Okul Müdürlerinin Atanmaları Sürecinde İdari Yargı Kararları ve Öne Çıkan Değerler

Yıl 2012, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 3, 347 - 348, 01.04.2012

Engin Aslanargun

Öz

Eğitim yöneticilerinin yasal ve mesleki sorumluluğunun yanında toplumun beklentilerine karşılık verecek ahlaki sorumluluğu da bulunmaktadır. Bu kapsamda okul müdürlerinin atanmasında adalet, eşitlik, liyakat, kariyer gibi değerlere bağlı kalınması önemli ilkeler arasındadır. Yürütme gücünü elinde bulunduran Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı ile yargı gücünü kullanan idare mahkemelerinin bu noktada duyarlı ve ilkeli davranmaları toplumsal meşruiyet açısından önemlidir. Bu çalışmada, bakanlık tarafından yapılan okul müdürü atamalarına karşı idare mahkemelerinin iptal kararlarında öne çıkan değerlerin tespit edilmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Araştırmada, nitel araştırma desenlerinden ölçüt örnekleme tekniği kullanılarak sadece bu kapsama giren yargı kararları incelenmiştir. Bu doğrultuda ulaşılan toplam 191 mahkeme kararı tematik olarak incelenmiş ve sınıflandırılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, hem yürütme hem de yargı organlarının yasalara uygun hareket ettiklerini savunmalarına karşın eğitim kurumları üzerinden bir çeşit güç savaşı yaşandığı izlenimi ortaya çıkmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

okul müdürü , değerler , idare mahkemeleri , yetki devri

Administrative Judicial Decisions on the Process of Principals’ Appointment and Emerging Values

Öz

Background. School administration is value driven topic that depends on the emotions, cultures and human values as well as technique and structure. Principals are not only charged with legal and professional duties, but they also respond to social expectations in a manner of morality. Over the long years, educational administration throughout the world have experienced the influence of logical positivism that is rational based techniques more than philosophical consideration, ignored values and emotions in organizations for the sake of rational problem solving, effectiveness, strategic planning, but schools are value driven organizations that is aimed to train young so as to perform social responsibility in society. Schools that has no other choice than to be responsive to society and its members should be compatible with the changes around them. Principal is the agent who plays the leading role to manage changes around, motivates teachers in the school and balances the expectation of the society towards to school proactively. Leadership style and perception are the factors to guide principals while administering the schools and competing with enviroment.Leadership, in this repect, is the key that helps to analyse both how principal perceives the members and to what extend school as a whole functions within the society (Bursalıoğlu, 1992; Çelik, 2007; Greenfield & Ribbins, 2004; Hesapçıoğlu, 1998; Starratt, 2004; Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2005). The laws and instructions that arrange the administration of education in Turkey is no longer comprehensive and flexible enough to act powerfully as a result of the highly centralized system. According to legal documents, principals who supervise the teachers and evaluate the teaching-learning process with limited authority delegated from superiors are responsible for running the school in line with the laws, instructions and directives of the superiors. There is an urgent need for educational administrators to have instruction, criteria and standard convenient with the modern educational administration practice in the world. Since educational administration hasn't been institutionalized and defined as a unique branch in Turkey, schools are directed by temporary instructions. Any administrational position in educational ministry, including schools, are still fulfilled by deputies, it means any moment his administration could be ended off depending on the political or bureaucratic favoritism. On the process of principals' appointment, it is essential to be stick to principals of values such as justice, equality, merit and career. It