Din Kültürü ve Ahlak Bilgisi Öğretmenlerinin Praetoryanist Davranış Biçimleri: İzmir Örneklemi

Praetoryanizm, askeri veya sivil otoritelerin siyasi ve sosyal kararlarda açık veya gizli olarak aktif bir rol aldığı vesayete dayalı bir siyasi psikolojik sistemdir. Aynı zamanda praetoryanizm, devlet veya bireyin diğer bireyleri korumak amacıyla onlar adına kararlar alması veya eylemde bulunmasıdır. Praetoryanizm davranışı, sınırlandırma, yönlendirme ile çıkarcılık alt boyutlarından oluşmaktadır. Okullarda praetoryanist davranışlar oldukça sık görülmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, din kültürü ve ahlak bilgisi (DKAB) öğretmenlerinin okullarda gösterdikleri praetoryan davranış biçimlerinin düzeylerinin belirlenmesidir. Araştırmada betimsel tarama deseni olarak nedensel karşılaştırmalı desen kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın verileri, DKAB öğretmenleri praetoryanist davranış ölçeği kullanılarak İzmir İlinin 30 ilçesinde görev yapan 393 öğretmenden elde edilmiştir. Veriler, betimsel istatistik yöntemleri kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Çalışma sonuçlarına göre, öğretmenlerin praetoryanist davranışları sınırlayıcılık, yönlendiricilik ve çıkarcılık olarak belirlenen üç alt boyuta sahiptir. DKAB öğretmenlerinin praetoryanist davranışları her üç alt boyutta da anlamlı bir şekilde değişmektedir. DKAB öğretmenleri en çok sınırlayıcı praetoryanist davranışlar sergilemekte; praetoryanist davranışları, cinsiyet, kıdem ve eğitim koluyla anlamlı bir şekilde değişmektedir. Kadın öğretmenler, erkek öğretmenlere göre daha fazla sınırlayıcı ve yönlendirici; erkek öğretmenlerse çıkarcı praetoryanist davranış göstermektedirler. Devlet okullarında çalışan öğretmenler, özel okullardaki öğretmenlere göre daha fazla sınırlayıcı ve yönlendirici praetoryanist davranışlar sergilemektedirler. Öğretmenlerin mesleki kıdemi arttıkça praetoryanist davranış göstermeleri de artmaktadır. Çalışma alanyazında öğretmenlerin praetoryanist davranışlarını belirleyen ilk çalışma olması açısından önemlidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Praetoryanizm, Praetoryanist Davranış Biçimi, Öğretmen, Din Eğitimi, Din Kültürü ve Ahlak Bilgisi Öğretmeni

The Praetorianistic Behavioral Forms of Religious Education Teachers: İzmir Sample

Praetorianism is a political and psychological system where the military takes an active role in political decisions openly or covertly. Also praetorianism is the interference of a state or an individual with another person, against their will, and defended or motivated by a claim that the person interfered with will be better off or protected from harm. It involves limitation on the freedom or autonomy of some agent and it does so for a class of reasons. Behavior of Praetorianism consists of subdimensions of limitation, direction and interest. Praetorian behavior is very common in schools. The purpose of this study is to determine the levels of praetorianistic behaviors that religious teachers show in schools. In the study, a causal-comparative pattern was used as a descriptive survey pattern. The data of the study were obtained from 393 religious teachers working in the 30 districts of Izmir by using the ‘religious teacher praetorianism scale’. The data were analyzed by using descriptive statistical methods. According to the results of the study, there are three sub-dimensions of praetorianist behavior of religious education teachers: limiting, directing and interest. The praetorianistic behaviors of teachers of religious education have changed significantly in all three sub-dimensions. Religious education teachers exhibit the most restrictive praetorianist behavior; their praetorian behavior changes significantly with respect to gender, professional tenure and sector. Female teachers are more restrictive and directive than male teachers; male teachers show interest praetorianist behavior. Teachers working in public schools are more restrictive and directive praetorianist behaviors than teachers in private schools. Teachers are increasingly showing praetorianism as their professional tenure increases. It is important that the study is the first study to determine the praetorianistic behavior of teachers.

