SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eğitim ve Bilim / 2010 / Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 157

Isomorphic and diverse institutions among Turkish foundation universities

Türkiye'deki vakıf üniversitelerinde kurumsal benzeşme ve farklılaşma

Fatma MIZIKACI
Pages
140–151
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

With the exception of small number of distinctive organizations showing semi-elité characteristics, foundation universities remain small and akin.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study explores isomorphic changes in the private higher education institutions in Turkey.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Within and across the institutions, isomorphic changes are common while diverse patterns are subject to having semi-elité characteristics.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:With the exception of small number of distinctive organizations showing semi-elité characteristics, foundation universities remain small and akin.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study explores isomorphic changes in the private higher education institutions in Turkey. Within and across the institutions, isomorphic changes are common while diverse patterns are subject to having semi-elité characteristics. Within the limits of the national centralized system, these universities have emerged as distinctive organizations and few have grown into leading institutions competing with public universities. They became initiators in running different academic programs, curricula and administrative structures. The largest group of foundation universities bears the demand absorbing role showing isomorphic characteristics. Three critical elements of isomorphic change, coercive, mimetic and normative, were observed in these institutions. With the exception of small number of distinctive organizations showing semi-elité characteristics, foundation universities remain small and akin.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye’deki vakıf üniversitelerinin birbirine benzeşme sürecini incelemektir. Bu üniversitelerde, kurumlar arası ve kurum içi benzeşme süreci genel bir karakter olmakla birlikte, farklılaşma gösteren kurum örnekleri de vardır ve bu farklılık, kısmen seçkin olma özelliği ile ilişkilidir. Türkiye’de yalnızca birkaç vakıf üniversitesinin idari yapısı ve eğitim programı kısmen seçkin kategorisinde yer almaktadır. Bu özellikleriyle, yükseköğretim sistemi içinde, ayrıcalıklı kurumlar olarak devlet üniversiteleriyle yarışabilecek kadar ön plana çıkmışlardır. Bunların dışında kalan vakıf üniversitelerinin büyük bir çoğunluğu birbirine benzer şekilde talep karşılama görevini üstlenmiştir. Bu kurumlar, benzeşim sürecinin üç karakteristik özelliği olan; dayatmaya dayalı benzeşim, taklitçi benzeşim ve normatif benzeşim süreçlerini geçirmektedir. Bu yüzden, birkaç kısmen seçkin üniversite dışında, vakıf üniversitelerinin birbirine benzer özellikleriyle yükseköğretim içindeki payları küçüktür.

🔖

Cite This Article

MIZIKACI, F. (2022). Isomorphic and diverse institutions among Turkish foundation universities. Eğitim ve Bilim, Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 157, 140–151. https://ajindex.com/articles/497744

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Altbach, P. G. (2005). Universities: Family Style. International Higher Education. Boston: The Boston College Center for Higher Education, 39, 15-16.
  2. Birnbaum, R. (1983). Maintaining Diversity in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bologna Türkiye Ulusal Raporu 2007-2009
  3. Template for National Reports, Retrieved on 20 May 2010 at URL: www.yok.gov.tr Dimaggio P. J. & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160.
  4. Ergüder, Ü. (2008).
  5. Recommendations. In Barblan, A., Ergüder, Ü., & Gürüz K. (Eds.), Case Studies: Higher Education in Turkey: Institutional Autonomy and Responsibility in a Modern Society. Policy Recommendations in a Historical Perspective. Bologna: Magna Charta Observatory & Bononia University Press.
  6. Gür, B. S. (2009). Yükseköğretimde Avrupalılaşmanın Ötesi. Mostar, 5(53), 40-43.
  7. Gürüz, K. (2007). Development of Private Higher Education in Turkey. International Educator, 16,2. Huisman, J. (2000). Dedicated Followers of Fashion: program emulation. In H. Wagenaar (Ed.), Dutch Universities in Government Institutions: Effects, Changes and Normative Foundations. Netherlands: Springer. Karakütük, K. (2006). Yükseköğretimin Finanmanı. Milli Eğitim, 171, 219-242.
  8. Kavak, Y. (1997). The Roles of Universities in Regional Development and Turkey’s Experience. Hacettepe Journal of Education, 13, 27-32.
  9. Küçükcan, T. & Gür, B. S. (2009). Türkiye’de Yükseköğretim: Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analiz. Ankara:
  10. SETA Yayınları.
  11. Korkut, H. (2001). Sorgulanan Yükseköğretim. Ankara:
  12. Nobel Yayınları.
  13. Levy, D. C. (2004). “The New Institutionalism: Mismatches with Private Higher Education’s Global Growth.” PROPHE Working Paper Series [Online] Retrieved on 25- July- 2008, at URL: www.prophe.org Levy, D. C. (2006). “Private-Public Interfaces in Higher Education Development: Two Sectors in Sync?” Paper presented in the Conference on Higher Education and Development: the 2006 World Bank Regional Seminar on Development Economics, Beijing, China. Levy, D.C. (2008a). When Private Higher Education Does Not Bring Organizational Diversity: Argentina, China, Hungary. In P. G. Altbach (Ed.), Private Prometheus: Private Higher Education and Development in the 21st Century. Greenwood: IAP. Levy, D. C. (2008b). The Enlarged Expanse of Private Higher Education. Die Hochscule, 2, 13-14.
  14. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutional organizations: Formal structure a