Journals / Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 2021 - Sayı: 28

A Study on the Evaluation of EducationUnions in Terms of Purposes and ActivitiesStated in their Constitutions

Pages
241–261
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️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)

It is concluded that it is necessary to conduct qualitativestudies which aim to determine the purposes of unions, their determinedgoals, and which mission they have undertaken.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to determine how education unions that have themost members in Turkey include the aims and activities in their statutes interms of the functions of the unions.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In the study, 27 evaluators selected fromfour groups as academicians, union managers, education administrators,and teachers were asked to classify items related to goals and activities infive categories.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It is concluded that it is necessary to conduct qualitativestudies which aim to determine the purposes of unions, their determinedgoals, and which mission they have undertaken.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study aims to determine how education unions that have themost members in Turkey include the aims and activities in their statutes interms of the functions of the unions. Furthermore, it aims to identify howthe determined purposes and activities are distributed according to unionsand the functions of the unions. The study is a qualitative research in thetype of document analysis. Purpose and functions of the unions; theirperspectives on politics and democracy, labour relations, education anddevelopment have been studies on the dimensions of socio-economic andsocio-psychological functions. In the study, 27 evaluators selected fromfour groups as academicians, union managers, education administrators,and teachers were asked to classify items related to goals and activities infive categories. Based on the evaluators’ classification, the Fleiss Kappacoefficient was found. At this stage, it was observed that the Fleiss Kappavalue indicated a significant agreement. In the study, the constitutions ofthe four education unions with the highest number of members wereexamined in five dimensions. The data were analysed using the five-stagecontent analysis method. As a result, it is possible to suggest that educationunionism in Turkey has an organisational mentality that emphasises socialand political issues. It is concluded that it is necessary to conduct qualitativestudies which aim to determine the purposes of unions, their determinedgoals, and which mission they have undertaken.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERKILIÇ, T. A., DİLBAZ, E. (2022). A Study on the Evaluation of EducationUnions in Terms of Purposes and ActivitiesStated in their Constitutions. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt: 2021 - Sayı: 28, 241–261. https://ajindex.com/articles/496940

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Acuner, A. (1994). Öğretmen örgütlenmesine ilişkin model önerisi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi. Ankara:
  2. Ankara Üniversitesi,
  3. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Akgeyik, T. (1994). Sendika-siyaset ilişkisi (karşılaştırmalı modeller açısından). Kamu-İş Dergisi, 3, (3), 77-89.
  4. Akturan, U. (2015). Doküman incelemesi. T. Baş ve U. Akturan (Ed). Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri: Nvivo 7.0 ile Nitel Veri Analizi içinde (s. 117-126). Ankara:
  5. Seçkin. Akyuz, Y. (1980). Öğretmen örgütlenmesi (Türkiye, Fransa, İsviçre'de ve uluslararası düzeyde) kuruluşlaretkinlikler-sorunlar. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi. Allen, R. E ve Keaveeny, T. J. (1988). Comtemporary Labour Relations. New York: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company. Aren, S. (2014). Ekonomi dersleri. Ankara:
  6. İmge. Berberoglu, N. (1995). Çalışma ekonomisi. Eskişehir: Ant. Bilgen, Ö. B., Doğan, N. (2017). Puanlayıcılar arası güvenirlik belirleme tekniklerinin karşılaştırılması. Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi, 8(1),63-78.
  7. Bilgin, N. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde içerik analizi. Ankara:
  8. Siyasal. Can, H.; Kavuncubaşı, Ş., Yıldırım, S. (2012). Kamu ve özel kesimde insan kaynakları yönetimi. Ankara:
  9. Siyasal. Cerev, G. (2013). Geçmişten günümüze öğretmenlerin sendikal örgütlenme mücadelesi. Çankırı Karatekin üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 4(2),203- 216. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20 (1), 37-46.
  10. Celik, A. (2010). Vesayetten siyasete Türkiye’deki sendikacılık. Ankara:
  11. İletişim. Celik, A. (2015, 16 Temmuz). Memur sendikacılığı nereye? https://www.birgun.net/ haber/memur-sendikaciligi-nereye-84911 (Erişim tarihi: 14.09.2020).
  12. Denscombe, M. (2007). The good research guide. New York: Open University. Egitim Bir-Sen. (2019). Eğitimciler Birliği Sendikası tüzüğü. https://ankara1.ebs.org.tr/tuzugumuz (Erişim tarihi: 04. 03. 2020).
  13. Egitim-Iş. (2019). Tüzük. http://www.egitimis.org.tr/files/bilgibelge/50dc80a384ef3_907516_egitimis_tuzuk.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 27.02.2020).
  14. Egitim-Sen. (2014). Tüzük. http://egitimsen.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/51040a5e4881afc_ek-2.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 27.02.2020).
  15. Eraslan, L. (2012). Türkiye’de Eğitim sendikaciliğinin tarihsel perspektifi ve günümüz eğitim sendikaciliğinin değerlendirilmesi. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/musbed/issue/ 23512/250504. (Erişim tarihi: 04. 03. 2020)
  16. Fleiss, J. L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 76(5)