SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Üniversite Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 4

The Spatial Distribution Of International Students In Turkey: An Analysis Through The Core-Periphery Approach

Türkiye’de Uluslararası Öğrencilerin Mekânsal Dağılımı: Merkez-Çevre Yaklaşımıyla Bir Analiz

İbrahim Hakan Göver(ABDULLAH GÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1258-0124
Pages
567–584
Publication Date
2025-12-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Findings reveal that international students are predominantly concentrated in highly populated and socioeconomically developed provinces such as Istanbul, Bursa, Eskişehir and Sakarya, whereas peripheral provinces host significantly fewer students.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the spatial distribution of international students in Turkey within the framework of the center–periphery theory.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Through this index, provinces were classified as “core,” “semi-core,” or “periphery.” The level of inequality in the spatial distribution of international students was measured using the Gini coefficient (0.854) and the Lorenz curve, while spatial dependence and clustering patterns were analyzed using Moran’s I test and Local Indicators of Spatial Association (LISA).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Findings reveal that international students are predominantly concentrated in highly populated and socioeconomically developed provinces such as Istanbul, Bursa, Eskişehir and Sakarya, whereas peripheral provinces host significantly fewer students.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Uluslararası öğrenciler · Merkez-çevre kuramı · Yükseköğretim

Abstract

This study examines the spatial distribution of international students in Turkey within the framework of the center–periphery theory. A composite centrality index was developed based on five weighted and standardized parameters—population size, number of universities, total student population, number of international students, and share of international students nationwide—using the Z-score method. Through this index, provinces were classified as “core,” “semi-core,” or “periphery.” The level of inequality in the spatial distribution of international students was measured using the Gini coefficient (0.854) and the Lorenz curve, while spatial dependence and clustering patterns were analyzed using Moran’s I test and Local Indicators of Spatial Association (LISA). Findings reveal that international students are predominantly concentrated in highly populated and socioeconomically developed provinces such as Istanbul, Bursa, Eskişehir and Sakarya, whereas peripheral provinces host significantly fewer students. Comparisons with SEGE-2017 socioeconomic development data indicate a positive relationship between socioeconomic status and international student density. The study highlights spatial inequalities in Turkish higher education and provides a data-driven framework.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Türkiye’deki uluslararası öğrencilerin coğrafi dağılımını merkez-çevre kuramı çerçevesinde incelemektedir. Araştırmada illerin nüfusu, üniversite sayısı, toplam öğrenci ve uluslararası öğrenci sayısı gibi göstergelere dayalı olarak Z-skor yöntemi ile standartlaştırılmış ve ağırlıklandırılmış beş parametreden oluşan bileşik bir merkezîlik endeksi geliştirilmiştir. Bu endeks aracılığıyla iller “merkez”, “yarı-merkez” ve “çevre” olarak sınıflandırılmıştır. Analizlerde, uluslararası öğrencilerin mekânsal dağılımındaki eşitsizlik düzeyi Gini katsayısı (0,854) ve Lorenz eğrisi ile ölçülmüş; mekânsal bağımlılık ve kümelenme örüntüleri ise Moran’s I testi ve Yerel Mekânsal Otokorelasyon Analizi (LISA) ile değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular, uluslararası öğrencilerin İstanbul, Bursa, Eskişehir ve Sakarya gibi nüfus yoğunluğu ve sosyoekonomik gelişmişlik düzeyi yüksek illerde toplandığını; çevre illerde ise düşük yoğunlukta kaldığını ortaya koymaktadır. SEGE-2017 verileriyle yapılan karşılaştırmalar, sosyoekonomik gelişmişlik ile uluslararası öğrenci yoğunluğu arasında pozitif bir ilişki olduğunu göstermektedir. Araştırma, yükseköğretimdeki mekânsal eşitsizlikleri görünür kılmakta ve uluslararası öğrenci politikalarının bölgesel kalkınma hedefleriyle uyumlu biçimde tasarlanabilmesi için veri temelli bir çerçeve sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Göver, İ. H. (2025). The Spatial Distribution Of International Students In Turkey: An Analysis Through The Core-Periphery Approach. Üniversite Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 4, 567–584. https://doi.org/10.32329/uad.1768740

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (69)

