-community partnership. Presented at Community Partnerships in Health Professions Education: A National Conference on Service Learning. Boston.
34. Stoecker, R., & Tryon, E. A. (2009). The unheard voices: Community organizations and service learning. In R. Stoecker & E. A. Tryon (Eds.) The Unheard Voices: Community Organizations And Service Learning. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
35. Tonkin, H. (Ed.). (2004). Service-learning across cultures: Promise and achievement. New York: International Partnership for Service-learning and Leadership.
36. Torres, J. (Ed.). (2000). Benchmarks for campus/community partnerships. Providence, R.I: Campus Compact.
37. Wade, R. C. (1997). Collaboration. In R. C. Wade (Ed.) Community service-learning: A guide to Including Service in the Public School Curriculum, NY: State University of New York Press.
38. Wealthall, S., Graham, J., & Turner, C. (1998). Building, maintaining and repairing the community- campus bridge: Five years’ experience of community groups educating medical students. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 12, 289–302.
39. Wilczenski, F. L., &. Coomey, S. M. (2007). A practical guide to service learning strategies for positive development in schools. New York: Springer Science Business Media, LLC.
40. Witmer, J. T., & Anderson, C. S. (1994). How to establish a high school service learning program. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
41. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
42. YÖK. (2006). Dersler ve İçerikleri. Ankara: Yüksek Öğretim Kurulu Başkanlığı.