Education in TurkeyPolicy Recommendations

Raphaelle Desrousseaux, Stephanie Hagen, Sophia Kissa and Giulio Catanzariti

-

Content

1. Structural challenges2. Students 3. Governance4. Institutions5. Policy Recommendations

Structural Challenges: An Ever-transforming Society and Education System

In 2010: 19.5 million students - all level (primary education 10.5 million )

67 000 educational institutions 710 900 teaching personnel

99 % students in publicly managed schools (OECD 2009)

Turkey’s population is 67.803.927 of which

30% aged under 14

Turkey at a glance

GDP per province

Fertility Rate(Educational implication)

Urban Population

Private spending on education Primary to non-tertiary / Tertiary, % of GDP, 2012 Source: Education at a glance: Educational finance indicator

Public spending on education Primary to non-tertiary / Tertiary, % of GDP, 2012 Source: Education at a glance: Educational finance indicators

A comparison of Private and Public Spending on Education

Liberalization

Structural transformation of Turkish Education

Ottoman period (prior to 1923)

Modernization (1923-1950)

Democracy and turmoil (1950-1980)

Dualized and religion based

CentralizationSecularization

Literacy

DeteriorationLess investment

Dichotomies in state and

education (1980-2001)

Neoliberal transformations (2001- present)

PoliticizationNationalism

Basic Education

Reform 1997

Law Unification of Education, No.

430 in 1924.

Reform 2012

4+4+4

MarketizationLess investment

Education to building a nation-state “Turkification”

● Law of unification of the Education Tevhid-i Tedrisat Kanonu - paradigm of centralized bureaucracy

● End of traditional religious school● New Alphabet● Coeducation● Turn Madrases into University● Curriculum - from Religion to

Nationalism

“Schools are obliged to indoctrinate

loyalty to the Republican principles”

Circular issued by the Ministry of

Education on 19 December 1923

Kemalist Modernization (1923-1950)

“Neoliberal transformation” (2001- present) - Marketization ● Revision of curriculum (i.e. more Koran courses)● Privatization of school services and management● Total quality Management and performance

assessment● Abolishment law banishing religious education ● Tutoring institution dershane 1,2 mln. students

The growth of Islamic Education. Imam-Hatip schools* 77.000 students in 2001, 198.000 in 2010.

Law No. 6287(Mar. 30, 2012)İLKÖĞRETİM VE EĞİTİM KANUNU (4+4+4)

Low Investment in Education● Budget has grown

three times in 10 years.● Stable investment.● Share of investment

from 17% to 6% of MoNE budget

● Roughly 1 million student added every year

Structural Challenges ● Centralization● High Birth Rate. With raising

mandatory schooling, increased infrastructure demand (Quality vs. Quantity).

● Historical East-West divide.● Minorities and religious group

demanding education (Kurds).● Urbanisation. Entry and Exit ratios.

Historical misforecast:“As a result, 72% of total school buildings are located in

villages, however only 27% of students today live in villages.” *In Iris Rotberg (ed.) Global Education Reform: Balancing Change and Tradition, Chapter 7, Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD, 2004, pp. 153-186

Students: Inequality in all Levels of the System

A system in which inequalities start at an early age (1)● A low enrollment rate : one of the lowest among the OECD countries

A system in which inequalities start at an early age (2)● A low enrollment rate linked to the socioeconomic status● Promote a multi-sectoral approach

Secondary education : a highly selective system● A strong connection between the secondary and tertiary

education entrance and the socioeconomic status of the students

● The chance of success is more connected to the capability of

parents to pay for private tutoring

● A large disinterest over the high school curriculum

Disconnected with the labour market (1)● A necessity to improve VET to meet the new development spheres

in the economy

● To stop the loss of students at the transition points

● A “qualification” curriculum to communicate to the students the

basic expectations from the labour market

Disconnected with the labour market (2)

Governance: A Highly Centralized System

The education system is highly centralized . Decision-making is still very much central, although Turkey has delegated autonomy since 1998 (94% of decisions taken at the central level, OECD).

. Structure: MONE: curriculum, planning, teacher placement and compensationProvinces: supervision of implementation, partial authority on teacher placement and funds allocation (Village Schools initiative)School: management of facilities, teacher evaluation

. Turkey aims to change that structure, and is willing to delegate more power

In reality, autonomy is limited. Rigid guidelines or granting of autonomy on secondary matters:

2011 Interviews with district governors: “All the details are regulated by directives and circulars, which makes taking initiatives more difficult for us.”; “We are not given enough authority, we cannot take initiatives and there is an authority conflict.”; “We cannot fire those with poor performance. Legal regulations do not allow us to do so, since performance criteria are not defined. Even if such people are fired, they come back to their posts by court decision.”

Similarly at the school level, autonomy in budgetary allocation was limited to technical aspects (maintenance, equipment).

. Local needs are determined by central authorities (incl. teacher allocation)

. Additionally, responsibility at the central level is unclearly defined, exacerbating inefficienciesMONE has 6 Departments: Secondary Education; Technical Education for Girls; Technical Education for Boys; Trade

and Tourism Education; Apprenticeship and Non-formal Education; and Apprenticeship, Vocational and Technical Education Development and Expansion. School administrators and district governors describe limited capacity to act towards a better use of resources as a consequence of this organisational chart.

Could greater autonomy increase performance?The impacts of autonomy are related to the performance level of the system, and the level of development of the country.

If implemented with insufficient capacities on the ground, an increase in autonomy could increase disparities and have a negative effect on performance, especially for autonomy regarding academic content.

Turkey must first reform its teaching workforce, and develop the leadership and managerial capacities of its administrators before a delegation of authority regarding resource utilisation and personnel management can take place.

Strengths : willingness to reform education, culture of assessment, coherence with MONE objectives

Example of a successful reformer: Poland

. Before the 1999 reform, a centralized system

. Delegation of school management to local authorities with school directors as pedagogical supervision -without reducing the budgets. Longer compulsory general education, national assessment, core curriculum and national standards, reform of teachers’ education and promotion. Increase in PISA performance (avg. of 470 in 2000, and 520 in 2012), and reduction of inequalities

Institutions: No one is Happy, No one is Prepared

A Unique Professional Workforce ● Some positives:

○ Student-teacher relations amongst highest in the OECD

○ Teachers demonstrate high levels of cooperation and professional collaboration (such as team teaching)

● Turkey has the youngest professional teaching workforce in the OECD

○ 61% of primary and 76% lower secondary teachers are under the age of 40

○ 18% of teachers have only 2 years of work experience as compared to the OECD average of 8% while only 12% of teachers have 20+ years of working experience as compared to the OECD average of 36%

Teachers are Unhappy ● Teachers report below-average levels

of satisfaction ○ Teachers salaries have doubled over the

past decade yet still remain seriously under the OECD average ($25, 189 vs $33,136)

● Teaches generally dislike the system of evaluation

○ used to ensure quality in terms of compliance with central regulations rather than for student improvement

○ Few incentives in place for teachers who receive high marks on evaluations and few repercussions for those who receive low marks

○ A substantial proportion of teachers either strongly disagreed (12%) or disagreed (28%) that the appraisal and feedback was fair (TALIS average: 4.4% and 12.4% respectively)

Teachers are Unprepared ● Career development

opportunities are lacking. According to TALIS 2009:

○ 75% of all teacher reported training

in the previous 18 months (TALIS Average = 89%)

○ 83% of teachers did not receive

compensation during development training (TALIS average = 63%)

○ 43% of teachers are in schools

where the principal reports that

lack of pedagogical preparation is a

factor hindering instruction a lot or

to some extent (TALIS average = 23%)

Teachers Feel Isolated ● Large proportion of new

teachers assigned to disadvantaged schools in the East of Turkey

○ Most teachers are arriving from

the West of Turkey and have

difficulty adjusting to the culture,

language, inclement weather and being far from their families

○ There are no incentives to stay

and so most request a transfer very quickly

○ Vicious circle of inequality

Administrators are not up to the challenge ● School principals tend towards a more

administrative style of school leadership rather than an pedagogical approach

○ Spend the most of their time working on the budget and allocating it

● Disconnected from teachers ○ 75% of students attend schools whose principals

reported that poor student-teacher relations hinder learning and yet student-teacher relations are amongst the highest in the OECD

○ Almost 25% of teachers worked in schools whose school principal reported that they either never or only sometimes reported the outcome of evaluations to the teacher

● Lack of in-service training for school leaders● Little community outreach

1. Sustain urbanization to accelerate the natural downturn of population growth. Continue with national projects on sexual education. (Puberty project).

2. Raise the share of investment in MoNE budget. In order to prevent the undesirable outcomes of privatization (i.e. worsening of quality, loss of equality).

3. Provide specific resources to cope with East-West and Urban-Rural divide.

Policy Recommendations: Structural

Policy Recommendations: Students 1. Improve and increase Early Childhood Education and Care

a. Establish as a priority access to quality ECEC for all children from three to five years old with a particular attention to the children with special needs

b. Strengthen a multi-sectoral approach while recognising the strong relationship between women’s participation in the labour market and the universal access to ECEC

c. Raise the public investment to implement obligation of compulsory education for children from three to five years

2. Change the examination used from primary to secondary education and from secondary education to university; realign exams with the curriculum

a. The new examinations should be focused on students achievement and include an evaluation of competencies related to the labour market.

b. Reset the examination system to take into account the large increase of the enrollment rate in primary education. c. Raise the attention of students on their capacity to master competencies and subject matter rather than

examination preparation

3. Better prepare students to enter the job market or higher educationa. Implement a new secondary curriculum in order to prepare the students to enter into the labour market and/or

into higher educationb. Design a “qualification” framework to implement the basic expectations regarding skills, knowledges and

competencies to enter into the labour marketc. Raise the involvement of professionals in the development of the qualifications and standards required for each

field

Policy Recommendations: Governance1. Identify the needs and resources

a. Renewed effort in school mapping so as to precisely identify needs and resources. b. Development of provincial strategies by provincial MONE directors, in coordination with district level governors. c. Develop the leadership capacities of school principals and local administration, encourage district-level

communication between schools. 2. Streamline and clarify the chain of authority, and legibly allocate responsibilities

a. Reorganisation of MONE into a unitary structureb. Development of a framework for the delegation of authority. Interlocutors and responsibilities should be clearly

defined for the delegation of authority to the provincial, district and school level to function.c. Development of a clear system of indicators to assess achievement and utilisation of resources

3. Increase autonomy and accountability at the provincial, district and school level for resource utilisation and improvement contingent on development of capacities

a. Delegation of authority and responsibility to provincial MONE directors in elaboration of a strategy to improve achievement and utilisation of resources.

b. Redefine the functions of administrators and inspectors to reflect the focus on school autonomy - monitoring of school performance rather than compliance

c. Delegation of authority and responsibility to the schools for quality improvement and efficiency in the use of resources (both physical and human). This should include more responsibilities regarding the budget, but also more flexibility for assignment of personnel.

