SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 45 Sayı: 2

Civic Engagement among University Students: Case of a Turkish Public University

Sibel Akın
Ömer Çalışkan
Cennet Engin-demir
Pages
301–330
Publication Date
2016-09-01
🏛️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)

One-Way Repeated ANOVA results indicated that there was a significant difference between the mean scores of three dimensions of civic engagement.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aimed to investigate the effect of certain background variables (gender, attending student club, newspaper reading, home residence, level of mother education, and level of father education) on university students’ level of civic engagement in university setting.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study also aimed to explore if there were any significant differences among the three dimensions of civic engagement: students’ activism, exercising rights, and interest in politics.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:One-Way Repeated ANOVA results indicated that there was a significant difference between the mean scores of three dimensions of civic engagement.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Civic engagement · Democracy · Higher education

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the effect of certain background variables (gender, attending student club, newspaper reading, home residence, level of mother education, and level of father education) on university students’ level of civic engagement in university setting. The study also aimed to explore if there were any significant differences among the three dimensions of civic engagement: students’ activism, exercising rights, and interest in politics. The study employed causal comparative design and the sample involved 1074 undergraduate students who were selected by stratified sampling from all faculties of a Turkish public university. The data were collected by a self-developed Civic Engagement Scale and analyzed by Two-Way MANOVA and One-Way Repeated ANOVA analyses. One-Way Repeated ANOVA results indicated that there was a significant difference between the mean scores of three dimensions of civic engagement. More specifically, the level of students’ activism was significantly lower than the level of students’ exercising their rights and the level of their interest in politics. On the other hand, there was no significant difference between the level of students’ exercising their rights and interest in politics. Moreover, Two-Way MANOVA results showed that all selected variables had a significant effect on the three dimensions of students’ civic engagement.

🔖

Cite This Article

Akın, S., Çalışkan, Ö., Engin-demir, C. (2016). Civic Engagement among University Students: Case of a Turkish Public University. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 45 Sayı: 2, 301–330. https://doi.org/10.14812/cuefd.284302

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

↗New Tab

Loading PDF document...

References (61)