  1. Ağaoğlu, M., & Yurtkoru, E. (2014). Öğrencilerin üniversite ve program tercih ölçütleri üzerine bir araştırma. Öneri Dergisi, 10(40), 115-124. https://doi.org/10.14783/od.v10i40.1012000355
  2. Altbach, P. G. (2016). Global perspectives on higher education. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  3. Altbach, P. G. (2007). The imperial tongue: English as the dominating academic language. International Higher Education, 49, 2–3. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2007.49.7986
  4. Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3–4), 290–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315307303542
  5. Altbach, P. G. (2004). Globalization and the university: Myths and realities in an unequal world. In National Education Association (Ed.), The NEA 2005 almanac of higher education (pp. 63–74). https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2004.9967114
  6. Anselin, L. (1995). Local indicators of spatial association - LISA. Geographical Analysis, 27(2), 93–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-4632.1995.tb00338.x
  7. Ataç, E. (2017). Reading educational inequalities in Türkiye: Statistics and geographic distributions. Education and Science, 42(192), 59-86. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2017.7124
  8. Baydemir, M., & Bolat, M. A. (2024). Uluslararası öğrencilerin Türk ekonomisine katkıları: İstanbul’da kendi hesabına okuyan öğrenciler örneği. Turkish Journal of Diaspora Studies, 4(2), 203-220. https://doi.org/10.52241/TJDS.2024.0078
  9. Beaverstock, J. V. (2002). Transnational elites in the city: British expatriates in Singapore’s financial district. Geoforum, 33(4), 525–538. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7185(02)00036-2
  10. Boduroğlu, G. (2025). Uluslararası öğrencilerin akademik ve sosyal hayata uyum sorunlarının incelenmesi: Çorum ili örneği. Journal of University Research, 8(1), 81-97. https://doi.org/10.32329/uad.1606764
  11. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Blackwell Publishers.
  12. Council of Higher Education. (2024). Internationalization strategy document for higher education 2024–2028. https://eski.yok.gov.tr/Documents/Yayinlar/Yayinlarimiz/2025/yuksekogretimde-uluslararasilasma-strateji-belgesi-2024-2028.pdf
  13. Cliff, A. D., & Ord, J. K. (1981). Spatial processes: Models and applications. Pion. Council of Higher Education. (2025, July 17). Higher education statistics for the 2024–2025 academic year. https://istatistik.yok.gov.tr/
  14. Çalıkoğlu, A. (2023). Internationalization of higher education In Türkiye: A Thematic and methodological analysis. Journal of University Research, 6(1), 98-113. https://doi.org/10.32329/uad.1190476
  15. Çetin, İ., & Sevüktekin, M. (2016). The Analysis of development disparities in Türkiye. International Journal of Economic Studies, 2(2), 39–61. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/792801
  16. De Maio, F. G. (2007). Income inequality measures. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 61(10), 849. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2006.052969
  17. De Wit, H., & Altbach, P. G. (2021). Internationalization in higher education: Global trends and recommendations for its future. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 5(1), 28–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2020.1820898
  18. Derman, S. (2010). The problems of foreign students in learning Turkish dialects, Necmettin Erbakan University İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 29, 227-247. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/184285
  19. Erken, A. (2017). Institutional tools of cold war: METU and Robert College engineering faculty, 1950‐1970. The Pursuit of History: International Periodical for History and Social Research, 18, 25–42. https://www.tarihinpesinde.com/dergimiz/sayi18/M18_02.pdf
  20. Findlay, A. M., King, R., Smith, F. M., Geddes, A., & Skeldon, R. (2012). World class? An investigation of globalisation, difference and international student mobility. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(1), 118–131. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41427932
  21. Friedmann, J. (1966). Regional development policy: A case study of Venezuela. MIT Press.
  22. Furtado, C. (1964). Development and underdevelopment. University of California Press.
  23. Gini, C. (1912). Variabilità e mutabilità. Tipografia di Paolo Cuppini.
  24. Glass, C. R., & Cruz, N. I. (2023). Moving towards multipolarity: Shifts in the core–periphery structure of international student mobility and world rankings (2000–2019). Higher Education, 85(2), 415–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00841-9
  25. Günay, D., & Günay, A. (2011). Quantitative developments in Turkish higher education since 1933. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 1, 1–22. Https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2011.001
  26. Güngör, H., & Soysal, T. (2021). Syrian refugees in Turkish higher education. Millî Eğitim, 50(1), 1245–1264. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.960083
  27. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2018). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  28. Huntington, S. P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. Simon & Schuster.
  29. Internationalization of Turkish Research Universities Council (ITRU). (2025). About us. Retrieved October 7, 2025, from http://itrunetwork.org/about
  30. Janik, A. (2023). Repositioning in international student flow: A network analysis approach. Journal of Studies in International Education, 27(5), 553–572. https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153231153682
  31. Karahasan, B. C. & Uyar, E. (2009). Spatial distribution of education and regional inequalities in Türkiye, MPRA Paper 30130, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2011. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/30130/
  32. Keyder, Ç. (1987). State and class in Türkiye: A study in capitalist development. Verso.
  33. Kondakçı, Y. (2011). Student mobility reviewed: attraction and satisfaction of international students in Türkiye. High Educ, 62, 573–592 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9406-2
  34. Knight, J. (2003). Updated internationalization definition. International Higher Education, 33, 2-3. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2003.33.7391
  35. Knight, J., & De Wit, H. (2018). Internationalization of higher education: Past and future. International Higher Education, (95), 11-13. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2018.95.10715