Keywords:

Praetorianism, Praetorianistic Behaviour Forms, Teacher, Religious Education, Religious Education Teacher,

PDF

___

Adams, G., & Balfour, D. (2014). Unmasking administrative evil. Routledge.
Anderson, C. W. (2014). Authoritarianism in Turkey (Doctoral dissertation, Monterey, California: Naval Postgraduate School).
Archer, C. I. (1990). The Royalist Army of New Spain, 1810-1821: Militarism, Praetorianism, or Protection of Interests?. Armed Forces & Society, 17(1), 99-116.
Ben-Eliezer, U. (1997). Rethinking the Civil-Military Relations Paradigm: the inverse relation between militarism and praetorianism through the example of Israel. Comparative Political Studies, 30(3), 356-374.
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1997). Statistics notes: Cronbach's alpha. Bmj, 314(7080), 572-589.
Bowman, K. S. (2010). Militarization, democracy, and development: The perils of praetorianism in Latin America. Penn State Press.
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2017). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Pegem Atıf İndeksi, 1-213.
Clemence, A., Doise, W., & Lorenzi-Cioldi, F. (2014). The quantitative analysis of social representations. Routledge.
Crosby, R. H. J. (2000). AMEE Guide No 20: The good teacher is more than a lecturer-the twelve roles of the teacher. Medical teacher, 22(4), 334-347.
Cunliffe, P. (2014). The New Liberal Praetorianism. H-Diplo, 280.
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-115.
Decalo, S. (1975). Praetorianism, Corporate Grievances and Idiosyncratic Factors in Military Hierarchies. Journal of African Studies, 2(2), 247.
Díaz, A. G. (2017). Education for Peace: Influence of Teacher’s Communication Style in the Relationships Primary School Pupil Create with Each Other. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 5(3 S1), 36.
Danopoulos, C., & Zirker, D. (2002). Civil-military relations theory in the post-communist world. Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, 38, 1-23.
Egreteau, R. (2016). Embedding praetorianism: soldiers, state, and constitutions in postcolonial Myanmar. In Politics and constitutions in Southeast Asia (pp. 131-153). Routledge.
Eyal, O., & Kark, R. (2004). How do transformational leaders transform organizations? A study of the relationship between leadership and entrepreneurship. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 3(3), 211-235.
Fair, C. C. (2015). Author's Response: The United States Needs a New Policy toward Pakistan. Asia Policy, 19(1), 178-182.
Frese, M., & Fay, D. (2001). 4. Personal initiative: An active performance concept for work in the 21st century. Research in organizational behavior, 23, 133-187.
Friedman, I. A. (2016). Being a teacher: altruistic and narcissistic expectations of pre-service teachers. Teachers and Teaching, 22(5), 625-648.
Giles, C., & Hargreaves, A. (2006). The sustainability of innovative schools as learning organizations and professional learning communities during standardized reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 124-156.
Giroux, H. A. (2018). Terror of Neoliberalism: Authoritarianism and the Eclipse of Democracy. Routledge.
Gulbrandsen, M., & Slipersaeter, S. (2007). The third mission and the entrepreneurial university model. Universities and strategic knowledge creation, 112-143.
Hachemaoui, M. (2015). Institutional Change versus Authoritarian Durability. Cahiers d’études africaines, (4), 649-686.
Hakim, M. (2016). Soeharto and the Politicization of Indonesian Islam (1968-1998). Journal of Indonesian Islam, 10(2), 159-180.
Herspring, D. R. (1992). Civil—military relations in post-communist Eastern Europe: The potential for praetorianism. Studies in Comparative Communism, 25(2), 99-122.
Jarausch, K. H. (2014). Students, Society and politics in imperial Germany: The rise of academic illiberalism. Princeton University Press.
Kerfoot, D., & Knights, D. (1993). Management, masculinity and manipulation: From praetoryanism to corporate strategy in financial services in Britain. Journal of Management Studies, 30(4), 659-677.
Kowalewski, D. (1991). Periphery praetorianism in cliometric perspective 1855-1985. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 32(3), 289-303.
Ma, L., & Tsui, A. S. (2015). Traditional Chinese philosophies and contemporary leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(1), 13-24.
Mulford, B. (2003). School leaders: Changing roles and impact on teacher and school effectiveness. Education and Training Policy Division, Oecd.
Nordlinger, E. A. (1977). Soldiers in politics: military coups and governments. Prentice Hall.
Ostovar, A. (2016). Vanguard of the Imam: Religion, Politics, and Iran's Revolutionary Guards. Oxford University Press.
Peri, Y. (2017). Civilian Control During a Protracted War.”. Politics and Society in Israel: Studies in Israeli Society Vol, 3.
Perlmutter, A. (2014). Political roles and military rulers. Routledge.
Rodriguez, A., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (2016). Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices. Psychological methods, 21(2), 137.
Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika, 74(1), 107.
Stewart, T., & Wolf, P. J. (2015). The school choice journey: Parents experiencing more than improved test scores. American Enterprise Institute, January.
Summers, M. W. (2015). The Dunning School: Historians, Race, and the Meaning of Reconstruction. The Journal of Southern History, 81(1), 225.
Şeker, S.D., (2011), Türkiye’nin İnsani Gelişme Endeksi ve Endeks Sıralamasının Analizi, DPT-SSKGM: Ankara.
Taylor, W. C. (2014). The Past and Future of Arab Civil-Military Relations. In Military Responses to the Arab Uprisings and the Future of Civil-Military Relations in the Middle East (pp. 23-43). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(1), 77-100.