SavedAdd your journal

Journals / ODÜ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ARAŞTIRMALARI DERGİSİ-ODÜSOBİAD / 2026 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 3

Evaluation of preschools in terms of sustainability: The case of Erzincan

Okul öncesi eğitim kurumlarının sürdürülebilirlik açısından değerlendirilmesi: Erzincan örneği

Şeymanur Battal Pala(ERZİNCAN BİNALİ YILDIRIM ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-4581-4561
Fulya Ezmeci(ERZİNCAN BİNALİ YILDIRIM ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-3950-1780
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-09-29
🏛️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 revealed that the overall level of sustainability practices in the preschools was moderate; the preschools exhibited relatively strong performance in the Recycle, Respect, and Rethink themes, whereas they displayed weak performance in the Repair, Refuse, and Reduce themes.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to evaluate the sustainability practices of preschools in Erzincan within the 7R framework (Rethink, Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, Repair, Respect, Recycle).
📊
Key Findings & Data:In nine preschools selected through purposive sampling, structured observations were conducted using the 7R Sustainability Observation and Interview Form developed by the researchers, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with administrators and teachers.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Findings revealed that the overall level of sustainability practices in the preschools was moderate; the preschools exhibited relatively strong performance in the Recycle, Respect, and Rethink themes, whereas they displayed weak performance in the Repair, Refuse, and Reduce themes.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Erken çocukluk eğitimi · sürdürülebilirlik · çevre eğitimi

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the sustainability practices of preschools in Erzincan within the 7R framework (Rethink, Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, Repair, Respect, Recycle). A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was adopted, with quantitative and qualitative data collected simultaneously. In nine preschools selected through purposive sampling, structured observations were conducted using the 7R Sustainability Observation and Interview Form developed by the researchers, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with administrators and teachers. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, while the qualitative data were analyzed through deductive content analysis. Findings revealed that the overall level of sustainability practices in the preschools was moderate; the preschools exhibited relatively strong performance in the Recycle, Respect, and Rethink themes, whereas they displayed weak performance in the Repair, Refuse, and Reduce themes. This pattern indicates that the waste hierarchy operates in reverse and that practices are largely activity-based nature dependent on teacher initiative. Socio-cultural and environmental dimensions of sustainability were relatively strong, while the economic dimension was neglected. Preschools included in certification programs exhibited higher performance; however, certification was discussed as remaining limited in transforming the culture of consumption. Consequently, sustainability should be supported through institutional policy, green procurement strategies, and professional development

Özet

Bu araştırma, Erzincan ilindeki erken çocukluk eğitimi kurumlarının sürdürülebilirlik uygulamalarını 7R modeli (Yeniden Düşün, Reddet, Azalt, Yeniden Kullan, Onar, Saygı Duy, Geri Dönüştür) çerçevesinde değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmada yakınsayan paralel karma araştırma deseni benimsenmiş; nicel ve nitel veriler eş zamanlı olarak toplanmıştır. Amaçlı örnekleme yoluyla belirlenen dokuz okul öncesi kurumunda, araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen 7R Sürdürülebilirlik Gözlem ve Görüşme Formu aracılığıyla yapılandırılmış gözlemler gerçekleştirilmiş; yönetici ve öğretmenlerle yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler yapılmıştır. Nicel veriler betimsel istatistiklerle, nitel veriler ise tümdengelimsel içerik analiziyle çözümlenmiştir. Bulgular, kurumların genel sürdürülebilirlik uygulama düzeyinin orta seviyede olduğunu; Geri Dönüştür, Saygı Duy ve Yeniden Düşün boyutlarında görece güçlü, Onar, Reddet ve Azalt boyutlarında ise zayıf bir performans sergilediğini ortaya koymuştur. Bu örüntü, atık hiyerarşisinin tersine işlediğini ve uygulamaların büyük ölçüde öğretmen inisiyatifine dayalı etkinlik temelli bir nitelik taşıdığını göstermektedir. Sürdürülebilirliğin sosyo-kültürel ve çevresel boyutlarının görece güçlü, ekonomik boyutunun ise ihmal edildiği saptanmıştır. Sertifikasyon programlarına dâhil kurumların daha yüksek performans sergilediği belirlenmiş; ancak sertifikasyonun tüketim kültürünü dönüştürmede sınırlı kaldığı tartışılmıştır. Sonuç olarak sürdürülebilirliğin kurumsal politika, yeşil satın alma stratejileri ve mesleki gelişim yoluyla desteklenmesi önerilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Pala, Ş. B., Ezmeci, F. (2026). Evaluation of preschools in terms of sustainability: The case of Erzincan. ODÜ SOSYAL BİLİMLER ARAŞTIRMALARI DERGİSİ-ODÜSOBİAD, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 3. https://doi.org/10.48146/odusobiad.1957516

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (37)