  36. Li, M., & Bray, M. (2007). Cross-border flows of students for higher education: Push-pull factors and motivations. Higher Education, 53, 791-818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-005-5423-3
  37. Litchfield, J. A. (1999). Inequality: Methods and tools. Text for the worldbank poverty.net, https://jenni.uchicago.edu/econ341/readings/Litchfield_1999_inequality-methods-tools.pdf
  38. Lorenz, M. O. (1905). Methods of measuring the concentration of wealth. Publications of the American Statistical Association, 9(70), 209–219. https://doi.org/10.2307/2276207
  39. Mardin, Ş. (1973). Center–periphery relations: A key to Turkish politics? Daedalus, 102(1), 169–190. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20024114
  40. Maringe, F., & Foskett, N. (2010). Globalization and internationalization in higher education: Theoretical, strategic and management perspectives. Continuum.
  41. Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (2002). “Push-pull” factors influencing international student destination choice. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(2), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540210418403
  42. Mete, M. & Özgenel, M. (2021), uluslararası yükseköğretim öğrencilerinin Türkiye’yi tercih etme nedenlerinin ve beklentilerinin incelenmesi, Stratejik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, C.5, S.3, s.739-753. https://doi.org/10.30692/sisad.936010
  43. Moran, P. A. P. (1950). Notes on continuous stochastic phenomena. Biometrika, 37(1–2), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/37.1-2.17
  44. Nye, J. S. (1991). Bound to lead: The changing nature of American power. Basic Books.
  45. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD). (2021), Education at a Glance 2021: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b35a14e5-en.
  46. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2023). Education at a glance 2023: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/f8c09d57-en
  47. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2018). OECD regional outlook 2018: Focusing on people and places. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264286234-en
  48. Özoğlu, M., Gür, B. S., & Coşkun, İ. (2012). Küresel eğilimler ışığında Türkiye’de uluslararası öğrenciler. Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Toplum Araştırmaları Vakfı (SETA).
  49. Polat, S. & Arslan, Y. (2017). Uluslararası öğrencilerin üniversite seçimini etkileyen etmenler. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 7(2), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.17.007
  50. Sarıahmetoğlu, H. & Kamer, S. T. (2021). Education and adaptation of foreign students: Problems and suggestions, MSKU Journal of Education, 8(2), 612-634. https://doi.org/10.21666/muefd.852569
  51. Sarıer, Y. (2016). The factors that affects students’ academic achievement in Türkiye: A meta-analysis study, Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 31(3), 609-627. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2016015868
  52. Prebisch, R. (1950). The economic development of Latin America and its principal problems. New York, NY: United Nations Department of Economic Affairs. Retrieved from https://repositorio.cepal.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/77466a7c-2c03-4168-81d0-4886825819dc/content
  53. Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon Books.
  54. Shils, E. (1975). Center and periphery: Essays in macrosociology. University of Chicago Press.
  55. Shils, E. (1982). The constitution of society. University of Chicago Press.
  56. Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 66-111). University of Illinois Press.
  57. Stein, S. (2021). Internationalization for an uncertain future: Tensions, paradoxes, and possibilities. The Review of Higher Education, 41(1), 3-32. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2017.0031
  58. Şimşek, B., & Bakır, S. (2016). International students mobility and the internationalization process of Atatürk University. Journal of Turkish Research Institute (55). https://doi.org/10.14222/Turkiyat1541
  59. Tekin, M. K. (2022). Dünyada ve Türkiye’de uluslararası öğrenci hareketliliğinin mekânsal perspektiften incelenmesi. Ege Coğrafya Dergisi, 31(1), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.51800/ecd.1085090
  60. Topal, F., & Tauscher, S. (2020). A Study on the problems of international students in the academic and social life. Journal of Academic Inquiries, 15(1), 309–336. https://doi.org/10.17550/akademikincelemeler.624380
  61. T.R. Ministry of Development. (2017). Socio-economic development ranking of provinces (SEGE-2017) report. Ministry of Development Publication No: 2977. https://www.sanayi.gov.tr/merkez-birimi/b94224510b7b/sege/il-sege-raporlari
  62. Turkish Statistical Institute. (2025, April 10). Population, demography. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=Nufus-ve-Demografi-109
  63. Wallerstein, I. (2004). World-systems analysis: An introduction. Duke University Press.
  64. Wallerstein, I. (1974). The modern world-system I: Capitalist agriculture and the origins of the European world-economy in the sixteenth century. Academic Press.
  65. Worsham, R. E., Whatley, M., Crain, A., Deal, S., & Skinner, B. T. (2023). assessing the role of spatial inequality in transfer student success. Community College Review, 52(1), 30-57. https://doi.org/10.1177/00915521231201207 (Original work published 2024)
  66. Yardımcıoğlu, F., Beşel, F., & Savaşan, F. (2017). Uluslararası öğrencilerin sosyo-ekonomik problemleri ve çözüm önerileri (Sakarya Üniversitesi örneği). Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi, 12(1), 203-254. https://doi.org/10.17550/akademikincelemeler.308940
  67. Yılmaz, G. & Güçlü, N (2021). Overview of ınternational student mobility in Turkey. Journal of Higher Education and Science 11(1), 245-256. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2021.444
  68. Yolsal, H. & Yorulmaz, Ö. (2019). Evaluating the research outputs of Turkish universities using Gini coefficient. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 19 (3), 59-82. https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.631974
  69. Zahl-Thanem, N. & Rye, J. F. (2024). Spatial inequality in higher education: A growing urban–rural gap. European Sociological Review, 40(6), 1067–1081. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcad057