International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1949-4270   |  e-ISSN: 1949-4289
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research
International Association of Educators

Original article | Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2022, Vol. 17(2) 131-164

Examining the Programs of Political Parties in terms of the Structure of the Turkish National Education System

Ahmet Çoban

pp. 131 - 164   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2022.442.7   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2202-24-0002

Published online: June 01, 2022  |   Number of Views: 118  |  Number of Download: 439

Save PDF

Abstract

Education systems are largely shaped by the policies of political parties. Political parties try to express their policies regarding the structure and functioning of the education system through party programs. As in all countries, policies regarding the education system have an important place in party programs in Turkey. The aim of this study is to examine the programs of political parties in Turkey in terms of the structure of the Turkish National Education System; the aim is to present their views on “Pre-School Education”, “Primary Education”, “General Secondary Education”, “Vocational Technical Secondary Education”, “Higher Education” and “Non-Formal Education-Adult Education-Continuous Education”. In this context, it is important to express the similarities in the objectives of the political parties regarding the structure of the Turkish Education System. In this study, the qualitative research method was used. The data of the research were collected through document analysis. The study population consisted of all the political parties in The Grand National Assembly of Turkey (GNAT). The sample of the study consists of five political parties selected according to the criterion sampling method, which is one of the purposive sampling methods. These political parties can be listed as follows according to the number of members: 1.Justice and Development Party (JDP), 2.Republican People's Party (RPP) 3.Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) 4.National Movement Party (NMP) 5.Good Party (GP). The data sources of the study are the party programs of political parties. The documents regarding the party programs were taken from the official websites of the parties. In the context of suitability for the purpose of the study, the documents were analyzed by the content analysis method. The findings of the research are given without adding the researcher's comment, according to the themes and codes created. According to the findings, there are quite a lot of statements about the structure of the Turkish National Education System in the programs of political parties. As a result of the analysis, it has been determined that there are many similarities in the programs of the five parties, although there are many differences in the objectives of the parties regarding the structure of the Turkish Education System.

Keywords: Political Parties, Party Programs, Education, The Turkish National Education System

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Coban, A. (2022). Examining the Programs of Political Parties in terms of the Structure of the Turkish National Education System . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 17(2), 131-164. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2022.442.7

Harvard
Coban, A. (2022). Examining the Programs of Political Parties in terms of the Structure of the Turkish National Education System . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 17(2), pp. 131-164.

