Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

The Development of Educational Administration as a Scientific Field in Historical Course

Year 2020, Volume: 28 Issue: 1, 253 - 266, 31.01.2020
https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.3553

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the scientization process of educational administration in historical course. In the study, firstly discussions about whether educational administration is a scientific discipline and its justifications were presented. Definitons of educational administration were given within the scope of scientificness criteria. Sub-sequently, scientization process of educational administra-tion rooted in USA was examined beginning from the end of 19th century. Finally, reflections of the transformation in educational administration in Turkey was discussed. Analy-sis revealed that until 1900s the field of educational admi-nistration that could not gain a scientific quality was enric-hed with philosophical debates, influenced by Taylorism and developed under the disciplines of business and eco-nomy, began to draw its own line and emerge as a depen-dent science with theory movement in 1950s, underwent a paradigmatic change towards subjectivist-interpretivist approach as a result of criticism of rational positivism. In the present study, it was concluded that the field of educati-onal administration has struggled to become an indepen-dent discipline since it was handled as a scientific research area.

References

  • Aktan, S. (2015). John Franklin Bobbitt'te program düşüncesinin gelişimi: Tarihsel bir inceleme. Electronic Turkish Studies, 10(15), 35-50.
  • Aldrich, R. (2014). In search of ‘time-tested truths’: historical perspectives on educational administration. Journal of Educa-tional Administration and History, 46(2), 220-233.
  • Anderson, G. L., & Grinberg, J. (1998). Educational administration as a disciplinary practice: Appropriating Foucault's view of power, discourse, and method. Educational administration quarterly, 34(3), 329-353.
  • Arar, K., & Oplatka, I. (2011). Perceptions and applications of teachers’ evaluation among elementary school principals in the Arab education system in Israel. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(2-3), 162-169.
  • Aslanargun, E. (2007). Modern eğitim yönetimi anlayışına yönelik eleştiriler ve postmodern eğitim yönetimi. Kuram ve Uy-gulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 50(50), 195-212.
  • Balcı, A. (2008). Türkiye’de eğitim yönetiminin bilimleşme düzeyi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 14(2), 181-209.
  • Balcı, A. (2011). Eğitim yönetiminin değişen bağlamı ve eğitim yönetimi programlarına etkisi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 36(162).
  • Bates, R. (1982). Toward a critical practice of educational administration. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
  • Bates, R. (1983). Educational administration and the management of knowledge. Publication Sales, Deakin University Press, Victoria 3217, Australia.
  • Bates, R. (2013). Educational administration and the management of knowledge: 1980 revisited. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 45(2), 189-200.
  • Beycioğlu, K., & Dönmez, B. (2006). Eğitim yönetiminde kuramsal bilginin üretimine ve uygulanmasına ilişkin bir değer-lendirme. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 47(47), 317-342.
  • Burgess, D., & Newton, P. (Eds.). (2014). Educational administration and leadership: theoretical foundations (Vol. 2). Routledge.
  • Bush, T. (1999). Crisis or crossroads? The discipline of educational management in the late 1990s. Educational management & administration, 27(3), 239-252.
  • Bush, T. (2006). Theories of Educational Management. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 1(2), n2.
  • Bush, T. (2007). Educational leadership and management: Theory, policy and practice. South African Journal of Education, 27(3), 391-406.
  • Cemaloğlu, N. (2005). Türkiye de okul yöneticisi yetiştirme ve istihdamı varolan durum, gelecekteki olası gelişmeler ve so-runlar. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(2), 249-274.
  • Çelik, V. (1997). Eğitim yönetiminde kuramsal gelişmeler. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 3(1), 31-44.
  • Eacott, S., & Evers, C. (2015). New Frontiers in Educational Leadership. Management and Administration Theory, 47(4), 307-311.
  • Eacott, S. (2015). Educational leadership relationally: A theory and methodology for educational leadership, management and administration. Springer.
  • Eacott, S. (2017). A social epistemology for educational administration and leadership. Journal of Educational Administra-tion and History, 49(3), 196-214.
  • English, F. W. (2001). What paradigm shift? An interrogation of Kuhn's idea of normalcy in the research practice of educa-tional administration. International journal of leadership in education, 4(1), 29-38.
