The Impact of School Tracking on Secondary Vocational Education and Training in Turkey
The Impact of School Tracking on Secondary Vocational Education and Training in Turkey
School tracking has been a structural characteristic of education systems for many years. School tracking is generally implemented at the high school level, where students are divided into academic and vocational education groups. It is important to examine the effects of school tracking because the effect of tracking may vary between education types. The present study examines the effects of tracking on VET in Turkey over the past decade. For this purpose, the socioeconomic characteristics of all students tracked into VET high schools over the past ten years were compared with those placed in other types of high schools. This method aimed to determine the effects of tracking on the academic achievement of the VET students. Student population data at 12th grade between 2010 and 2019 is analyzed in study. The predictive power of secondary school achievement and socioeconomic status is examined with multiple regression analysis. The results indicated that VET high school students from all socioeconomic backgrounds have been in a disadvantaged position for the past decade. The research identified that the education level of fathers caused the greatest disadvantage for VET high school students, compared with their peers studying in other high schools. As the percentage of students placed in different schools increased by tracking, the prediction power of students’ early academic performance and socioeconomic levels on academic achievement also increased. Considering the socioeconomic disadvantage of VET students, this result indicates that when the level of tracking increases, inequality also increases. The results show that the disadvantage caused by tracking in VET has continued at a similar level over the last decade, and that this disadvantage has grown in the years when the scale of tracking increases.
___
- Acemoğlu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2018). Artificial intelligence, automation and work. NBER Working Paper 24196. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge.
- Alacacı, C., & Erbaş, A. K. (2010). Unpacking the inequality among Turkish schools: Findings from PISA 2006. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(2), 182–192.
- Aldan Karademir, Ç. (2007). Düzey dersliklerinin ilköğretim 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin fen bilgisi dersine ilişkin akademik başarıları ve benlik saygısı üzerine etkisi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi.
- Aşıcı, M., Baysal, N., & Şahenk-Erkan, S. (2012). A comparison of the reading comprehension questions in PISA 2009 and national level determination exam in Turkey. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 1(2), 210–217.
- Ataç, E. (2017). Reading educational inequalities in Turkey: Statistics and geographic distributions. Education & Science, 42(192), 59-86.
- Aydın, E., & Tugal, I. (2005). On the influence of grouping practices on classroom teaching. Essays in Education, 14.
- Berberoğlu, G., & Kalender, İ. (2005). Investigation of student achievement across years, school types and regions: SSE and PISA analyses. Educational Sciences and Practice, 4(7), 21–35.
- Biewen, M., & Tapalaga, M. (2017). Early tracking, academic vs. vocational training and the value of ‘second chance’ options. IZA Discussion Paper Series No. 11080.
- Bourdieu, P. (1973). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In: Brown R. K. (Ed.) Knowledge, educational and cultural change, pp. 71–112. London, Tavistock.
- Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture. London, Sage Publications.
- Bölükbaş, S., & Gür, B. S. (2020). Tracking and inequality: The results from Turkey. International Journal of Educational Development, 78, 102262.
- Brunello, G., & Checchi, D. (2007). Does school tracking affect equality of opportunity? New international evidence. Economic Policy, 22, 781-861.
- Canbal, M.S., Kerkez, B., Suna, H.E., Numanoğlu, K.V., & Ozer, M. (2020). Mesleki ve teknik ortaöğretimde paradigma değişimi için yeni bir adım: Eğitim programlarının güncellenmesi. Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri: Teori ve Uygulama, 11(21), 1-26.
- Cansız, M., Ozbayanlı, B., & Çolakoğlu, M. H. (2019). Impact of school type on student academic achievement. Education & Science, 44(197), 275-314.
- Carbonaro, W. (2005). Tracking, students’ effort, and academic achievement. Sociology of Education 78, 27–49.
- Dolean, D., Melby-Lervåg, M., Tincas, I., Damsa, C., & Lervåg, A. (2019). Achievement gap: Socioeconomic status affects reading developmentbeyond language and cognition in children facing poverty. Learning and Instruction, 63, 1-10.
- Dustmann, C. (2004). Parental background, secondary school choice, and wages. Oxford Economic Papers, 56, 209-230.
- ERG (2014). Türkiye eğitim sisteminde eşitlik ve akademik başarı araştırma raporu ve analiz. ERG Raporları. Retrieved from http://kasaum.ankara.edu.tr/files/2013/02/ERGe%C5%9FitlikWEB.22.05.14.pdf
- Fuller, A. (2015). Vocational education. In: James D. Wright (Ed.). International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd edition), Vol.25, Oxford: Elsevier, pp.232-238.
- Gelbal, S. (2008). The effect of socio-economic status of eighth grade students on their achievement in Turkish. Education and Science, 33(150), 1-13.
- Guill, K., Lüdtke, O., & Köller, O. (2017). Academic tracking is related to gains in students' intelligence over four years: Evidence from a propensity score matching study. Learning and Instruction, 47, 43-52.
- Hanushek, E. A., & L. Woessmann (2006). Does educational tracking affect performance and inequality? Differences-indifferences evidence across countries. Economic Journal, 116, C363 - C376.
- Heltemes, L. (2009). Social and academic advantages and disadvantages of within-class heterogeneous and homogeneous ability grouping. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, St. John Fisher College.
- Leschinsky, A., & Mayer, K. U. (Eds). (1990). The comprehensive school experiment revisited: Evidence from Western Europe. Frankfurt, Peter Lang.
- MEB (2018). Türkiye’de mesleki ve teknik eğitimin görünümü. Eğitim Analiz ve Değerlendirme Serisi No:1. Ankara: MEB.
- MEB (2019). 2019 Liselere geçiş sistemi kapsamında ilk yerleştirme sonuçları. Eğitim Analiz ve Değerlendirme Serisi No:8. Ankara: MEB.
- MEB (2020). 2020 Liselere geçiş sistemi kapsamında ilk yerleştirme sonuçları. Eğitim Analiz ve Değerlendirme Serisi No:8. Ankara: MEB.
- Martinkova, P., Hladka, A., & Potuznikova, E. (2020). Is academic tracking related to gains in learning competence? Using propensity score matching and differential item change functioning analysis for better understanding of tracking implications. Learning and Instruction, 66, 101286.
- Meier, V., & Schütz, G. (2007). The economics of tracking and non-tracking. IFO Working Paper No. 50.
- Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. OECD (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD Publishing.
- Osborne, J. W. (2002). Four assumptions of multiple regression that researchers should always test. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 8(2), doi:/10.7275/r222-hv23
- Ozer, M., Çavuşoğlu, A., & Gür, B. S. (2011). Restorasyon ve toparlanma dönemi: Mesleki ve teknik eğitimde 2000’li yıllar. In B.
- S. Gür (Ed.), 2000’li yıllar: Türkiye’de eğitim (pp. 163- 192). İstanbul: Meydan. Ozer, M. (2018). The 2023 Education Vision and new goals in vocational and technical education. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 8(3), 425–435.
- Ozer, M. (2019a). Reconsidering the fundamental problems of vocational education and training in Turkey and proposed solutions for restructuring. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, 39(2), 1–19.
- Ozer, M. (2019b). Background of problems in vocational education and training and its road map to solution in Turkey’s Education Vision 2023. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 9(1), 1–11.
- Ozer, M. (2020a). The paradigm shift in vocational education and training in Turkey. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(2), 357- 384.
- Ozer, M. (2020b). What PISA tells us about performance of education systems?. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 9(2), 217-228.
- Ozer, M. (2020c). Vocational education and training as “A friend in need” during coronavirus pandemic in Turkey. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 9(2), 1-7.
- Ozer, M. (2020d). The contribution of the strengthened capacity of vocational education and training system in Turkey to the fight against Covid-19. Journal of Higher Education, 10(2), 134.140. doi:10.2399/yod.20.726951, 1-7.
- Ozer, M. (2020e). Educational policy actions by the Ministry of National Education in the times of COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey. Kastamonu Education Journal, 28(3), 1124-1129.