  1. Boeve-de Pauw, J., & Van Petegem, P. (2018). Eco-school evaluation beyond labels: The impact of environmental policy, didactics and nature at school on student outcomes. Environmental Education Research, 24(9), 1250-1267. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2017.1307327
  2. Borg, F., & Pramling Samuelsson, I. (2022). Preschool children’s agency in education for sustainability: The case of Sweden. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 30(1), 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2022.2026439
  3. Caiman, C., & Lundegård, I. (2014). Pre-school children's agency in learning for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 20(4), 437–459. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2013.812722
  4. Collins, S., & Garrity, S. (2025). Early childhood educators’ understanding of education for sustainable development. Irish Educational Studies, 44(2), 281-299. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2023.2266688
  5. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  6. Davis, J. (2009). Revealing the research ‘hole’ of early childhood education for sustainability: A preliminary survey of the literature. Environmental Education Research, 15(2), 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620802710607
  7. Davis, J., & Elliott, S. (Eds.). (2014). Research in early childhood education for sustainability: International perspectives and provocations. Routledge.
  8. Duncan, E. (2011). Education for sustainable development in practice: Report Part 2 — ESD in practice. OMEP (Organisation Mondiale Pour L'Éducation Préscolaire).
  9. Edwards, S., & Cutter-Mackenzie, A. (2011). Environmentalising early childhood education curriculum through pedagogies of play. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36(1), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/183693911103600109
  10. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publishing.
  11. Elliott, S., & Davis, J. (2009). Exploring the resistance: An Australian perspective on educating for sustainability in early childhood. International Journal of Early Childhood, 41(2), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168879
  12. Grindheim, L. T., Bakken, Y., Hauge, K. H., & Heggen, M. P. (2019). Early childhood education for sustainability through contradicting and overlapping dimensions. ECNU Review of Education, 2(4), 374–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/2096531119893479
  13. Güler Yıldız, T., Öztürk, N., İlhan İyi, T., Aşkar, N., Banko Bal, Ç., Karabekmez, S., & Höl, Ş. (2021). Education for sustainability in early childhood education: A systematic review. Environmental Education Research, 27(6), 796–820. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1896680
  14. Huckle, J. (2012). Sustainable development. In J. Arthur & A. Peterson (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Education (pp. 362–371). Routledge.
  15. Inoue, M., O'Gorman, L., & Davis, J. (2016). Investigating early childhood teachers' understandings of and practices in education for sustainability in Queensland: A Japan-Australia research collaboration. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 32(2), 174–191. https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2016.4
  16. Kahriman-Öztürk, D., Olgan, R., & Güler, T. (2012). Preschool children's ideas on sustainable development: How preschool children perceive three pillars of sustainability with the regard to 7R. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(4), 2987–2995.
  17. Kahriman-Pamuk, D., & Borg, F. (2025). Sustainability, play and children’s agency: a comparative study of the Swedish and Turkish preschool curricula. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 33(4), 659–675. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2024.2415948
  18. Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127, 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005
  19. Korkmaz, A., & Guler Yildiz, T. (2017). Assessing preschools using the Eco-Schools program in terms of educating for sustainable development in early childhood education. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 25(4), 595-611. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2017.1331074
  20. Koşan, Y., & Güler Yıldız, T. (2026). From theory to practice: Empowering preschool teachers for sustainability via pedagogical systems theory based professional development. Early Childhood Education Journal, 54, 3161–3175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-025-02086-4
  21. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  22. Pamuk, S., Öztürk, N., Kahriman Pamuk, D., Elmas, R., Güler Yıldız, T., & Haktanır, G. (2021). A collaboration project on education for sustainability: Professional development needs of Turkish preschool teachers. Journal of Theoretical Educational Sciences, 14(4), 586–604. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.892384
  23. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri [Qualitative research and evaluation methods] (M. Bütün & S. B. Demir, Trans. Eds.; 3rd ed.). Pegem Akademi. (Original work published 2002)
  24. Potting, J., Hekkert, M., Worrell, E., & Hanemaaijer, A. (2017). Circular economy: Measuring innovation in the product chain. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. https://www.pbl.nl/uploads/default/downloads/pbl-2016-circular-economy-measuring-innovation-in-product-chains-2544.pdf
  25. Pramling Samuelsson, I. (2011). Why we should begin early with ESD: The role of early childhood education. International Journal of Early Childhood, 43(2), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-011-0034-x
  26. Pramling Samuelsson, I., & Kaga, Y. (Eds.). (2008). The contribution of early childhood education to a sustainable society. UNESCO.
  27. Pramling Samuelsson, I., & Park, E. (2017). How to educate children for sustainable learning and for a sustainable world. International Journal of Early Childhood, 49(3), 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-017-0197-1
  28. Reike, D., Vermeulen, W. J. V., & Witjes, S. (2018). The circular economy: New or refurbished as CE 3.0? Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 135, 246–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.08.027
  29. Siraj-Blatchford, J. (2009). Editorial: Education for sustainable development in early childhood. International Journal of Early Childhood, 41(2), 9–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168875
  30. Sterling, S. (2001). Sustainable education: Re-visioning learning and change (Schumacher Briefing No. 6). Green Books.
  31. Tekin, H. (1996). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme [Measurement and evaluation in education] (9th ed.). Yargı Yayınları.
  32. Toran, M. (2016). Sürdürülebilir anaokulları: Okul öncesi eğitim kurumlarının değerlendirilmesi [Sustainable kindergartens: An evaluation of early childhood education institutions]. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(3), 1035–1046.
  33. UNESCO. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals: Learning objectives. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444/PDF/247444eng.pdf.multi
  34. UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374802/PDF/374802eng.pdf.multi
  35. United Nations General Assembly. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future (Development and International Economic Co-operation: Environment, A/42/427). UN Digital Library. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/139811
  36. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. UN Publishing. https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/70/1
  37. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences] (12th ed.). Seçkin Yayıncılık.