  • Evers, C. W., & Lakomski, G. (2001). Theory in educational administration: naturalistic directions. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(6), 499-520.
  • Fitz, J. (1999). Reflections on the field of educational management studies. Educational management & administration, 27(3), 313-321.
  • Fitzgerald, T., & Gunter, H. M. (2008). The state of the field of educational administration. Journal of Educational Admin-istration and History, 40(2), 81-83.
  • Gorard, S. (2005). Current contexts for research in educational leadership and management. Educational Management Ad-ministration & Leadership, 33(2), 155-164.
  • Greenfield, T. B. (1986). The decline and fall of science in educational administration. Interchange, 17(2), 57-80.
  • Griffiths, D. E. (1956). Human relations in school administration. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  • Griffiths, D. E. (1979). Intellectual turmoil in educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 15(3), 43-65.
  • Güngör, S. (2014). Eğitim ve eğitim yönetiminde paradigmalar. e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(3), 26-40.
  • Hallinger, P., & Chen, J. (2015). Review of research on educational leadership and management in Asia: A comparative analysis of research topics and methods, 1995–2012. Educational management administration & leadership, 43(1), 5-27.
  • Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2005). The study of educational leadership and management: Where does the field stand to-day?. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 33(2), 229-244.
  • Karasar, N. (2013). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel.
  • Kochan, F. K. (2002). Hope and possibility: Advancing an argument for a Habermasian perspective in educational admin-istration. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 21(2), 137-155.
  • Maxcy, S. J. (2001). Educational leadership and management of knowing: The aesthetics of coherentism. Journal of Educa-tional Administration, 39(6), 573-588.
  • Murphy, J. (1991). Restructuring schools: Capturing and assessing the phenomena. Teachers College Press.
  • Murphy, J. (1998). Preparation for the school principalship: The United States' story. School Leadership & Management, 18(3), 359-372.
  • Oplatka, I. (2009). The field of educational administration: A historical overview of scholarly attempts to recognize episte-mological identities, meanings and boundaries from the 1960s onwards. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(1), 8-35.
  • Oplatka, I. (2008). The field of educational management: Some intellectual insights from the 2007 BELMAS national con-ference. Management in Education, 22(3), 4-10.
  • Örücü, D., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Akademisyenlerin gözünden Türkiye’de eğitim yönetiminin akademik durumu: Nitel bir analiz. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 17(2), 167-197.
  • Özdemir, M. (2011). Kamu yönetimi ve işletme yönetimi arakesitinde bir bilim: Eğitim Yönetimi. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 44(2), 29-42.
  • Özdemir, S. (2013). Türk eğitim sistemi ve okul yönetimi. Pegem: Ankara.
  • Özdemir, M. (2017). Eğitim yönetiminde epistemik bunalımın arkeolojisi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 23(2), 281-304.
  • Paige, R. M., & Mestenhauser, J. A. (1999). Internationalizing educational administration. Educational Administration Quar-terly, 35(4), 500-517.
  • Park, J. (2015). Thematic approach to theoretical speculations in the field of educational administration. Educational Philos-ophy and Theory, 47(4), 359-371.
  • Samier, E. (2017). Towards a postcolonial and decolonising educational administration history. Journal of Educational Ad-ministration and History, 49(4), 264-282.
  • Sergiovanni, T. J. (1991). The principalship: A reflective practice perspective. Publication Sales, Allyn and Bacon.
  • Şimşek, H. (1997). Pozitivizm ötesi paradigmatik dönüşüm ve eğitim yönetiminde kuram ve uygulamada yeni yaklaşımlar. Eğitim Yönetimi, 3(1), 97-109.
  • Şişman, M. (1998). Eğitim yönetiminde kuram ve araştırmada alternatif paradigma ve yaklaşımlar. Eğitim Yönetimi, 3(16), 395-422.
  • Thrupp, M., & Willmott, R. (2003). Educational management in managerialist times. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
  • Turan, S. (2004). Modernite ve postmodernite arasında bir insan bilimi olarak Eğitim yönetimi. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 1(1), 1-8.
  • Waite, D. (2002). The paradigm wars in educational administration: an attempt at transcendence. International studies in ed-ucational administration, 30(1), 66-81.
  • Waktins, P.E. (1983), ``Scientific management and critical theory in educational administration'', paper presented to the In-stitute for Educational Administration, Geelong. Reprinted in Bates, R., Educational Administration and the Management of Knowledge, Deakin University, Geelong, pp. 119-35
  • Yılmaz, K. (2018). Türkiye’deki eğitim yönetimi alanı ile ilgili çalışmalara eleştirel bir bakış. Journal of Human Sciences, 15(1), 123-154.

