Modern Eğitim Yönetimi Anlayışına Yönelik Eleştiriler ve Postmodern Eğitim Yönetimi

The Critics of Modern Educational Administration and Postmodern Educational Administration

Özet

Eğitim yönetimi alanında uzunca bir zaman egemen olan pozitivist paradigma, okulları ideolojik bir yaklaşımla değerlendirmekte, öğrenci, öğretmen, yönetici ve yardımcı personeli, kurallar ve görev tanımları karşısında edilgen bir konuma itmektedir. Pozitivist düşüncenin ürünü olarak okullar, kurallarla işleyen, belirlenmiş programları uygulayan, hâkim düşünceye göre insan yetiştirmeyi hedefleyen kurumlar olarak düşünülmüştür. Postmodern eğitim ve okul yönetimi, modern paradigmanın etkisinde şekillenen teknik ve amaç eksenli eğitim ve okul yönetimi anlayışlarına karşı esnek, yerel ve değer sistemlerini önemseyen bir eğitim ve okul yönetimi yaklaşımını savunmaktadır. Pozitivist, rasyonel ve merkeziyetçi modern eğitim yönetimi anlayışı okullarda yönetici, öğretmen ve öğrencilerin psiko-sosyal ihtiyaç ve beklentilerine karşılık verememekte, bu yönüyle bazı sorunlara sebep olmaktadır. Bu çalışmada teorik düzeyde, postmodern eğitim ve okul yönetimi tartışmalarının, modern eğitim yönetimi anlayışını önemli ölçüde dönüşüme uğrattığı ileri sürülmektedir.

Abstract

Summary Educational administration has been manipulated by the approaches generally categorized into modern and traditional. Basic characteristics of modern approach determined by positivism are rooted in the scientific experiments. The objective and exact results of experiments performed in the field of science have begun to influence administration, than educational settings have been affected by this consideration. It is possible to come to conclusion and generalization depending on the exacts results of physical, medical, and mathematical experiments via the scientific approaches; however it is misleading in the field of social sciences since the subject of it is about human and his behavior. Human beings are not only differentiated in terms of feelings, ideas, attitudes, education and manner but also the same person could easily behave uniquely depending on the different situation and time, thus it is impossible for social sciences to reach exact and objective results as it is fact for the experimental sciences. Modern paradigms which interpret the schools in the view of ideology emphasize and values rules and structures more than students, teachers and administrators. The schools are transformed into organizations that are run by rules, strictly stick to curriculum, and aimed to train students in the light of dominant paradigm of positivism. In this point of view, mission of teachers have been constrained to apply the given curriculum and to transmit the defined knowledge, where as the students have been defined as an input whose mission are to be trained by rational education for the sake of the survival of status quo (Birch, 1993; Hoy ve Miskel, 1996; Best ve Kellner, 1998; English, 2001). It is alleged by the scholars that modern educational systems characterized by bureaucracy ignored the sociological and psychological factors that affect the human behaviors in organizations. The classical management theorists had stressed the rights of superiors; but the duties of subordinates. It was prior to managers to get the job done formally more than the satisfaction of the subordinates' psychological and social needs. Educational settings that are organized in the light of modernism and bureaucracy have caused the schools' curriculum planned by central authority; the administrators have been appointed and promoted in a centralized manner; financial and sub structural services have only been performed after the approval of central authorities. The administrators in modern schools have transformed his power and authority into the centralized and bureaucratic power instead of sharing them with teachers and students, and they tend to turn the schools into the organization that is driven by rules and structures. The nature of school administrations which includes homogeneity and standard educational style are opposed to multicultural education and individual difference. In contrast to modern paradigms, it is assumed that school administration which is shaped by postmodern paradigm might have presented the subjective nature of human love, difference, faith etc. Variation is valued as wealth and the mission of administration is to manage the chaos and support the difference as much as possible. Postmodern Educational Administration The drawbacks of modern paradigms which are also stated the emergent causes of postmodernism could be classified in a five headings. These are (Bush, 1995): (1) modern paradigms are goal-oriented, (2) the process of deciding is rational, (3) individualistic expectation in an organization is ignored, (4) the authority is belonged to superiors hierarchically and (5) they are structure based organizations. The emergent paradigms have aimed to fill the gaps of modern paradigms that are bureaucratic, centralized, statuesque based and positivist. Postmodern paradigm has caused some debates in the turn of the 21st century. Paradigm shift that is popularized after positivism have been related to some critical assumptions about the quality of knowledge. These are summarized below (Özden, 1999): - Whether the science should strictly stick to rules or can it be transformed according to individuals? - Should knowledge be loaded or critical thinking be encouraged? - Should the necessary knowledge be loaded or should it better to teach how to learn? - Should knowledge only involve the verbal and numerical intelligence or should it comprise kinesthetic, rhythmic and self development? Culture is another important concept in the process of paradigmatic transformation. Since the individuals are defined as a culture-based identity, the administration should also be culture specific, unique and decentralized. It is evident that there is a transformation towards social and cultural models from rational and bureaucratic models (Balcı, 1988, 422; Şişman, 1995; 1996; 1998). In a postmodern educational and administrational setting it is hoped that common sense and communication could build a bridge between the subjects (Kanpol, 1995). Furthermore, it is necessity to appeal the expectation of the current generation who were brought up in a turbulent educational setting. With these characteristics, postmodern paradigm have criticized the standard and homogenized educational consideration for the sake of flexible and interpretative approaches that is appealing to individual expectation, needs and cultural values (Giroux, 1994). The transformation process as a concept of postmodernism is alleged by the so called scholars where as the pitfalls of postmodernism also stressed. The critisizm of postmodern education have focused on the ambiguity of citizenship, hinderance to democratisation and socialisation in the schools (Terren, 2002, 161). It is assumed that there are no standard rules and centralized curriculum which is prevalent all over the country in postmodern setting because of the decentralization, variance and difference. It is then; school administrators could have accepted the culture

Anahtar kelimeler: eğitim yönetimi , postmodern okul yönetimi , eğitim yönetimi