Müzakereci öğretim yaklaşımına ilişkin bir derleme

Year 2021, , 821 - 840, 30.12.2021

Meltem Yalın Uçar , Melek Dönmez Yapucuoğlu

https://doi.org/10.30900/kafkasegt.955309

Abstract

Bu çalışma, müzakereci yaklaşımın tanımını, tarihsel gelişimini, müzakereci demokrasi ve müzakereci pedagoji uygulamaları ile yükseköğretim ve öğretmen yetiştirme süreçlerindeki uygulamalarını betimlemiştir. Müzakere ve müzakereci yaklaşımlar, siyasetten ekonomiye, eğitimden pazarlamaya kadar birçok alanda uygulanmıştır. Müzakere, farklı bakış açıları arasında fikir alışverişi olan tartışma ve diyaloglardan farklı olarak, alternatiflerin derinlemesine düşünülmesi ve nihayetinde seçimler yapılması yoluyla zor olan değişimlerle yüzleşmeyi sağlamaktadır. Grup içerisinde gerçekleşen tartışmalar sonucunda yapılan bireysel seçimler, biliş ötesi ile birlikte duyuşsal davranışların da gelişmesine katkı sağlamaktadır. Müzakareci yaklaşım, özelde bireysel farkındalığa, genelde toplumsal uzlaşıya hizmet etmektedir. Aynı şekilde müzakereci yaklaşım, küreselleşmenin ve pandeminin etkisiyle her düzeydeki eğitim talepleri ve sürecin yeniden ele alınması, evrensel perspektifi öncellemesi, çok kültürlülüğe, çok dilliliğe, farklı görüş ve yaklaşımlara toleranslı olmayı gerektirmesi ve son çeyrek yüzyılda sosyal-duygusal öğrenmeye hizmet etmesi açısından diğer öğretim yaklaşımlarından ayrışarak özgünlüğünü ortaya koymaktadır. Dolayısıyla müzakereci demokrasi sürecinde, vatandaşlar belirli konu veya kararları müzakere ederken, konular hakkında daha fazla bilgi sahibi olmayı, karşıt görüşlere saygı duymayı ve daha fazla kamusal argümanlar kullanmayı sağlamaktadır. Özellikle, öğretmen eğitimi sürecinde kullanılması sonucunda oluşan çarpan etkisinin, toplumsal yapılanmaya olumlu etkileri olacağı düşünülen müzakereci öğretim yaklaşımı, bu çalışmada kuramsal olarak yapılandırılmaya çalışılmıştır. Bu süreç, doküman incelemesi ile gerçekleştirilmiş olup, nitel betimsel analiz yöntemi kullanılmış ve yedi ayrı tema elde edilmiştir. Bu temalar; tarihsel gelişim çerçevesinde müzakereci yaklaşım, müzakere, müzakereci demokrasi, müzakereci pedagoji, müzakereci eğitim programları, yükseköğretimde müzakereci yaklaşım ve öğretmen eğitiminde müzakereci yaklaşım olarak ifade edilmiştir. Literatür taraması sonucunda, müzakereci öğretim yaklaşımının, formal öğrenme ortamlarında etkili olarak kullanılabildiği, demokratik perspektife sahip bireylerin yetiştirilmesine ve demokratik toplum oluşumu sürecinde etkili olarak kullanılabileceği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

Müzakere, müzakereci öğretim yaklaşımı, müzakereci demokrasi, müzakereci pedagoji