Tarihsel Seyir İçinde Eğitim Yönetiminin Bilimleşme Süreci

Year 2020, Volume: 28 Issue: 1, 253 - 266, 31.01.2020
https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.3553

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı tarihsel süreç içinde eğitim yöne-timi alanının yaşadığı bilimleşme sürecinin incelenmesidir. Çalışmada ilk olarak eğitim yönetiminin bir bilim olup ol-madığına yönelik alan yazında yer alan tartışmalara yer verilmiştir. Eğitim yönetiminin bilim olma kriterleri çerçeve-sinde nasıl tanımlandığı ortaya konmuştur. Daha sonra eğitim yönetimi alanının ABD’de temelleri atılan bilimleşme süreci 19. yüzyılın sonlarından başlanarak inceleme konusu edilmiştir. Son olarak eğitim yönetiminin bilimleşme süre-cinde yaşadığı evrilmenin Türkiye’deki yansımaları ele alınmıştır. Yapılan incelemeler 1900’lü yıllara kadar bilim-sel bir niteliğe kavuşamayan eğitim yönetimi alanının felsefi tartışmalardan beslendiği, 1900’lü yılların ilk çeyreğinde Taylor tarafından ortaya atılan bilimsel yönetimin etkisi altında kaldığı ve işletme ve ekonomi alanlarına bağımlı olarak geliştiği; 1950’li yıllarda ABD’de ortaya çıkan teori hareketi ile kendine özgü sınırlarını çizmeye ve bağımsız bir bilim olarak ortaya çıkmaya başladığı, 20. yüzyılın son çeyreğinde eğitimde mantıksal pozitivist yaklaşımın eleştiri-ye uğradığı ve öznel-yorumsamacı yönde bir paradigmatik dönüşüm yaşadığı görülmüştür. Mevcut çalışmada eğitim yönetimi alanı gelişme sürecinde çeşitli bilim dallarından etkilense de, bir bilim olarak inceleme konusu edilmeye başlandığı andan itibaren bağımsız bir alan olmak için çaba gösterdiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