  1. Adler, R. P., & Goggin, J. (2005). What do we mean by “civic engagament”? Journal of Transformative Education, 3(3), 236-253.
  2. Barnhardt, C. L., Sheets, J. E., & Pasquesi, K. (2015). You expect what?: Students’ perceptions as resources in acquiring commitments and capacities for civic engagement. Research in Higher Education, 56, 622-644.
  3. Boland, J. A. (2008). Embedding a civic engagement dimension within the higher education curriculum: A study of policy, process and practice in Ireland (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.
  4. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Cultural reproduction and Social reproduction. In J. Karabel & A. H. Halsey. (Eds.), Power and ideology in education (pp. 487-510). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  5. Bourdieu, P. (1993). Sociology in question. London: Sage.
  6. Brisbin, R. A., & Hunter, S. (2003). Community leaders’ perceptions of university and college efforts to encourage civic engagement. The Review of Higher Education, 26(4), 467-486.
  7. Bryant, A. N., Gaston-Gayles, J., & Davis, H. A. (2012). The relationship between civic behavior and civic values: A conceptual model. Research in Higher Education, 53, 76-93.
  8. Burns, T., & Carpenter, J. (2008). Organizational citizenship and student achievement. Journal of Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives in Education, 1(1), 51-58.
  9. Caputo, D. (2005). A campus view: Civic engagement and the higher education community. National Civic Review, 94(2), 3-9.
  10. Checkoway, B. (2001). Renewing the civic mission of the American research university. The Journal of Higher Education, 72(2), 125-147.
  11. Checkoway, B. (2012). Education for democracy by young people in community-based organizations. Youth & Society, 45(3), 389-403.
  12. Checkoway, B., & Aldana, A. (2013). Four forms of youth civic engagement for diverse democracy. Children and Youth Services Review, 35(11), 1894-1899.
  13. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  14. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95-120.
  15. Çağlar, N. (2011). Kadının siyasal yaşama katılımı ve kota uygulamaları [Women’s participation in political life and quota applications]. Suleyman Demirel University the Journal of Visionary, 3(4), 56-79.
  16. Çarkoğlu, A. (2001). Türk gençliği ve siyasal katılım. In B. Ekim (Ed.), Türk gençliği ve katılım, katıl ve geleceğini yarat (pp. 37-65). İstanbul: ARI Düşünce ve Toplumsal Gelişim Derneği Yayınları.
  17. Çelik, Z., & Gür, B. S. (2014). Yükseköğretim sistemlerinin yönetimi ve üniversite özerkliği: Küresel eğilimler ve Türkiye örneği [The governance of higher education systems and university autonomy: Global trends and the case of Turkey]. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 4(1), 18-27.
  18. Dayıoğlu, M., & Türüt-Aşık, S. (2007). Gender differences in academic performance in a large public university in Turkey. Higher Education, 53(2), 255-277.
  19. Dedeoğlu, S. (2009). Eşitlik mi ayrımcılık mı?: Türkiye’de sosyal devlet, cinsiyet eşitliği politikaları ve kadın istihdamı. Çalışma ve Toplum, 2, 41-54.
  20. Dee, T. S. (2004). Are there civic returns to education? Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1697-1720.
  21. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, NY: Macmillan.
  22. Dinçer, H., & Kıvılcım, Z. (2014). Öğrencilerin ifade ve örgütlenme özgürlüğü: Üniversitelerde disiplin soruşturmaları [Students’ freedom of expression and assembly: Disciplinary investigations in the universities]. Eğitim Bilim Toplum, 12(45), 108-118.
  23. Doğanay, A., Çuhadar, A., & Sarı, M. (2007). Examining of the effects of some variables on political participation level of prospective teachers in the context of democratic citizenship education. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 13(50), 213-246.
  24. Doğramacı, İ. (2007). Türkiye’de ve dünyada yükseköğretim yönetimi [Higher education governance in Turkey and the World]. Ankara: Meteksan.
  25. Downs, D. A. (2012). Civic education versus civic engagement. Academic Questions, 25, 343-347.
  26. Dündar, S. (2013). Demokratik okulun bir unsuru olarak öğrencilerin karar süreçlerine katılımı [Students’ participation to the decision-making process as a tool for democratic school]. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13(2), 853-875.
  27. Economist Intelligence Unit. (2015). Democracy index 2015: Democracy in an age of anxiety. Retrieved from http://www.eiu.com/public/topical_report.aspx?campaignid=Democracy2015 (Accessed on 28.07.2016).
  28. Einfeld, A., & Collins, D. (2008). The relationships between service-learning, social justice, multicultural competence, and civic engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 49(2), 95-109.
  29. Englund, T. (2002). Higher education, democracy and citizenship–the democratic potential of the university? Studies in Philosophy and Education, 21(4-5), 281-287.
  30. Erdoğan, E. (2001). Türk gençliği ve siyasal katılım boyutları: Bir katılım endeksi denemesi. In B. Ekim (Ed.), Türk gençliği ve katılım, katıl ve geleceğini yarat (pp. 9-27). İstanbul: ARI Düşünce ve Toplumsal Gelişim Derneği Yayınları.
  31. Erdoğan, E. (2003). Türk gençliği ve siyasal katılım: 1999–2003. In B. T. Yılmaz (Ed.), Türk gençliği ve katılım, katıl ve geleceğini Yarat II (pp. 27-46). İstanbul: ARI Düşünce ve Toplumsal Gelişim Derneği Yayınları.
