Bu RoMEO yeşil bir dergidir
2016, Cilt 6, Sayı 3, Sayfa(lar) 333-350
[ Öz ] [ PDF ] [ Benzer Makaleler ] [ Yazara E-Posta ] [ Editöre E-Posta ]
DOI: 10.5961/jhes.2016.170
Statistical Profile of the Sociology Discipline in Turkish Higher Education System from a Historical Perspective
Serdar ÜNAL, Berivan BİNAY
Adnan Menderes University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Department of Sociology, Aydın, Turkey
Keywords: Sociology in Turkey, Higher education, Undergraduate and graduate education in sociology, Sociology students and academic staff, Quantitative change
Abstract
The extent to which academic disciplines are affected by the nationwide development and changes occurring at the level of higher education and what kind of quantitative changes this can potentially lead to in the relevant disciplines are significant. In this paper, the quantitative changes seen in the sociology discipline which we consider to have an important place in the social sciences category are provided on the basis of the developments made in the higher education sector in Turkey. The current profile of the discipline is discussed in comparison with historical data, as well. To this end, the study focuses on the historical development process of the sociology discipline and education in Turkey from a quantitative perspective. For this purpose, the historical changes of quantitative data on the available undergraduate and graduate programs in the field of sociology, on student demand for these programs and on academic staff are examined through various quantitative indicators. In addition, the distribution and change of the students and academic staff in the field of sociology are classified according to the geographic locations, the foundation years and the types of the universities. In this way, the current profile of the discipline of sociology is described and some inferences are made on its general trends, status and future projections in Turkish higher education system. In this respect, the findings presented in this article have a descriptive nature. In this study, quantitative data from the documents in the archives of the Student Selection and Placement Center of Turkey, Council of Turkish Higher Education and universities are utilized and the data pertaining to the discipline of sociology are analyzed and presented through some specific categorizations.
  • Top
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Results
  • Conclusion
  • References
  • Introduction
    The developments related to higher education have been one of the hottest topics of debate in Turkey as similar to the other parts of the World. “Higher education is generally defined as the whole of universities and other subsidiary institutions in which scientific values are protected and disseminated and for this aim, scientific studies are carried out along with educational activities” (Kılıç, 1999: 290). In this sense, “higher education institutions are actors who have a potential to shape the future of the society due to its features such as producing and transmitting knowledge, spreading innovative and critical point of view and training quality manpower” (Gür & Küçükcan, 2009: 33). Brennan (2008: 387) stresses that higher education plays an important role in constructing and supporting the ‘knowledge society’, ‘fair and steady society’ and ‘critical society’. With these characteristics, “higher education is in its most dynamic state, which contributes to spatial-horizontal mobility vertical-social mobility in the world” (Çetinsaya, 2014: 13). Higher education has a strategic significance for many countries in today’s world due to all of these qualities. Today, “in parallel with the increased importance of higher education for societies, economies and individuals, demands and expectations have also increased and diversified. Universities are expected to train high quality manpower at every level, who are equipped with high skills, to graduate more students, to conduct information-rich activities, to produce technology, to meet the demands of life-long learning and to produce services for the society” (Çetinsaya, 2014: 27). To this end, in today’s world, “many nation-states have invested in tertiary education seeking to improve national economic development, to develop a well-educated citizenry, and to enhance national competitiveness. Accordingly, the world has seen an increase in tertiary education enrollments” (Yu & Delaney, 2014: 282). In this sense, “higher education is increasingly finding itself the object of research. This partly reflects the economic importance attached to higher education in today’s ‘knowledge economies’ but also its importance for social equity and mobility and for social cohesion and integration” (Brennan & Teichler, 2008: 259). For these reasons, higher education and all related fields require a wholistic and multidimensional investigation all over the world.