References

  • Aktan, S. (2015). John Franklin Bobbitt'te program düşüncesinin gelişimi: Tarihsel bir inceleme. Electronic Turkish Studies, 10(15), 35-50.
  • Aldrich, R. (2014). In search of ‘time-tested truths’: historical perspectives on educational administration. Journal of Educa-tional Administration and History, 46(2), 220-233.
  • Anderson, G. L., & Grinberg, J. (1998). Educational administration as a disciplinary practice: Appropriating Foucault's view of power, discourse, and method. Educational administration quarterly, 34(3), 329-353.
  • Arar, K., & Oplatka, I. (2011). Perceptions and applications of teachers’ evaluation among elementary school principals in the Arab education system in Israel. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(2-3), 162-169.
  • Aslanargun, E. (2007). Modern eğitim yönetimi anlayışına yönelik eleştiriler ve postmodern eğitim yönetimi. Kuram ve Uy-gulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 50(50), 195-212.
  • Balcı, A. (2008). Türkiye’de eğitim yönetiminin bilimleşme düzeyi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 14(2), 181-209.
  • Balcı, A. (2011). Eğitim yönetiminin değişen bağlamı ve eğitim yönetimi programlarına etkisi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 36(162).
  • Bates, R. (1982). Toward a critical practice of educational administration. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
  • Bates, R. (1983). Educational administration and the management of knowledge. Publication Sales, Deakin University Press, Victoria 3217, Australia.
  • Bates, R. (2013). Educational administration and the management of knowledge: 1980 revisited. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 45(2), 189-200.
  • Beycioğlu, K., & Dönmez, B. (2006). Eğitim yönetiminde kuramsal bilginin üretimine ve uygulanmasına ilişkin bir değer-lendirme. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 47(47), 317-342.
  • Burgess, D., & Newton, P. (Eds.). (2014). Educational administration and leadership: theoretical foundations (Vol. 2). Routledge.
  • Bush, T. (1999). Crisis or crossroads? The discipline of educational management in the late 1990s. Educational management & administration, 27(3), 239-252.
  • Bush, T. (2006). Theories of Educational Management. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 1(2), n2.
  • Bush, T. (2007). Educational leadership and management: Theory, policy and practice. South African Journal of Education, 27(3), 391-406.
  • Cemaloğlu, N. (2005). Türkiye de okul yöneticisi yetiştirme ve istihdamı varolan durum, gelecekteki olası gelişmeler ve so-runlar. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(2), 249-274.
  • Çelik, V. (1997). Eğitim yönetiminde kuramsal gelişmeler. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 3(1), 31-44.
  • Eacott, S., & Evers, C. (2015). New Frontiers in Educational Leadership. Management and Administration Theory, 47(4), 307-311.
  • Eacott, S. (2015). Educational leadership relationally: A theory and methodology for educational leadership, management and administration. Springer.
  • Eacott, S. (2017). A social epistemology for educational administration and leadership. Journal of Educational Administra-tion and History, 49(3), 196-214.
  • English, F. W. (2001). What paradigm shift? An interrogation of Kuhn's idea of normalcy in the research practice of educa-tional administration. International journal of leadership in education, 4(1), 29-38.
  • Evers, C. W., & Lakomski, G. (2001). Theory in educational administration: naturalistic directions. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(6), 499-520.
  • Fitz, J. (1999). Reflections on the field of educational management studies. Educational management & administration, 27(3), 313-321.
  • Fitzgerald, T., & Gunter, H. M. (2008). The state of the field of educational administration. Journal of Educational Admin-istration and History, 40(2), 81-83.
  • Gorard, S. (2005). Current contexts for research in educational leadership and management. Educational Management Ad-ministration & Leadership, 33(2), 155-164.
  • Greenfield, T. B. (1986). The decline and fall of science in educational administration. Interchange, 17(2), 57-80.
  • Griffiths, D. E. (1956). Human relations in school administration. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  • Griffiths, D. E. (1979). Intellectual turmoil in educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 15(3), 43-65.
  • Güngör, S. (2014). Eğitim ve eğitim yönetiminde paradigmalar. e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(3), 26-40.
  • Hallinger, P., & Chen, J. (2015). Review of research on educational leadership and management in Asia: A comparative analysis of research topics and methods, 1995–2012. Educational management administration & leadership, 43(1), 5-27.
  • Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2005). The study of educational leadership and management: Where does the field stand to-day?. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 33(2), 229-244.
  • Karasar, N. (2013). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel.
  • Kochan, F. K. (2002). Hope and possibility: Advancing an argument for a Habermasian perspective in educational admin-istration. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 21(2), 137-155.
  • Maxcy, S. J. (2001). Educational leadership and management of knowing: The aesthetics of coherentism. Journal of Educa-tional Administration, 39(6), 573-588.
  • Murphy, J. (1991). Restructuring schools: Capturing and assessing the phenomena. Teachers College Press.
  • Murphy, J. (1998). Preparation for the school principalship: The United States' story. School Leadership & Management, 18(3), 359-372.
  • Oplatka, I. (2009). The field of educational administration: A historical overview of scholarly attempts to recognize episte-mological identities, meanings and boundaries from the 1960s onwards. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(1), 8-35.
  • Oplatka, I. (2008). The field of educational management: Some intellectual insights from the 2007 BELMAS national con-ference. Management in Education, 22(3), 4-10.
  • Örücü, D., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Akademisyenlerin gözünden Türkiye’de eğitim yönetiminin akademik durumu: Nitel bir analiz. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 17(2), 167-197.
  • Özdemir, M. (2011). Kamu yönetimi ve işletme yönetimi arakesitinde bir bilim: Eğitim Yönetimi. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 44(2), 29-42.
  • Özdemir, S. (2013). Türk eğitim sistemi ve okul yönetimi. Pegem: Ankara.
  • Özdemir, M. (2017). Eğitim yönetiminde epistemik bunalımın arkeolojisi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 23(2), 281-304.
  • Paige, R. M., & Mestenhauser, J. A. (1999). Internationalizing educational administration. Educational Administration Quar-terly, 35(4), 500-517.
  • Park, J. (2015). Thematic approach to theoretical speculations in the field of educational administration. Educational Philos-ophy and Theory, 47(4), 359-371.
  • Samier, E. (2017). Towards a postcolonial and decolonising educational administration history. Journal of Educational Ad-ministration and History, 49(4), 264-282.
  • Sergiovanni, T. J. (1991). The principalship: A reflective practice perspective. Publication Sales, Allyn and Bacon.
  • Şimşek, H. (1997). Pozitivizm ötesi paradigmatik dönüşüm ve eğitim yönetiminde kuram ve uygulamada yeni yaklaşımlar. Eğitim Yönetimi, 3(1), 97-109.
  • Şişman, M. (1998). Eğitim yönetiminde kuram ve araştırmada alternatif paradigma ve yaklaşımlar. Eğitim Yönetimi, 3(16), 395-422.
  • Thrupp, M., & Willmott, R. (2003). Educational management in managerialist times. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
  • Turan, S. (2004). Modernite ve postmodernite arasında bir insan bilimi olarak Eğitim yönetimi. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 1(1), 1-8.
  • Waite, D. (2002). The paradigm wars in educational administration: an attempt at transcendence. International studies in ed-ucational administration, 30(1), 66-81.
  • Waktins, P.E. (1983), ``Scientific management and critical theory in educational administration'', paper presented to the In-stitute for Educational Administration, Geelong. Reprinted in Bates, R., Educational Administration and the Management of Knowledge, Deakin University, Geelong, pp. 119-35
  • Yılmaz, K. (2018). Türkiye’deki eğitim yönetimi alanı ile ilgili çalışmalara eleştirel bir bakış. Journal of Human Sciences, 15(1), 123-154.
There are 53 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Studies on Education
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Gökhan Savaş

Publication Date January 31, 2020
Acceptance Date June 24, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2020 Volume: 28 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Savaş, G. (2020). Tarihsel Seyir İçinde Eğitim Yönetiminin Bilimleşme Süreci. Kastamonu Education Journal, 28(1), 253-266. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.3553

10037