A review of the deliberative teaching approach

Abstract

This study describes the definition of the deliberative approach, its historical development, the practices of deliberative democracy and deliberative pedagogy, its applications in higher education and teacher training processes. Deliberation and deliberative approaches have been applied in many fields from politics to economics, from education to marketing. Unlike discussion and dialogue, which exchanges ideas between different perspectives, negotiation enables confrontation with difficult changes through reflection on alternatives and ultimately making choices. Individual choices made as a result of discussions within the group serve to develop affective behaviors as well as metacognition. The deliberative approach also serves individual awareness in particular and social consensus in general. The deliberative approach differs from other teaching approaches in terms of reconsidering education demands and processes at all levels with the effect of globalization and pandemic, prioritizing the universal perspective, requiring multiculturalism, multilingualism, tolerance to different views and approaches, and serving social-emotional learning. Further, the fact that it was prioritized in the last quarter century reveals its originality. Therefore, in the deliberative democracy process, while citizens are negotiating certain issues or decisions, it provides to have more information about the issues, to respect opposing views and to use more public arguments. Especially, the deliberative teaching approach, which is thought to have positive effects on the social structuring of the multiplier effect and formed as a result of its use in the teacher education process, has been tried to be structured theoretically in this study. This study was carried out with the literature review method and the themes obtained as a result of the qualitative descriptive method were expressed as the deliberative approach, deliberation, deliberative democracy, deliberative pedagogy, deliberative curriculum, deliberative approach in higher education and deliberative approach in teacher education and deliberative teaching approach within the framework of historical development. As a result of the literature review, it has been concluded that the deliberative teaching approach can be used effectively in formal learning environments and can be used effectively in the process of raising individuals with a democratic perspective and in the process of democratic society formation.

Keywords

Müzakere, Müzakereci öğretim yaklaşımı, Müzakereci demokrasi, Müzakereci pedagoji.