  32. Ersoy, A. F. (2012). Annelerin vatandaşlık algısı, çocuklarında vatandaşlık bilinci geliştirme uygulamaları ve karşılaştıkları sorunlar [Mothers’ perceptions of citizenship, practices for developing citizenship conscience of their children and problems they encountered]. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(3), 2111-2124.
  33. Esmer, Y. (2012). Türkiye değerler atlası. Retrieved from http://www.benimicininsanhaklari.org/wp-content/uploads/05-Turkey-Values-Study-2012-Turkiye-Degerler-Atlasi-2012.pdf (Accessed on 15.01.2015).
  34. European Commission. (2014). Europe for citizens programme 2014-2020. Retrieved from https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/sites/eaceasite/files/documents/comm2013003670000en.pdf (Accessed on 12.03.2015).
  35. Fiss, O. M. (2012). The democratic mission of the university. Albany Law Review, 76(1), 2013.
  36. Flanagan, C., Levine, P., & Settersten, R. (2009). Civic engagement and the changing transition to adulthood. Retrieved from http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/ChangingTransition.pdf (Accessed on 05.12.2014).
  37. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies.
  38. Glaeser, E. L., Ponzetto, G. A., & Shleifer, A. (2007). Why does democracy need education? Journal of Economic Growth, 12(2), 77-99.
  39. Goldin, N. (2014). The global youth wellbeing index. Retrieved from http://www.youthindex.org/reports/globalyouthwellbeingindex.pdf (Accessed on 10.02.2015).
  40. Gözübüyük-Tamer, M. (2011). Okulların demokratik ve katılımcı öğrenim ortamlarına dönüştürülmesi [Transforming of schools to democratic and participative learning environment]. National Education, 192, 7-25.
  41. Higher Education Council of 1981, Pub. L. No. 2547. Yükseköğretim kanunu [Higher education law]. Retrieved from http://www.yok.gov.tr/documents/10279/29816/2547+say%C4%B1l%C4%B1%20Y
  42. %C3%BCksek%C3%B6%C4%9Fretim+Kanunu/f439f90b-7786-464a-a48f-9d9299ba8895 (Accessed on 19.02.2015).
  43. Hurtado, S., Engberg, M. E., Ponjuan, L., & Landreman, L. (2002). Students’ precollege preparation for participation in a diverse democracy. Research in Higher Education, 43(2), 163-186.
  44. Ishitani, T. T., & McKitrick, S. A. (2013). The effects of academic programs and institutional characteristics on postgraduate civic engagement behavior. Journal of College Student Development, 54(4), 379-396.
  45. Jeffres, L. W., Lee, J., Neuendorf, K., & Atkin, D. (2007). Newspaper reading supports community involvement. Newspaper Research Journal, 28(1), 6-23.
  46. Johnson-Hakim, S. M., Kirk, C. M., Rowley, R. L., Lien, A. D., Greenleaf, J. P., Burdsal, C. A. (2013). Exploring civic engagement at an urban commuter campus: Pathways and barriers. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 41(4), 279-290.
  47. Ottaway, M. (2003). Democracy challenged: The rise of semi-authoritarianism. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
  48. Prentice, M. (2011). Civic engagement among community college students through service learning. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 35(11), 842-854.
  49. Putnam, R. (2000). An interview with Robert Putnam: The future of US civil society: Civic engagement after September 11. Harvard International Review, 28(2), 74-77.
  50. Sener, T. (2012). Civic engagement of future teachers. Procedia Technology, 1, 4-9.
  51. Shaw, A., Brennan, M., Chaskin, R., & Dolan, P. (2012). Engaging youth in planning education for social transformation: Youth civic engagement in non-formal education. Retrieved from http://www.childandfamilyresearch.ie/sites/www.childandfamilyresearch.ie/files/shaw_brennan_chaskin_dolan.pdf (Accessed on 06.11.2014).
  52. Sigauke, A. T. (2012). Young people, citizenship and citizenship education in Zimbabwe. International Journal of Educational Development, 32(2), 214-223.
  53. Sloam, J. (2014). ‘The outraged young’: Young Europeans, civic engagement and the new media in a time of crisis. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 217-231.
  54. Smith, B. L. R., & Fritschler, A. L. (2009). Engagement in civic education remains weak. Phi Kappa Phi Forum, 89(3), 8-10.
  55. Taylor, R. (2007). Concepts of citizenship in the context of political education. In L. McIlrath, & I. M. Labhrainn (Eds.), Higher education and civic engagement: International perspectives (pp. 3-12). Aldershot, England: Ashgate.
  56. TBMM (The Grand National Assembly of Turkey). (2015). Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi milletvekilleri dağılımı: Cinsiyete göre dağılım [The Grand National Assembly of Turkey: Gender-based distribution]. Retrieved from https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/develop/owa/milletvekillerimiz_sd.dagilim (Accessed on 01.04.2015).
  57. Thornton, C. H., & Jaeger, A. J. (2007). A new context for understanding civic responsibility: Relating culture to action at a research university. Research in Higher Education, 48(8), 993-1020.
  58. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., Brady, H. E., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  59. Westley, B. H., & Severin, W. J. (1964). A profile of the daily newspaper non-reader. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 41(1), 45-156.
  60. WEF (The World Economic Forum). (2015). The global gender gap report 2015. Retrieved from http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2015/economies/#economy=TUR (Accessed on 10.08.2016).
  61. Yaylı, H., & Eroğlu, G. (2015). Yerel katılım bağlamında Türkiye’de kadın temsili [Women’s representation in Turkey in terms of local participation]. International Journal of Science Culture and Sport, 3, 504-524.