Chicago 16th edition
Coban, Ahmet (2022). "Examining the Programs of Political Parties in terms of the Structure of the Turkish National Education System ". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 17 (2):131-164. doi:10.29329/epasr.2022.442.7.
References
  1. Aydın, İ. (1997). Education, training and teachers in political parties and government programs (1908-1997). Ankara: Education-Union Publications. [Google Scholar]
  2. Aypay, A.(2015). Education Policy. Ankara: Pegem Academy. [Google Scholar]
  3. Berber, Ş. (2004). Political parties and education policies in Turkey. Journal of Selçuk University Social Sciences Vocational School, 4(2), 1-34. [Google Scholar]
  4. Berber, Ş. & Aslan, G. (2017). Religious education policies of politıcal parties. The Journal of Academic Social Science, (39), 595-602. DOI : 10.16992/ASOS.11914 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bulut, P. & Güven, S. (2010). Primary Education in political parties’ programs. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 6(2), 281-300. [Google Scholar]
  6. Büyükboyacı, Ş. (2015). The education policies of the period of Suleyman Demirel (1965–1971) and the reflections of practices in Turkish press. Ulakbilge Journal of Social Sciences, 3(6), 19-57. DOI: 10.7816/ulakbilge-03-06-02 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chandra, V. (2021). Functioning of Political Parties. BPSC-109 Political Processes and Institutions in Comparative Perspective. https://www.academia.edu/51147899/Functioning_of_Political_Parties. [Google Scholar]
  8. Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1). [Google Scholar]
  9. Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. (5 th Editon) Los Angeles: SAGE. [Google Scholar]
  10. Duman, T. ( 1991). Teacher Training-Historical Development in Secondary Education in Turkey. İstanbul: National Education Printing House) [Google Scholar]
  11. Durkheim, E. (1968). Education et sociologie [Education and sociology]. Les Presses Universitaires de France. [Google Scholar]
  12. Eren, E. (2020). Education policies in the context of political communication in Turkey. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(1), 227-240. doi: 10.12973/eu-jer.10.1.227 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  13. Erol, İ. & Çetin, M. (2020). Current educational policies of political parties in Turkey. International Journal of Scientific and Technological Research, 6(6). DOI: 10.7176/JSTR/6-06-07 [Google Scholar]
  14. Esen, S. (2012). The approaches of Turkish political parties towards entrepreneurship in their party programmes. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, (62), 602-609. [Google Scholar]
  15. European Commıssıon For Democracy Through Law [ECfDTL] -Venice Commission (2020). Guıdelines On Political Party Regulation. 2nd Edition, http://www.venice.coe.int/ [Google Scholar]
  16. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. (8th ed.) Published by McGraw-Hill, a business unit of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. New York. [Google Scholar]
  17. GP (2021). Good Party Program. https://iyiparti.org.tr/storage/img/doc/iyi-parti-guncel-parti-program.pdf [Google Scholar]
  18. Güneş, M. & H. Güneş (2003). Education policies and civil society in Turkey. Ankara: Anı Publications. [Google Scholar]
  19. Gürsoy, M. & Balcı-Karaboğa, A. (2015). Educational ıssue ın the election declarations of political parties. Route Educational and Social Science Journa, 2(4), 112-140 [Google Scholar]
  20. Heper, M. & M. Landau, J. M. (2016). Political Parties and Democracy In Turkey. New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  21. Holmberg, S. (2003). Are political parties necessary? Electoral Studies, (22), 287-299. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-3794(02)00016-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  22. JDP (2021). Justice and Development Party Program. https://www.akparti.org.tr/en/parti/party-programme/ [Google Scholar]
  23. Johnston, M. (2005). Political parties and democracy ın theoretical and practical perspectives. Washington: DC. [Google Scholar]
  24. Korkmaz, F. (2018).  The Analysis of Political Parties' Opinions Toward the Education System in Their Election Bulletin of 2018 Presidential and General Elections. Jouranl of Contemporary Administrative Science, 5( 3). [Google Scholar]
  25. Kuckartz, U. (2014). Qualitative text analysis. California:  Thousand Oaks. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kurniadi, B. (2019). Indonesia political development: democracy, political parties in the political education perspective. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 6(3), 66-70. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2006). Report on the 2007 Budget. Ankara: Directorate of State Books Printing House [Google Scholar]
  28. Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2020). National education basic law. https://www. legislation.gov.tr/ LegislationText /1.5.1739.pdf [Google Scholar]
  29. Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2021). National education statistics. Ankara: A Publication of Official Statistics Program. [Google Scholar]
  30. Mundy, K. Green, A. Lingard, R. & Verger, A. (2016). The handbook of global education policy. West Sussex: Wiley‐Blackwell. [Google Scholar]
  31. NMP (2021). National Movement Party Program. https://www.mhp.org.tr/htmldocs/mhp/program/mhp/mhp_tarihcesi.html [Google Scholar]
  32. OECD (2020). Education Policy Outlook: Turkey. https://www.oecd.org/education/policy-outlook/country-profile-Turkey-2020.pdf [Google Scholar]
  33. Özdaş, F. & Çakmak, M. (2018). Metaphor perceptions related to the teaching practıce of teacher candidates’. International Journal of Turkish Literature, Culture and Education, 7(4), 2747-2766. http://dx.doi.org/10.7884/teke.4323 [Google Scholar]
  34. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. [Google Scholar]
  35. Patton, M. Q. (2014). What brain sciences reveal about integrating theory and practice. American Journal of Evaluation, 35(2), 237-244. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214013503700 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  36. PDP (2021). Peoples’ Democratic Party Program. https://hdp.org.tr/tr/parti-programi/8/ [Google Scholar]
  37. Prime Ministry (1983). Law of political parties. Official Newspaper, (18027) [Google Scholar]
  38. Rauh, C., Kirchner, A. & Kappe, R. (2011). Political parties and Higher Education spending: Who favours redistribution? West European Politics, 34(6): 1185-1206. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2011.616659 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  39. RPP (2021). Republican People's Party Program. https://chp.azureedge.net/1d48b01630ef43d9b2edf45d55842cae.pdf [Google Scholar]
  40. Saldana, J. (2013). The Coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks: Sage [Google Scholar]
  41. Sirivunnabood, P. (2016). Political Education: The Role of Political Parties in Educating Civil Society on Politics. Silpakorn University Journal of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts, 16(3), 157-194. https://doi.org/10.14456/sujsha.2016.20 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  42. Tataj, X. & Kola, M (2021). Education policies in line with the latest developments in the field of artificial ıntelligence: case of Albania. Human & Human, (27), 101-116. https://doi.org/10.29224/insanveinsan.818263 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  43. TEDMEM (2018). 2018 election manifestos of political parties. Ankara: Turkey Education Association, Turkish Education Association. https://tedmem.org/mem-notlari/gorus/siyasi-partilerin-2018-secim-bildirgeleri-egitim-alanindaki-politika-ve-vaatlerin-karsilastirilmasi [Google Scholar]
  44. Tok, T. N.  (2012). Education discourses and policies of political parties in Turkey. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 18(2), 273-312. [Google Scholar]
  45. Toprakçı, E. & Güngör, A. A. (2014). Educational policies of the political parties in Turkey. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 9(1), 5-35. [Google Scholar]
  46. Türk, E. (2015). Turkish Education System and Secondary Education. Ankara: General Directorate of Support Services. [Google Scholar]
  47. Uluğ, F. (2018). 2023 Education vision as a policy document. Ankara: Sonçag Publishing Printing. [Google Scholar]
  48. Usta, M. E. (2015). Educational policies according to political party programs. TYB ACADEMY Journal of Language, Literature and Social Sciences, (13), 55-73. [Google Scholar]
  49. Varış, F. (1998). Introduction to educational science. İstanbul: Alkım Publications. [Google Scholar]
  50. Veljanovska, S. (2021) Environmental policy in the programs of political parties in Macedonia. Journal of Process Management – New Technologies, International, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.5937/jouproman9-30168 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  51. Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis. California:  Thousand Oaks. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  52. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2018). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  53. Yılmaz, E. (2007). Education- Teaching in the programs of political parties in Turkey. Ankara: Başkayerler Publications, [Google Scholar]
  54. Yılmaz, E. (2016a, September 23-24). Educational Policies in the Programs of Political Parties in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey between 1923-1960. (Conference presentation). IBANESS Conference Series – Kırklareli/ Turkey  [Google Scholar]
  55. Yılmaz, E. (2016b, September 23-24). Educational Policies in the Programs of Political Parties in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey between 1983-2015. (Conference presentation). IBANESS Conference Series – Kırklareli/ Turkey. [Google Scholar]
Download
Metric
History
Related

Volume 17 Issue 2

June 2022

All Articles

Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research

International Association of Educators.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License.
Privacy policy     |     Terms of Use     |     Use of Cookies
Creative Commons Lisansı
© 2012 - 2024 - THDSoft e-Journal Management System.