EĞİTİMDE ÖZELLEŞTİRME ARAÇLARI OLARAK KUPON SİSTEMİ VE CHARTER OKULLARININ İNCELENMESİ

Bu çalışmada, kupon sistemi ve Charter okullarının yapısı ve eğitimde özelleştirme süreci ile olan ilişkilerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Ayrıca, özelleştirme sürecinin Türkiye'de gelişimi, uygulamaları ve geleceği irdelenmiştir. Özellikle 1980'li yıllarda küresel ölçekte hissedilen iktisadi bunalım, refah devleti anlayışının kuramsal temelinin iflas etmesine yol açmıştır. Bunun sonucu olarak, yeni-liberal ve yeni-muhafazakâr düşünceler devletin küçültülmesi yönünde görüşünü ortaya atmıştır. Böylece devletin üzerindeki yükün azalacağı görüşü ortaya atılmıştır. Bu amaçla devleti küçültme aracı olarak özelleştirme, yerelleşme ve piyasalaştırma uygulanmıştır. Özellikle ekonomide liberal yaklaşımın benimsenmesi ile eğitim de bu süreçten etkilenmiştir. Eğitimin özelleştirilmesi ve rekabetçi bir yaklaşımla yönetilmesi bazı ülkelerde "kupon sistemi" ve "Charter okulları" uygulamalarıyla başlamıştır. Son yıllarda bu uygulamaların yansımaları Türkiye'de de görülmüştür. Kupon sistemi ve Charter Okullarının kamu sektörü ve özel sektör arasında yer almakta olan uygulamalar olduğu düşünülmektedir. Ayrıca bu uygulamaların Türkiye'de ki uygulanabilirliğinin, eğitim sisteminin yoğun bürokratik yapısı ve fiziki alt yapı yetersizlikleri göz önünde bulundurulduğunda tam olarak gerçekleştirilmesi zor görülmektedir

INVESTIGATION OF VOUCHER SYSTEM AND CHARTER SCHOOL AS TOOLS OF PRIVATIZATION IN EDUCATION

In this study, it was aimed to determine the structure of the voucher system and Charter schools and the relationship between the process of privatization in education. In addition, the development of the privatization process and applications in Turkey are examined. Especially in the 1980s, the economic crisis was felt on global scale, has led to the bankruptcy of the theoretical basis of the concept of the welfare state. As a result, neo-liberal and neo-conservative thoughts argued the downsizing of the state. Thus, the view was introduced that will decrease the burden on the state. For this purpose, privatization, decentralization and marketization was applied as a tool for reducing the state. Especially with the adoption of liberal approach in economy, education also has been affected by this process. The privatization of education and management of education with a competitive approach in some countries began with the application as "voucher system" and "Charter schools". In recent years, reflections of these applications have also been seen in Turkey. Voucher system and Charter Schools are considered to be applications between public and private sector. Moreover, the implementation of these systems is difficult due to the lack of intensive bureaucratic structure and physical infrastructure

___

Aksoy, N. (2011). Türkiye kamu eğitiminde gizli ticarileşme: Kurumsal sosyal sorumluluğunişleyiş biçimleri ve eğitimi ticarileştirme işlevleri. Eğitim, Bilim, Toplum Dergisi, 9(35), 8-27.

Aktan, C. C. (1995). Klâsik liberalism, neo-liberalizm, libertarianizm. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 28, 3- 32

Alp, S. (2009). Refah devleti düşüncesinin gelişimi ve bir liberal alternatif olarak üçüncü sektör. Maliye Dergisi, 156, 265-279.

Amerika Birleşik Devletleri Eğitim Departmanı (2001). No child left behind act.http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml.

Angrist, J., Bettinger, E., & Kremer, M. (2006). Long-term educational consequences of secondary school vouchers: Evidence from administrative records in Colombia. American Economic Review, 96(3), 847-862.

Archer, J. (2000). Accountability measures vary widely. Education Week, 19(36), 1, 18-20.

Astiz, M. F., Wiseman, A. W., & Baker, D. P. (2002). Slouching towards decentralization: Consequences of globalization for curricular control in national education systems. Comparative Education Review, 46(1), 66-88.