is critical in terms of societal legitimacy for both Ministry of Education who holds the power of execution and for administrative courts that hold the power of jurisdiction to act responsive and stick to principles. Since obeying to laws in appearance does not always mean to be legitimate, institutions should also appreciate and interpret the laws so as to appeal societal and cultural expectations (Çam,1984; Günday, 2003; Gür, 2009; Karaman-Kepenekçi, 2011; Tortop, İspir ve Aykaç, 2005; Ulutaş, 2009).According to studies about school administration (Bursalıoğlu, 1992; Ekşi, 2009; Gümüşeli, 2011) there are more tendencies towards to rule based management than human relations in school administration. Principals should better give more importance and emphasize on the humanistic side of administration such as consideration, trust, empathy and sincerity while communicating with teachers rather than structure and formal side of management. Principals have thought to be in line with the ethical principles but act in reversely, that is because they have limited information about ethics in school administration (Aslanargun, 2011; Beaty,2004; Celep, 2007; Greenfield, 2004; Torlak, 2007). They are in need of ability about communication, democracy and human relation in order to build the climate of tolerance. It is alleged that principals should be trained about tolerance, fairness, equity, freedom, human rights, responsibility and authority; by the way they would be more sensitive about ethical principles. Administrative behaviors of principals in Turkey are more convenient with classical management more than the approaches in the late 2000's. They are more likely stick to rules than to guide teachers; neither the problems in schools could be dealt with the problem solving circle nor cooperation process has been applied; bureaucracies and formalities are more appreciated than meanings and values. Purpose. The purpose of this study is to determine the values that emerged as a result of the decisions of administrative courts against to principals' appointments of Ministry of National Education. Method. Qualitative method and criteria sampling have been applied since only criteria was defined as administrative court's decisions objected to principals' appointment, thus 191 decisions of administrative courts that researcher obtained analyzed thematically. Data collection and analysis go hand in hand; each newly reached document have been analyzed depending on what was discovered during the previous stage and data was interpreted with the inductive content analysis (Corbin & Straus, 2008; Snape & Spencer, 2003; Willis, 2007; Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2005). Results and Discussion. Centralized policies and laws have caused power conflict amongst the administrative and executive authorities. The policies and application that became law in the midst of last century were generally reflection of cold war philosophy that is authoritative and militaristic could no longer appeal the needs and expectations of people nowadays. Ministry of Education, as an executive authority alleged to have been authorized to appoint principals and other authorities that was stated in the laws of 657, Public Servants Law; on the other hand administrative courts, as an judicial authority, claimed that any executive power could act without restriction and constitution authorized jurisdiction to supervise the act of execution on certain basis. There have been radical change and paradigmatic transformation towards to human, administration, state, rights, science, and value driven motives have been popularized all over the world. It is also urgent for execution and jurisdiction to update their philosophy and reform legislation so as to reflect renewed humanistic consideration. Decentralization versus centralization and power struggle are the key concept around the debates. Consequently, in spite of the fact that both executive and judicial organs appeared to do their jobs the way how it stated in the laws, it seemed as power fight being performed on the basis of educational institutions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

