EVALUATION OF OPEN HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN TURKEY

Authors

  • Engin Tamer Sen Open Education Faculty, Anadolu University, Eskisehir, Turkey
  • Kamil Cekerol Open Education Faculty, Anadolu University, Eskisehir, Turkey

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2018.41.225238

Keywords:

Open Education Programs, Open Education in Turkey, Program Diversity in Open Education, Quotas in Open Education

Abstract

In the development of open and distance education, the formation of open universities constitutes an important milestone. What is expected from those institutions called “mega universities”, with their large scale economies as a result of their high number of students, is that they provide this large mass of students with low-cost and high-quality higher education. This role can be undertaken by an open university in every country. However, besides Anadolu University, which used to be the only institution in Turkey in this field for many years, Istanbul University and Atatürk University also have been active in open education since 2011. The motivation of this study is to evaluate the development processes of these universities that have more than one hundred thousand students. For this purpose, the following are evaluated and interpreted: The place of undergraduate and graduate programs offered in these three universities in all university programs; their different practices in associate degree and undergraduate programs; quota restrictions and enrollment numbers in programs; and program diversities. In the scope of this study, relevant data from the last ten years of higher education manuals were collected, and the university web pages were examined. Findings in the study show that sufficient program diversity has not been achieved, and high quota restrictions decreased the student numbers of these universities. The ways of achieving program diversity and overcoming quota constraints by considering "quality" and "requirements" are the subjects of more detailed further researches.

References

All relevant Higher Education Institutions web pages.

Associate Programs Map, Council of Higher Education, 2015-2016, 2016-2017 academic years. Retrieved from https://yokatlas.yok.gov.tr/lisans-anasayfa.php (24.08.2017)

Associate Programs Map, Council of Higher Education, 2015-2016, 2016-2017 academic years. https://yokatlas.yok.gov.tr/onlisans-anasayfa.php (24.08.2017) 2016-OSYS Numerical Information on Placement Results. Retrieved from http://dokuman.osym.gov.tr/pdfdokuman/2016/LYS/YerlestirmeSayisalBilgiler10082016.pdf (24.08.2017)

Buttar, S.S. (2015). ICT in Higher Education. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, Special Issue 3(1), 1686-1696. DOI-http://dx.doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2016.s21.16861696

Daniel, J. (2012). Dual-mode universities in higher education: way station or final destination?. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 27(1), 89-95, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2012.640791

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2014). “Distance Education Systems and Institutions in the Online Era: An Identity Crises”. Online Distance Education Towards a Research Agenda, Eds: Zawacki-Richter Olaf, Terry Anderson, AU Press, Athabasca University, (p.p.109-129).

Gustavo, E.P. and Moller, L.A., (2001). Organizational alignment supporting distance education in post-secondary institutions. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Number IV, 69-84.

Keegan, D. (1996), The Foundations of Distance Education (3rd ed.), London: Croom Helm; in: Simonson, Michael, Smaldino, Sharon, Zvacek Susan, Teaching and Learning at a Distance, Foundations of Distance Education, Sixth Edition, 2015.

King, B. (2012). Distance education and dual-mode universities: an Australian perspective. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. 27(1), 9-22, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2012.640781

Lentell, H. (2012) Guest editorial. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning. 27(1), 3-7, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2012.640780

Liyanagunawardena, T.R., Adams, A.A., Rassool, N., Williams, S.A. (2014). Developing Government Policies for Distance Education: Lessons Learnt from Two Sri Lankan Case Studies. International Review of Education, 60(6), 821-839. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-014-9442-0

Moore, M. G, Kearsley, G. (2012). Distance Education: A Systems Wiew of Online Learning, Third Edition, Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Mutawa, A.M. (2017). Evaluation of Blended Learning in Higher Education: A Case Study. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, Special Issue 3(1), p.p. 881-889. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2017.s31.881889

OSYM Guidelines for Higher Education Programs and Quotas, between 1996-2016, http://www.osym.gov.tr/TR,12901/2017.html (24.08.2017)

Seraji, F. (2017). Blended Learning in Distance Education: A Comparative Study of Selected Mega Open Universities. Quarterly Journal of Iranian Distance Education (IDEJ), 1(1), 9-24.

Van den, J. G. and Schlusman, K. H. L. A. (1989). The Didactics of Open Education (Herleen: The Open Universitait).In: Onwe, J.O. (2013). Policies and Practice of Open and Distance Learning Models in the Sub-Saharan African Countries: A Literature Survey, American International Journal of Contemporary Research, Vol. 3 No. 8; August 2013.

Downloads

Published

2018-03-20

How to Cite

Sen, E. T., & Cekerol, K. (2018). EVALUATION OF OPEN HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN TURKEY. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 4(1), 225–238. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2018.41.225238