Competition in Public Education from School Administrators’ Perspective: A Qualitative Study on Public Schools in Türkiye

Yıl 2024, , 10 - 23, 30.06.2024

Aydin Balyer , Arslan Bayram

https://doi.org/10.25233/ijlel.1381304

Öz

The aim of this qualitative study is to determine how public school administrators experience competition in public education. The research was conducted with a phenomenological design. The study group of the research consists of 25 public school administrators working in Istanbul province in Turkey. The data were collected through semi-structured interviews, and the data were analyzed with content analysis method. The research results revealed that public school administrators experience competition as a situation that harms public education in general. School administrators have an opinion that conditions of competition are not equal, and inflated grades in private schools lead to an advantage to private school students. Based on the results of the research, it is recommended that public education should be supported more as it is a basic human right.

Anahtar Kelimeler

public education, private schools, school administrators, Competition, privatization

Kaynakça

• Aksoy, N. (2011). Türkiye kamu eğitiminde gizli ticarileşme: kurumsal sosyal sorumluluğun işleyiş biçimleri ve eğitimi ticarileştirme işlevi. Eğitim Bilim Toplum Dergisi, 9(25), 8-27.
• Akhmetova, D. (1997). Anyone can become unique. Russian Education & Society, 39(19, 84-92. http://dx.doi.0.2753/RES1060-9393390184
• Bagley, C. (2006). School choice and competition: A public-market in education revisited. Oxford Review of Education, 32(3), 347-362.
• Başkale, H. (2016). Nitel araştırmalarda geçerlik, güvenirlik ve örneklem büyüklüğünün belirlenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 9(1), 23-28.
• Bayram, A. (2018). The reflection of neoliberal economic policies on education: Privatization of education in Turkey. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(2), 341 - 347. http://dx.doi.10.12973/eu-jer.7.2.341
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç, E., Akgün, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2020). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Creswell, J. W. (2012). Eğitim araştırmaları; Nicel ve nitel araştırmanın planlanması, yürütülmesi ve değerlendirilmesi. İstanbul: EDAM.
• Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. N. York: Sage publications.
• Couch, J. F., William, F. S. & Williams, A. L. (1993). Private school enrollment and public school performance. Public Choice, 76(4), 301-312.
• Dikkaya, M. & Özyakışır, D. (2006). Küreselleşme ve bilgi toplumu: Eğitimin küreselleşmesi ve neo-liberal politikaların etkileri. Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, 3(9), 155-176.
• Eğitim-Sen (2023). Eğitimde ticarileşme. Eğitim-sen Yayınları.
• Fuat, E. (2006). Neo-liberal eğitim politikalarının anatomisi için. alternatif bir çerçeve, Toplum ve Hekim, 14(4), 251-261.
• Falabella, A. (2013). Accountability policy effects within school markets a study in three chılean municipalities. (Doktoral Thesis Instıtute of Education University of London).
• Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research. NewYork: Sage.
• Friedman, D. (2008), Piyasa, Devlet, Eğitim. Liberal Düşünce,49, 1-39.
• Harrison, J., & Rouse, P. (2014). Competition and public high school performance. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 48(1), 10-19.
• Hoxby, M.C. (2000). Does competition among public schools benefit students and taxpayers?. The American Economic Review, 90(5), 1209-1238.
• Karasar, N. (2021). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Nobel Dağıtım.
• Kishan, R. (2008). Privatization of education. New Delhi: Aph Publishing Corporation.
• Le Fevre, D. M. (2014). Barriers to implementing pedagogical change: The role of teachers’ perceptions of risk. Teaching and Teacher Education, 38, 56-64.
• Lincoln, S. Y., & Guba, E. G. (19859. Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Misra, K., Grimes, P.W., & Rogers, K. E. (2012). Does competition improve public school efficiency? A spatial analysis. Economics of Education Review, 31(6), 1177-1190.
• Öztürk, H. (2015). Nitel ve nicel araştırma nedir? Aralarındaki farklar nelerdir? Retrieved from https://haldunozturk.com/nitel-ve-nicel-arastirma-nedir-aralarindaki-farklar-nelerdir/ February, 27, 2022.
• Rizvi, F. 2016. Privatization in education: Trends and consequences. Education Research and Foresight Series, No. 18. Paris, UNESCO. https://en.unesco.org/node/262287
• Şahin, İ. (2007). Türkiye eğitim sisteminde değişim. Eğitim Bilim Toplum Dergisi, 5(20), 30-51.
• Tayyar A., Çetin, B. (2013). Liberal iktisadi düşüncede devlet, C.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 14(1), 107-120.
• Thapa, A. (2013). Does private school competition improve public school performance? The case of Nepal. International Journal of Educational Development, 33(4), 358-366.
• Toch, T. (2000). Improving performance: Competition in American public education. National Alliance of Business, Inc., Washington, DC.
• Uçkaç, A. (2010). Türkiye’de neoliberal ekonomi politikaları ve sosyo-ekonomik yansımaları. Maliye Dergisi, 158, 422-430.
• Urquiola, M. (2016). Competition among schools: Traditional public and private schools. In Handbook of the Economics of Education (Eds. Kirsten Shankland ). Elsevier B.V.
• Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2022). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Yolcu, H. (2013). The Education Agenda of Turkey: Marketing Education in the Context of Neo-liberal Policies. Routhledge.