References

• Al-Hadi, T. M. (2015). Using a deliberation-based strategy to enhance the EFL pre-master candidates’ 21st century learning skills. CDELT Occasional Papers in the Development of English Education, 60(2), 7-30.
• Ali, D., Hinds, T. L., King, S., Lindaman, K., Marsh, B. ve Oeth, E. P. (2020). Deliberation and democratic practice: A student affairs approach. J. Easton (Eds.), Higher Education Exchange: Democracy Divided içinde (s. 33-50). Kettering Foundation.
• Altınkök, S. (2015). Müzakereci demokrasi ve uygulama yöntemi olarak "vatandaş jürileri" yaklaşımı. Journal of Judgments by the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes/Uyusmazlik Mahkemesi Dergisi, 6, 1-39.
• Apple, M. W. (2008). Is deliberative democracy enough in teacher education?. M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser. D. J. McIntyre ve K. E. Demers (Eds), Handbook of Research on Teacher Education: Enduring Questions in Changing Contexts içinde (ss.105-110). New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
• Aras, S. V. ve Sözen, S. (2012). Türkiye, Finlandiya ve Güney Kore’de öğretmen yetiştirme programlarının incelenmesi. Çevrimiçi kongrede sunulan bildiri, Niğde. https://www.academia.edu/5006218/T%C3%BCrkiye_Finlandiya_ve_G%C3%BCney_Korede_%C3%96%C4%9Fretmen_Yeti%C5%9Ftirme_Programlar%C4%B1n%C4%B1n_%C4%B0ncelenmesi adresinden 04.03.2021 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
• Arneback, E. ve Englund, T. (2020). Teachers’ deliberation on communicative potentials in classrooms when students express racism. Reflective Practice, 21(1), 28-40.
• Banks, J. A. (2001). Citizenship education and diversity: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 5-16.
• Bayram, A. K. (2016). Topluluk, iktidar ilişkileri, birey ve müzakereci demokrasi. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, 16(62), 111-120.
• Biesta, G. (2013). Receiving the gift of teaching: From ‘learning from’to ‘being taught by’. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 32(5), 449-461.
• Bogaards, M. ve Deutsch, F. (2015). Deliberation by, with, and for University Students. Journal of Political Science Education, 11(2), 221-232.
• Bohman, J. (1997). Deliberative democracy and effective social freedoom: Capabilities, resources and opportunities. J. Bohman and W. Regh (Eds), Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics içinde (ss. 349-382). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
• Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2).
• Brookfield, S. ve Preskill, S. (2005). Discussion as a way of teaching: tools and techniques for democratic classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Conover, P. J., Searing, D. D. Ve Crewe, I. M. (2002). The deliberative potential of political discussion. British Journal of Political Science 32, 21-62.
• Carcasson, M. (2013). Rethinking civic engagement on campus: The overarching potential of deliberative practice. Higher Education Exchange, 37-48.
• Chwalisz, C. (2019). A new wave of deliberative democracy. Carnegie Europe, 26, 1-6.
• Cornwall, A. ve Gaventa, J. (2000). From users and choosers to makers and shapers repositioning participation in social policy. IDS Bulletin, 31(4), 50-62.
• Dewey, J. (1957). Reconstruction in philosophy. Newyork: Henry Holt and Company.
• Doherty, J. (2012). Deliberative pedagogy: An education that matters. Connections, 24-27. Erişim adresi: https://www.kettering.org/content/deliberative-pedagogy-education-matters Doytcheva, M. (2009). Çokkültürlülük. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Drury, S. A. M. (2015). Deliberation as communication instruction: A study of a climate change deliberation in an introductory biology course. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 26(4), 51-72.
• Drury, S. A. M., Brammer, L. R. ve Doherty, J. (2013). Learning outcomes of deliberative pedagogy. Working paper for the Kettering Foundation’s Deliberative Pedagogy Research Exchange.
• Drury, S. A. M. Andre, D., Goddard, S. ve Wentzel, J. (2016). Assessing deliberative pedagogy: Using a learning outcomes rubric to assess tradeoffs and tensions. Journal of Public Deliberation, 12(1), 1-29.
• Dryzek, J. S. (1996). Foundations for environmental political economy: The search for homo ecologicus?. New Political Economy, 1(1), 27-40. Eisner, E. (1984). No easy answers: Joseph Schwab’s contributions to curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 14(2), 201–210.
• Elster, J. (1998) "Introduction". In Elster, J. (ed.) Deliberative Democracy (p. 1-18). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Englund, T. (2015). Toward a deliberative curriculum?. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2015(1), 48-56.
• Englund, T. (2016). On moral education through deliberative communication. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48(1), 58-76.
• Erat, V. ve Kaçer, F. (2014). Siyasal yapım sürecinde müzakereci yaklaşımlar. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1(4), 57-75.
• Erdoğan, M. (2012). Müzakereci demokrasi ve sınırları. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(22), 25-43.
• Fisher, R., Ury, W. ve Patton, B. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. NewYork: Penguin Books.
• Fishkin, J. S. (1996). The televised deliberative poll: An experiment in democracy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 546, 132-140.
• Forster, N. (1994). The analysis of company documentation. Qualitative methods in organizational research, a practical guide (p. 147-166). SAGE Publications.
• Gastil, J. (2008). Political communication and deliberation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc
• Gastil, J. ve Keith, W. M. (2005). A nation that (sometimes) likes to talk. J. Gastil ve P. Levine (Eds.), The Deliberative Democracy Handbook-Strategies For Effective Civic Engagement İn The 21st Century içinde (ss.3-19). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Gutmann, A. ve Thompson, D. F. (2004). Why deliberative democracy?. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
• Güneş, F. (2016). Öğretmen Yetiştirme Yaklaşım ve Modelleri. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(3),413-435.
• Habermas, J. (1984) The theory of communicative action. Volume I: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press,
• Habermas, J. (1990) Moral consciousness and communicative action translated by Lenhardt, C. and Weber Nicholson, S.. Oxford: Polity Press
• Hargroves, C. ve Desha, C. (2015). 'The Deliberative and Dynamic model for engineering education curriculum renewal'. Australia, In World Congress on Engineering Education 2014.
• Harriger, K. J. ve McMillan, J. J. (2007). Speaking of politics: preparing college students for democratic citizenship through deliberative dialgoue. Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation Press.
• Hess, D. E. (2009). Controversy in the classroom: The democratic power of discussion. New York: Routledge.
• Hess, D. ve Gatti, L. (2010). Putting politics where it belongs: In the classroom. New Directions for Higher Education,152, 19-26.
• Johnson, M., Partlo, M., Hullender, T., Akanwa, E., Burke, H., Todd, J. ve Alwood, C. (2014). Public Deliberation as a Teaching Andragogy: Implications for Adult Student Learning from a Doctoral Higher Education Policy Course. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 14(1), 95-108.
• Kadlec, A. ve Friedman, W. (2010). Thirty-five years of working on public judgment at public agenda. D. Yankelovich ve W. Friedman (Eds.), Toward Wiser Public Judgment içinde (ss. 73-109). Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
• Kandlbinder, P. (2007). The challenge of deliberation for academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 12(1), 55-59.
• Kanra, B. (2012). Binary deliberation: The role of social learning in divided societies. Journal of Public Deliberation, 8(1), 1-24.
• Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
• Kies, R. (2010). Deliberative democracy: Origins, meaning, and major controversies. R. Kies (Eds), Promises and Limits of Web-Deliberation içinde (ss. 7-38). New York: A Macmillan Company.
• Latimer, C. ve Hempson, K. M. (2012). Using deliberation in the classroom: A teaching pedagogy to enhance student knowledge, opinion formation, and civic engagement. Journal of Political Science Education, 8(4), 372-388.
• Longo, N. V. (2013). Deliberative pedagogy in the community: Connecting deliberative dialogue, community engagement, and democratic education. Journal of Public Deliberation, 9(2), 1-18.
• Makaiau, A. S. ve Tanaka, N. (2018). Philosophy for Children: A Deliberative Pedagogy for Teaching Social Studies in Japan and the USA. Journal of International Social Studies, 8(2), 29-54.
• Manin, B. (2001). On legitimacy and political deliberation. In R. Blaug ve J. Schwarzmantel (Eds), Democracy: A Reader (ss. 501-508), Edinburgh: Columbia University Press.
• Manosevitch, I. (2019). Deliberative pedagogy in a conflicted society: cultivating deliberative attitudes among Israeli college students. Higher Education, 78(4), 745-760.
• Mathews, D. (2012). Foreword. D. W. Barker, N. McAfee ve W. McIvor David (Eds.), Democratizing Deliberation: A Political Theory Anthology içinde (ss. 7-11). Dayton: Kettering Foundation Press.
• Mathews, D. (2014). The ecology of democracy: Finding ways to have a stronger hand in shaping our future. Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation Press.
• Maurissen, L., Claes, E. ve Barber, C. (2018). Deliberation in citizenship education: how the school context contributes to the development of an open classroom climate. Social Psychology of Education, 21(4), 951-972.
• McDevitt, M. ve Kiousis, S. (2006). Deliberative learning: An evaluative approach to interactive civic education. Communication education, 55(3), 247-264.
• Molnar-Main, S. (2017). Review of Democracy, Deliberation and Education by Robert Asen (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
• Nelson-Hurwitz, D. C. ve Buchthal, O. V. (2019). Using deliberative pedagogy as a tool for critical thinking and career preparation among undergraduate public health students. Frontiers in public health, 7(37), 1-8.
• Null, W. (2011). Curriculum: From theory to practice. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publıshers, Inc.
• Odabaşı, P. (2000). Satışta ve pazarlamada müşteri ilişkileri yönetimi. İstanbul: Sistem Yayıncılık.
• OECD. (2017). Recommendation of the council on open government. Paris: OECD. Erişim adresi: https://www.oecd.org/gov/Recommendation-Open-Government-Approved-Council141217.pdf
• Olivos, E. M. (2010). Public deliberation and civic engagement on issues of diversity in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(3), 61-74.
• Ozanne, J. L., Corus, C. ve Saatcioglu, B. (2009). The philosophy and methods of deliberative democracy: Implications for public policy and marketing. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 28(1), 159-184.
• Pennnington, M. (2010). Democracy and the deliberative conceit. Critical Review, 22(2), 159-184.
• Pimbert, M. ve Wakeford, T. (2001). Overview: Deliberative democracy and citizen empowerment. PLA Notes, 40, 23-28.
• Reeves, M. L. (2019). Teaching through deliberation. (Unpublished masters thesis). Kansan State University, Kansas.
• Reid, L., Macleod, A., Byers, D., Delva, D., Fedak, T., Mann, K., ... ve Simpson, C. (2012). Deliberative curriculum inquiry for integration in an MD curriculum: Dalhousie University's curriculum renewal process. Medical teacher, 34(12), 785-793.
• Shaffer, T. J. (2014). Deliberation in and through higher education. Journal of Public Deliberation, 10(1), 1-5.
• Shaffer, T. J. (2017). Deliberative pedagogy: What does it mean to educate for citizenship in a democracy?. Kettering Foundation. Erişim adresi: https://www.kettering.org/blogs/deliberative-pedagogy-what-does-it-mean
• Shaffer, T. J., Longo, N. V., Manosevitch, I. ve Thomas, M. S. (2017). Deliberative Pedagogy: Teaching and Learning for Democratic Engagement. East Lansing: MSU Press.
• Sheeler, K. H. Weiss, A. ve D'Souza, R. A. (2015). Communication and citizenship: Reflections on classroom practice. Journal of Public Deliberation, 11(2), 1-8.
• Simmie, M. G. ve Lang, M. (2018). Deliberative teacher education beyond boundaries: discursive practices for eliciting gender awareness, Teachers and Teaching, 24(2), 135-150.
• Sokoloff, H., Dillon, D. ve Dineen, P. (2016). Debate, discussion, deliberative dialogue. National Issues Forums. Erişim Adresi: https://cdn.naaee.org/sites/default/files/1._comparing_debate_discussion_and_deliberation.pdf
• Stitzlein, S. M. (2010). Deliberative democracy in teacher education. Journal of Public Deliberation, 6(1), 1-18.
• Thomas, N. L. ve Hartley, M. (2010). Higher education’s democratic imperative. New Directions for Higher Education, 152, 99-107.
• Thompson, D. F. (2008). Deliberative democratic theory and empirical political science. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 497-520.
• Türkiye Yeterlikler Çerçevesi (2020). Erişim adresi: https://www.myk.gov.tr/index.php/tr/turkiye-yeterlilikler-cercevesi
• Wach, E. ve Ward, R. (2013). Learning about qualitative document analysis. IDS Practice Paper in Brief, 1(13), 1-10.
• Waghid, Y. (2009). Universities and public goods: In defence of democratic deliberation, compassionate imagining and cosmopolitan. E. Justice Blitzer (Eds.), Higher Education in South Africa içinde (ss. 71-83.), Stellenbosch: Sun Press.
• Wood, D. R., DeMulder, E. K. ve Stribling, S. M. (2011). Teacher Development as Deliberative Democratic Practice: A Precursor to Educating for Democratic Citizenship. Factis Pax, 5(2), 125-257.
• Yeşiladalı, B. (2007). Çatışma çözme. Genç çevreciler eğitim programı. Bölgesel Çevre Merkezi REC Türkiye, 20-25 Ağustos, Ankara. Erişim adresi: https://docplayer.biz.tr/9105713-Catisma-cozme-genc-cevreciler-egitim-programi.html
• Yetim, A. A. ve Göktaş, Z. (2004). Öğretmenin mesleki ve kişisel nitelikleri. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 12(2), 5541-550.
• Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2008). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Yılseli, H. (2020). Satış elemanlarının satış müzakere becerilerinin algılanan satış performansı üzerindeki etkileri (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi/ Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Bursa.
• Young, I. M. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Yükseköğretim Kurulu (YÖK). (2018). Öğretmen Yetiştirme Lisans Programları. Erişim adresi: https://www.yok.gov.tr/Documents/Kurumsal/egitim_ogretim_dairesi/YeniOgretmen-Yetistirme-Lisans Programlari/AA_Sunus_%20Onsoz_Uygulama_Yonergesi.pdf
• Zaleski, M. (2016). Deliberation across the curriculum. International Debate Education Association. Erişim adresi: http://idebate.org/magazine/files/Magazine43723acc686c7.pdf
• Zeichner, K. M. ve Liston, D.P. (1990). Traditions of reform in U.S. teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(2), 3-20.