principal , values , administrative court , delegation

Kaynakça

• Al, H. (2012). Danıştay’ın rejimle olan kan bağı, açık görüş.www. stargazetesi.com.Erişim tarihi 07.08.2012.
• Aslanargun, E. (2011).Türkiye’de okul yönetimi ve atama yönetmelikleri.e-Journal of New World Sciences Academy (NWSA), Education Sciences, 1C0466, 6(4), 2646-2659.
• Başaran, İ. E. (2000). Yönetim (3. Basım). Ankara: Feryal.
• Beaty, B.R. (2004). Feeling like a leader, the emotions of leadership. In H. Tomlinson (ed.), Educational management, major themes in education, 1 (pp. 179-207). London: Routledge.
• Bursalıoğlu, Z. (1992). Görev, yetki ve sorumluluk üzerine.Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi,25(1), 5-9.
• Bursalıoğlu, Z. (2003). Eğitim yönetiminde teori ve uygulama(7. Basım). Ankara: Pegem A.
• Can, N. ve Çelikten, M. (2000). Türkiye’de eğitim yöneticilerinin yetiştirilmesi süreci.Milli Eğitim Dergisi, (148).
• Celep, C. (2007). Okullarda bilgi yönetim kültürü geliştirmede okul yöneticilerinin rolü.Eğitime Bakış, 3(8), 15-22.
• Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research, techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory(3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
• Çam, E. (1984). Siyaset bilimi. İstanbul: Der.
• Çelik, V. (2007). Karakterin ölümü ve moral liderlik.Eğitime Bakış, 3(8), 40-43.
• Ekşi, H. (2009). İnsanın gelişim çağları ve eğitim.Eğitim Bilimleri ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Derneği, Öğretmenlik Vizyon Programı Seminer Notları, http://www.ebsad.org/ makaleler, Erişim Tarihi 18.11.2011.
• Eryılmaz, H. (2008). Hukuksal düzenlemeler ve uygulama yönünden Türkiye'de Eğitim yöneticiliği.http://www.urlaexpres.com/artikel.php?artikel, Erişim Tarihi 25.10.2011.
• Gönenç, L. (2011). Dünya’da ve Türkiye’de yüksek yargı kurulları. Anayasa Çalışma Metinleri 4, İstanbul: Türkiye Ekonomi Politikaları Araştırma Vakfı (TEPAV).
• Greenfield, T.B. (2004). Theory about organisation: a new perspective and its implication for schools.In H. Tomlinson (ed.), Educational management, major themes in education, 1 (pp. 71-94). London: Routledge.
• Greenfield, T. B., & Ribbins, P. (2004). Educational administration as a humae science, conversation between thomas greenfield and peter ribbins.In H. Tomlinson (ed.), Educational management, major themes in education, 1 (pp. 95-134). London: Routledge.
• Gümüşeli, A. İ. (2001). Çağdaş okul müdürünün liderlik alanları.Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi,(28), 531-548.
• Günday, M. (2003). İdare hukuku(8. Basım). Ankara: İmaj.
• Gür, B. (2009). Kastlaştırma.http://www.zaman.com.tr/haber.do, Erişim Tarihi, 21.09.2011.
• Hesapçıoğlu, M.(1998). Postmodern çağda eğitim yönetimi ve eğitim örgütü. İçinde M. Hesapçıoğlu ve H. Taymaz (eds.),Türkiye’de eğitim yönetimi(ss. 97- 103).Ankara: Kültür Koleji Eğitim Vakfı Yayınları.
• Karaman-Kepenekçi, Y. (2011). Educational administrators’ education in law,.Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 44(1), 1-16.
• Katılmış, A., Ekşi, H. ve Öztürk, C. (2010). Sosyal bilgiler dersi kazanımlarıyla bütünleştirilmiş bilimsellik odaklı karakter eğitimi programının etkililiği.Sosyal Bilgiler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 50-87.
• Kaya, Y. K. (1977). İnsan yetiştirme düzenimiz(2. Baskı). Ankara. Nüve.
• Resmi Gazete. (1965). Devlet Memurları Kanunu, 23.07.1965 Tarih ve 12056 Sayılı Resmi Gazete, Kanun No, 657.
• Resmi Gazete. (1982). İdari Yargılama Usulü Kanunu,20.1.1982Tarih ve 17580, Sayılı Resmi Gazete, Kanun No,2577.
• Resmi Gazete. (1992). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığının Teşkilat ve Görevleri Hakkında Kanun,12.5.1992 Tarih ve 21226 Sayılı Resmi Gazete, Kanun No, 3797.
• Resmi Gazete. (2009). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Eğitim Kurumları Yöneticilerinin Atama ve Yer Değiştirmelerine İlişkin Yönetmelik, 13.8.2009 Tarih ve 27318 Sayılı Resmi Gazete.
• Resmi Gazete. (2011a). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Eğitim Kurumları Yöneticilerinin Atama ve Yer Değiştirmelerine İlişkin Yönetmelik, 09 Ağustos 2011Tarih ve 28020 Sayılı Resmi Gazete.
• Resmi Gazete, (2011b). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığının Teşkilat ve Görevleri Hakkında Kanun Hükmünde Kararname, 14 Eylül 2011 Tarihli ve 28054 Sayılı Resmî Gazete.
• Snape, D., & Spencer, L. (2003). The foundation of qualitative research. InJ. Ritche and J. Lewis (eds.),Qualitative research practice(pp. 1-23). London: Sage.
• Starratt, R.J. (2004a). Etik liderlik.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Torlak, Ö. (2007). Yönetimde ahlak ve sorumluluklar.Eğitime Bakış, 3(8), 34-40.
• Tortop, N., İspir, E.G. ve Aykaç, B. (2005). Yönetim bilimi.Ankara: Yargı.
• Turan, S. (2009). Centralisation paradigm of tradition versus decentralisation as the imposition of modernity in Turkish Educational System. In A. Nir (ed.),Centralisation and school empowerment: from rhetoric to practice. New York: Nova Books.
• TES. (2010). Hukuk, davalar ve sonuçlar. http:www.turkegitimsen. org.tr/ haber Erişim tarihi 20.10.2011.
• Ulutaş, B. (2009). Türkiye’de idari yargı kararlarının uygulanmasındaki güçlükler.Eğitim Bilim Toplum Dergisi,7(28), 21-35.
• Willis, J. W. (2007). Foundation of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approach. USA: Sage.
• Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemler(5. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin.