Advices on Budget Models for Equality in High Schools: The Case of Turkey

Yıl 2020, Sayı: 18, 55 - 67, 24.07.2020

Ece Özdoğan Özbal Kasım Karakütük

https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.732197

Cited By: 1

Öz

The schools' budgets and the management of budgets is important for the effective maintenance of schools. School budgets are an important tool for ensuring equality within and among schools. In this study which aims to assert a suggestion on budget management model providing equity and decreasing problems, detecting different income and expense relationships in the school's budgets, the associational status of incomes and expenses of 1180 high schools in Turkey has been examined and the views of 60 school members (school principal, teacher, student, parents, school parent association member) about the budget management model have been evaluated. In the study, it was determined that there was a significant relationship between high school budgets and school-parent association budget of the school and the intangible right, movable property, maintenance and repair expenses. While high school principals define the ideal budget model as a model in which the budget is provided by the state and they have a more effective role, other school members consider the budget must be comprised of the contributions of individuals and different institutions other than the state, and different school members also participate in the budget management process in addition to the school principal.

Anahtar Kelimeler

high school, school budget, school finance, budget management, management

Kaynakça

• Augenblick, J., Myers, J., & Anderson, A. (1997). Equity and Adequacy in School Funding. The Future of Children, 7 (3), 63-78. doi:10.2307/1602446.
• Brighouse, H. (2007). Educational Justice and Socio‐Economic Segregation in Schools. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 41(4), 575-590.
• Card, D., & Payne, A. A. (2002). School finance reform, the distribution of school spending, and the distribution of student test scores. Journal of Public Economics, 83(1), 49-82.
• Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling tecniques, 3rd Edition, Wiley Press. Çınkır, Ş. (2010). Problems of primary school headteachers: problem sources and support strategies, Elementary Education Online, 9(3), 1027-1036.
• Davies, B., & Hentschke, G. C. (1994). School autonomy: Myth or reality—Developing an analytical taxonomy. Educational Management & Administration, 22(2), 96-103.
• Guthrie, J. (1997). School finance: fifty years of expansion. The Future of Children,7(3), 24-38. doi:10.2307/1602443.
• Hanushek, E. A. (2013), “Financing Schools”, in J. Hattie, and E. M. Anderman (Eds.), International guide to student achievement, New York, Routledge.
• Hough, J. R. (1993). Financial management in education, Lough Borough University. UK.
• Howell, P., & Miller, B. (1997). Sources of Funding for Schools. The Future of Children, 7 (3), 39-50. doi:10.2307/1602444.
• Ikpa, V. W. (2016). Politics, adequacy, and education funding. Education, 136 (4), 468 -472.
• Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of apartheid schooling in America. Broadway Books.
• Odden, A., (1992). Rethinking school finance: An agenda for the 1990s. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1992, p. 33.
• Odden, A., Goetz, M. E., & Picus, L. (2007). Paying for school finance adequacy with thenational average expenditure per pupil. School Finance Redesign Project, Center on Reinventing Public Education.
• Özdemir, N. (2011). A tool for primary education financing: Analysis of parent teacher association’s budget (Example of Ankara). Master thesis, Hacettepe University Institute of Social Sciences, Ankara.
• Rubenstein, R., Schwartz, A. E., Stiefel, L., & Amor, H. B. H. (2007). From districts to schools: The distribution of resources across schools in big city school districts. Economics of Education Review, 26(5), 532-545.
• Terman, D., & Behrman, R. (1997). Financing Schools: Analysis and Recommendations. The Future of Children,7(3), 4-23. doi:10.2307/1602442.
• Underwood, J. K. (1994). School finance adequacy as vertical equity. U. Mich. JL Reform, 28, 493.
• Välijärvi,J., & Malin, A. (2000). 10 The Two-Level Effect of Socio-Economic Background, Ed. Lie, S., Linnakylä, P., & Roe, A. (2000). Northern lights on PISA, 7, 1.