Policy Recommendations: Institutions 1. Implement more programs designed to attract, develop and retain teachers

a. Increase quantity and quality of induction, career training and development programs specifically aimed at new teachers

b. Provide greater support (ie. housing, language lessons, social activities a mentor program) and monetary incentives to teachers in Eastern Turkey

2. Provide more in-service training for principals and school leadersa. Increase pedagogical training so they are more connected to teachers, students and the

community

b. Train principals in order to prepare them to deal with both a current lack of material and

human resources as well as potential future of more school autonomy in a less centralized system

3. Restructure the teacher evaluation system a. Change focus of evaluation from that of compliance with the system to that of student

progress

b. Implement monetary or professional rewards for teachers who score high on evaluations and increase accountability for those who score low

Policy Recommendations: Leadership Competences1. Develop the leadership and strategic capacities of provincial and local administrators

a. Provide pre-service or in-service training for education administrators at the provincial and local level in instructional leadership and management, and in strategic assessment of performance and planning

b. Develop advisory resources to support this professional transition

2. Develop the management and leadership capacities of school principalsa. Provide professional development for school principals in the areas of leadership, school-level planning,

budgeting and assessment.b. Modify pre-service training of school principals to reflect the new responsibilities associated with a

future increase in autonomy.c. Redefine recruitment requirements for the position of school principal, and emphasize applicants’

relevant managerial or leadership experiences and training

At all levels, planning and evaluating rests on the capacity of teachers to conduct classroom-level assessments

Thank you!

SourcesEducation in ‘Multicultural’ Societies – Turkish and Swedish Perspectives, eds. Marie Carlson, Annika Rabo and Fatma Gök, Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul, Transactions, vol. 18 (Stockholm 2007), pp. 247-255. Erdem, M. ; Aydin, I. ; Tasdan, M. and Akin, U. (2011). ‘Educational Problems and Solutions in Turkey : The Views of District Governors’. Educational Management and Administration and Leadership. 39(2). Pp. 242-256Gershberg, A. (2005). Towards an Education Decentralization Strategy for Turkey : Guideposts from international experience’. Policy Note for the Turkey Education Sector Study. World Bank. Kartal, S.E. ; Yirci, R. and Ozdemir, T.Y. (2015). ‘Teachers’, parents’ and students’ perceptions regarding the problems in Turkey’s national éducation system : a qualitative study’. European Journal of Educational Studies. 7(1)MONE (2005). Background Report. MONE, Ankara.OECD (2005). School Factors related to Quality and Equity. Results from PISA 2000. PISA. OECD Publishing.OECD (2007). Basic Education in Turkey. OECD Publishing.OECD (2009) Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments. TALIS. OECD PublishingOECD (2011). ‘School autonomy and accountability : are they related to student performance ?’. PISA in Focus. 9. OECD (2013). Education Policy Outlook : Turkey. OECD Publishing.OECD (2013). PISA 2012 Results : What Makes Schools Successful ? Resources, Policies and Practices (Volume IV). PISA. OECD Publishing.OECD (2014). Education at a Glance 2014. OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing.OECD (2015) Education at a Glance: Turkey 2015. OECD Indicators. OECD PublishingÖzoğlu, Murat. "Mobility-Related Teacher Turnover and the Unequal Distribution of Experienced Teachers in Turkey." ESTP Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice 15.4 (2015)Pak S., Articulating the Boundary between Secularism and Islamism: The Imam Hatip Schools of Turkey, Anthropology and Education Quarterly 35, no 3, 2004 Schütz, G. ; West, M.R. and Wößmann, L. (2007). ‘School Accountability, Autonomy, Choice, and the Equity of Student Achievement : International Evidence from PISA 2003’. OECD Education Working Papers. 2007 (9). OECD Publishing.Usher R., and Edwards R., Post-modernism and Education, London: Routledge, 1994Inal K., Akkaymak G., Neoliberal Transformation of Education in Turkey, Palgrave, 2013

Back up Slides

Mustafa NecatiTürkiye Millî Eğitim Bakanı

1925-1929

Democracy and Turmoil (1950-1980)

Return of religious teaching to school.

Nationalism in school curricula and textbooks. (Communist threat)

Economic growth and democratization of society in policies.

�Deterioration of education

�Public support military to avoid anarchy

�Increased centralization in the education

�Curriculum and textbooks become nationalistic

�MONE criticized for giving in to political pressure.

�Students needs and interest not addressed

�Growth of more private institutions

Dichotomies in education (1980-2010)