- Ozer, M. (2020f). Mesleki eğitimde paradigma değişimi: Türkiye’nin mesleki eğitim ile imtihanı. İstanbul: Maltepe Üniversitesi Yayınları.
- Ozer, M., & Perc, M. (2020). Dreams and realities of school tracking and vocational education. Palgrave Communications, 6, 34.
- Ozer, M., & Suna, H. E. (2019). Future of vocational and technical education in Turkey: Solid steps taken after Education Vision 2023. Journal of Education and Humanities, 10(20), 165–192.
- Ozer, M., & Suna, H. E. (2020). The linkage between vocational education and labor market in Turkey: Employability and skill mismatch. Kastamonu Education Journal, 28(2), 558–569.
- Ozer, M. (2021). A new step towards narrowing the achievement gap in Turkey: “1,000 schools in vocational education and training” project. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 10(1), 97-108.
- Önder, E., & Güçlü, N. (2014). Solution proposals intended to reduce achievement difference among primary schools. Journal of Educational Sciences, 40, 109-132.
- ÖSYM (2018). 2018 YKS değerlendirme raporu. Ankara: ÖSYM.
- ÖSYM (2019). 2019 YKS değerlendirme raporu. Ankara: ÖSYM.
- Özdemir, C. (2016). Equity in the Turkish education system: A multilevel analysis of social background influences on the mathematics performance of 15-year-old students. European Educational Research Journal, 15(2), 193-217.
- Özelçi, S. Y., Çengel, M., Vural, R. A., & Gömleksiz, M. (2016). Rethinking tracking practices: What teachers say. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(10), 2341-2352.
- Page, R. (1991). Lower track classrooms: A curricular and cultural perspective. New York: Teachers College Press.
- Perc, M., Ozer, M., & Hojnik, J. (2019). Social and juristic challenges of artificial intelligence. Palgrave Communication, 5, 61.
- Piopiunik, M. (2013). The effects of early tracking on student performance: Evidence from a school reform in Bavaria. Ifo Working Paper No. 153. Retrieved from https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/IfoWorkingPaper-153.pdf
- Raffe, D. (2008). The concept of transition system. Journal of Education and Work, 21(4), 277-296. Reichelt, M., Collischon, M., & Eberl, A. (2019). School tracking and its role in social reproduction: Reinforcing educational inheritance and the direct effects of social origin. The British Journal of Sociology, 70(4), 1-26.
- Rosenthal, R., & Jacopson, R. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Slavin, R. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: A best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 293-336.
- Slavin, R. E., & Braddock, J. H. (1993). Ability grouping on the wrong track. The College Board Review, 68(2), 11-17.
- Solga, H., Protsch, P., Ebner, C., & Brzinsky-Fay, C. (2014). The German vocational education and training system: Its institutional configuration, strength, and challenges. WZB Discussion Paper SP-I-2014-502.
- Suna, H. E., Tanberkan, H., & Ozer, M. (2020). Changes in literacy of students in Turkey by years and school types: Performance of students in PISA applications. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology , 11(1), 76-97.
- Suna, H.E., Tanberkan, H., Gur, B.S., Perc, M., & Ozer, M. (2020a). Socioeconomic status and school type as predictors of academic achievement, Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 61, 41-64.
- Suna, H. E., Gur, B. S., Gelbal, S., & Ozer, M. (2020b). Science high school students’ socioeconomic background and their preferences regarding their transition into higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 10(3), 356-370. doi: 10.2399/yod.20.734921
- Şahin, H. (2019). Türkiye’de eğitimde fırsat eşit(siz)liği ve bireylerin eğitim kararları: Ardahan ve Karabük örneği. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
- Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Woessmann, L. (2009). International evidence on school tracking: A review. CESifo DICE Report 1:26-34. Thompson, S. (2018). Achievement at school and socioeconomic background—an educational perspective. npj Science of Learning, 3(5). doi: 10.1038/s41539-018-0022-0
- Vyas, S., & Kumaranayake, L. (2006). Constructing socio-economic status indices: How to use principal components analysis. Health Policy and Planning, 21(6), 459–468. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czl029