Aydınlı, H. İ. (2003). 1980 sonrası Türk belediye sisteminde yeni liberal ve desentralist Eğilimler. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(1), 73-86.

Aydoğanoğlu, E. (2003). Eğitimde toplam kalite yönetimi gerçeği. Ankara: Eğitim Sen Mesleki Eğitim Dizisi-3.

Baloğlu, Z. (1990). Türkiye’de Eğitim. İstanbul: TÜSİAD Yayınları.

Belfield, C. R. (2006). The evidence on education vouchers: An application to the Cleveland scholarship and tutoring program.http://www.ncspe.org/publications_files/OP112.pdf.

Bettinger, E. P. (2005). The effect of charter schools on charter students and public schools. Economics of Education Review, 24, 133-147.

Bettinger, E., & Slonim, R. (2006). Using experimental economics to measure the effects of a natural educational experiment on altruism. Journal of Public Economics, 90(8-9), 1625- 1648.

Bifulco, R., & Ladd, H. (2006). The impacts of charter schools on student achievement: Evidence from North Carolina. Education Finance Policy, 1(1), 50-90.

Booker, K., Gilpatrick, S. M., Gronberg, T., & Jansen, D. (2008). The effect of charter schools on traditional public school students in Texas: Are children who stay behind left behind?. Journal of Urban Economics, 64, 123-145.

Bravo, D., Mukhopadhyay, S., & Todd, P. E. (2010). Effects of school reform on education and labor market performance: Evidence from Chile’s universal voucher system. Quantitative Economics, 1, 47-95.

Carrasco, A., & Martin, E. S. (2012). Voucher system and school effectiveness: Reassessing school performance difference and parental choice decision-making. Estudios Deeconomia, 39(2), 123-141.

Carnoy, M. (1998). National voucher plans in Chile and Sweden: Did privatization reforms make for better education?. Comparative Education Review, 42(3), 309-337.

Cook, W. J. (1990). Strategic planning in Amerika’s school: An explotory study. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the AERA. San Francisco.

Cue´llar-Marchelli, H. (2003). Decentralization and privatization of education in ElSalvador: Assessing the experience. International Journal of Educational Development, 23, 145-166.

Davis, D. H., & Raymond, M. E. (2012). Choices for studying choice: Assessing charter school effectiveness using two quasi-experimental methods. Economics of Education Review, 31, 225-236.

Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı, (1979). Dördüncü Beş Yıllık Kalkınma Planı. http://www.kalkinma.gov.tr/Lists/Kalknma%20Planlar/Attachments/6/plan4.pdf. E.T: 15.09.2015.

Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı, (1984). Beşinci Beş Yıllık Kalkınma Planı. http://www.kalkinma.gov.tr/Lists/Kalknma%20Planlar/Attachments/5/plan5.pdf. E.T: 15.09.2015.

Donahoo, S. (2001). Perspectives on charter schools: A review for parents. Clearinghouse on elementary and early childhood education. http://www.ericdigests.org/2002-2/charter.htm.

Dokuzuncu Kalkınma Planı, (2006). http://www.kalkinma.gov.tr/Lists/Kalknma%20Planlar/Attachments/1/plan9.pdf. E.T: 15.09.2015.

Dönmez, Ö. (2008). Türkiye’de öğretmen kimliğinin dönüşümüne ilişkin bir çözümleme (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.

Finn, C. E., Manno, B. V., & Vanourek, G. (2000). Charter Schools in Action: Renewing Public Education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Flaker, A. (2014). School management and efficiency: An assessment of charter vs. traditional public schools. International Journal of Educational Development, 39, 235-246.

Gauri, V. (1998). School Choice in Chile: Two Decades of Educational Reform. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, PA.

Gauri, V., & Vawda, A. (2003). Vouchers for Basic Education in Developing Countries: A Principal Agent Perspective. In Policy research working paper series 3005. Washington,DC: The World Bank.

Gallego, F. A. (2004). Voucher-School Competition, Incentives, and Outcomes: Evidence from Chile. http://www.previsionsocial.gob.cl/subprev/?wpfb_dl=369.

Gershberg, A. I. (2005). Towards an Education Decentralization Strategy for Turkey: Guideposts from İnternational Experience. Washington: World Bank.

Greene, J. P., Peterson, P. E., & Jiangtao, D. (1997). Effectiveness of School Choice: The Milwaukee Experiment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University program in education policy and governance.

Hanson, M. (1998). Strategies of educational decentralization. Key questions and core issues. Journal of Educational Administration. 26(2), 111-128.

Henig, J. R., Holyoke, T. T., Lacireno-Paquet, N., & Moser, M. (2003). Privatization, politics, and urban services: The political behavior of charter schools. Journal of Urban Affairs, 25(1), 37-54.

Hesapçıoğlu, M., & Çelebi, N. (2011). Magnet ve charter okullarının eğitim ve finans yapıları. Marmara Üniversitesi Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 33, 79-101.

Holmes, G., DeSimone, J., & Rupp, N. (2003). Does School Choice Increase School Quality? NBER Working Paper No. 9683.

Hoxby, C. M., Murarka, S., & Kang, J. (2009). How New York City’s Charter Schools Affect Achievement. The New York City charter schools evaluation project.

Howell, W. G., & Peterson, P. E. (2002). The Education Gap: Vouchers and Urban Schools. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.

Imberman, S. (2011). The effect of charter schools on achievement and behavior of public school students. Journal Public Economy, 95(7-8), 850-863.

Jinnai, Y. (2014). Direct and indirect impact of charter schools’ entry on traditional public schools: New evidence from North Carolina. Economics Letters, 124, 452-456.

Karlsen, G. E. (2000). Decentralized centralism: Framework for a better understanding of governance in the field of education. Journal of Education Policy, 15(5), 525-538.

Kartal, S. (2008). İlk ve ortaöğretim kurumlarında velinin okul yönetimine katılması. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(1), 23-30.

Kemmerer, F. (1994). Decentralization of Schooling in Developing Nations. In: Husen, Tursten, Postletwaite, T.Neville (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education. Elsevier science ltd, New York, 1412-1416.

Keskin Demirel, D. (2012). Eğitimde piyasalaşma ve öğretmen emeğinde dönüşüm. Çalışma ve Toplum, 2012/1. http://calismatoplum.org/sayi32/demirer.pdf. E.T: 10.03.2016.

Krueger, A., & Zhu, P. (2002). Another Look at The New York City School Voucher Experiment. (Workingpaper No. 9418). Cambridge, MA: National bureau of economic research.

Ladd, H. (2002). School vouchers: A critical view. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16, 3-24.

Lasley, T. J., & Bainbridge, W. L. (2001). Unintended consequences. Education Week, 19(33), 38- 42.

McEwan, P. (2000). The potential impact of large-scale voucher programs. Review of Educational Research, 70, 103-49.

McEwan, P. J. (2001). The effectiveness of public, Catholic, and nonreligious private schools in Chile’s voucher system. Education Economics, 9(2), 103-128.

Meeks, F. L., Meeks, W. A., & Warren, C. A. (2000). Racial desegregation magnet schools, vouchers, privatization, and home schooling. Education and Urban Society, 33(1), 88-101.

Memduhoğlu, H. B., & Uçar, İ. H. (2012). Yönetici ve öğretmenlerin stratejik planlama algısı ve okullarda mevcut stratejik planlama uygulamalarının değerlendirilmesi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(23), 234-256.

Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2009). 2010-2014 Stratejik Planı. http://sgb.meb.gov.tr/Str_yon_planlama_V2/MEBStratejikPlan.pdf. E.T. 12.09.2015.

Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2015). Milli Eğitim İstatistikleri, Örgün Eğitim, 2014-2015. http://sgb.meb.gov.tr/istatistik/meb_istatistikleri_orgun_egitim_2014_2015.pdf. E.T: 15.09.2015.

Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2012). Özel Öğretim Kurumları Yönetmeliği. http://ookgm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2015_08/10044119_zel_retm_ynet.pdf. E.T: 19.09.2015.

Mizala, A., & Romaguera, P. (2000). School performance and choice: the Chilean experience. Journal of Human Resources, 35(2), 392-417.

Mizala, A., & Torche, F. (2012). Bringing the schoolsback in: The stratification of educational achievement in the Chilean voucher system. International Journal of Educational Development, 32, 132-144.

Molnar, A. (2005). School Commercialism: From Democratic Ideal to Market Commodity (Positions: Education, politics, and culture). Routledge New York and London.

Morgan, C., Petrosino, A., & Fronius, T. (2015). The impact of school vouchers in developing countries: A systematic review. International Journal of Educational Research, 72, 70-79.

Murphy, J. (1996). The Privatization of Schooling: Problems and Possibilities. Corwinpress, Inc, USA.

Ngok, L. K. (2007). Chinese education policy in the context of decentralization and marketization: Evolution and implications. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(1), 142-157.

Ni, Y., & Rorrer, A. K. (2012). Twice considered: Charter schools and student achievement in Utah. Economics of Education Review, 31, 835-849.

Özdemir, M. (2008). Eğitim yönetiminde yerelleşme siyasaları. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 41(3), 153- 168.

Özdemir, M. (2011). Eğitim yönetimi politikalarındaki dönüşümün yoksulluk üzerindeki olası etkileri. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(3), 707-725.

Patrinos, H. A. (2007). Demand-Side Financing in Education. In Education policy series. Paris: UNESCO.

Prawda, J. (1993). Educational decentralization in Latin America: Lessons learned. International Journal of Educational Development, 13(3), 253–264.

Riddell, A. (1993). The evidence on public/private educational tradeoffs in developing countries. International Journal of Educational Development, 13(4), 373-386.

Rouse, C. (1998). Private school vouchers and student achievement: An evaluation of the Milwaukee parental choice program. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, 553-602.

Sayılan, F. (2006). Küresel aktörler (DB ve GATS) ve eğitimde neoliberal dönüşüm. TMMOB Jeoloji Mühendisleri Odası. Aylık Bülten Eğitim Dosyası. Kasım-Aralık, 44-51. http://www.jmo.org.tr/resimler/ekler/1e03cc77d4bbd6b_ek.pdf. E.T: 14.03.2017

Schneider, J. (1999). Five prevailing charter types. School Administrator, 56(7), 29-31.

Şişman, M. (2002). Eğitimde Mükemmellik Arayışı. Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.

Toma, E., & Zimmer, R. (2012). Two decades of charter schools: Expectations, reality, and the future. Economics of Education Review, 31, 209-212.

Tuttle, C. C., Gleason, P., & Clark, M. (2012). Using lotteries to evaluate schools of choice: Evidence from a national study of charter schools. Economics of Education Review, 31, 237- 253.

Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasası. (1982). https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/anayasa/anayasa_2011.pdf. E.T: 01.09.2015.

Welsh, T., & McGinn, N. (1999). Decentralization of Education: Why, When, What and How? UNESCO, International institute for educational planning, France.

Whitty, G., & Power, S. (2000). Marketization and privatization in mass education systems. International Journal of Education Development, 20, 93-107.

Winters, M. (2012). Measuring the effect of charter schools on public school student achievement in an urban environment: Evidence from New York City. Economics of Education Review, 31(2), 293-301.

URL-1: http://dashboard2.publiccharters.org/National/. Erişim Tarihi: 06.06.2016.

URL-2:http://www.ozelogretim.org.tr/Ogrencilerden_Temel_Liselere_goc_icerik460.html. ErişimTarihi: 11.04.2016.

URL-3: http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/egitim/29173808.asp. Erişim Tarihi: 12.03.2016.

Yirci, R., & Kocabaş, İ. (2013). Eğitimde özelleştirme tartışmaları: Kavramsal bir analiz. International Periodical for The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 8(8), 1523-1539.

Yolcu, H. (2011). Türkiye’de eğitimde yerelleşme ve ailelerin okul yönetimine katılımının güçlendirilmesi: Değişen ne?. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 11(3), 1229-1251.

Zimmer, R., & Bettinger, E. P. (2010). The Efficacy of educational vouchers. http://faculty.wwu.edu/kriegj/Econ406/Papers/Zimmer%20&%20Bettinger.pdf.