    In all societies which are especially in the category of developed and developing countries, various scientific disciplines or fields being a part of the higher education are handled in a multidimensional way in accordance with the need of restructuring in congruent with the present local and global socio-economic conditions. Various studies are conducted for the future projections of these disciplines. Not only can the members of the related disciplines but also the outside actors participate in discussions about case analysis of these academic disciplines and their future. Among the recurring themes about higher education are program updates, teaching staff needs, quality teaching staff training and employment after graduation, etc. as well as such topics as the increase in the number of students seeking for higher education, the increased costs and expenditures for education, administrative and economic autonomy, globalization, accountability and quality in education (Gür & Küçükcan, 2009: 33). Therefore, the analysis of these topics at both macro and micro level, which are valid for any academic discipline arises as an important need. When the multifaceted structure of present academic disciplines is taken into account, an elaborate examination of the changes and developments in these fields on a quantitative basis can be considered as one of these facets. In this regard, when the recent developments in higher education sector in Turkey are taken into consideration on a ‘quantitative’ basis, it is possible to argue that substantial changes and transformations have been made compared to the past years. From 1933 when İstanbul University was founded to 1982, there has been a continuous increase in the number of universities and that number reached 19 before 1982; in 1982, 8 new state universities were founded and thus the number of universities increased up to 27 (Günay & Günay, 2011:2). In 1984, the first foundation university was founded and from 1987 onwards, there was an increase in the total number of universities from 29 to 53 with the foundation of 24 new universities in 1992 and to 77 in 2006 (Günay & Günay, 2011:2). Since then, in the last ten years including 2015-2016 academic year, this number has increased to 193 universities, 109 of which were state universities, 76 of which were foundation universities and 8 of which were foundation vocational schools (YÖK, 2016). In parallel with these, the number of students and academic staff at higher education has shown a substantial increase.

    In Turkey, İstanbul Darülfünun had 2167 students in 1930-31 academic year and the number of students at higher education went up to 1.100 in 1942-1943 academic year (Tekeli, 2010; Günay & Günay, 2011: 7-12). There was an ongoing increase in the total number of higher education students between 1984 and 2015. The total number of higher education students, which was 322320 in 1984 became 612433 in 1995- 96 academic year. It was 1689062 in 2011-2012 academic year and reached 4494421 in 2015-16 academic year. For 2015-16 academic year, state universities comprised 4074676 of this number of students (undergraduate and graduate) and foundation universities constituted 419745 of that number (YÖK, 2016). The increase in higher education has not been realized in every field at the same level and density. Social sciences as one of the fields with a remarkable increase in student density has started to be placed high on the agenda recently. For instance, in a classification made by Korkut-Owen et al. (2014: 803) based on ISCED (“International Standard Classification of Education”) for 11 years from 2002 to 2012, the biggest increase in student number and percent change was in social sciences, business administration and law. According to these findings, in 2012 the student number in these fields increased from 38000 to 158000 and the percent change became 14.0%. The classification of fields based on higher education statistics of 2014-2015 academic year indicated that social sciences, business and law fields had the biggest share with 57.8% percentage (2096917) among 3628800 students covering eight fields. The sociology discipline which is in the category of social sciences seemed to get a substantial share of this general tendency towards social sciences. The potential that increased or decreased interest in certain academic fields or disciplines or quantitative changes affect the general practices and tendencies of fields and disciplines is always probable. Therefore, every discipline is in need of a case analysis that includes different dimensions in terms of present and future projections or an information and data pool that comprises historical changes on quantitative basis in order to provide a better understanding of general trends. Sweet (2015: 14) stressed that the direction of changes in the sociology discipline, the enlargement (or decrease) of the demands for it and the implications of the present state are important topics. For him, the trends in interest towards sociology discipline (the direction of these trends) needed to be investigated regularly for different fields. According to him, strong programs continue their existence even in the conditions of the changing student profiles and sometimes enlarge their educational programs. With these in mind, the description of the general picture for the nationwide density and distribution of present undergraduate and graduate programs in academic disciplines, student density and tendency in these programs and the number and distribution of academic staff and an examination of the historical changes on this basis become more important.

    Scope of the Study and Data Collection Tools
    The changes of academic disciplines on a quantitative basis provide many information explicitly or implicitly about the perception of a discipline by students, academicians and other members of the society, the attitudes towards the discipline and discourses on it. “It is possible to argue that not only the departments but also academic environments outside the departments have been involved in major changes in the last twenty years” (Özgen, 2006: 10). While there are significant studies on the history and intellectual development of sociology as an academic discipline in social sciences in Turkey, it can be argued that quantitative studies on the development, change and institutionalization of the sociology discipline and sociology education in Turkey on a quantitative basis are quite limited. When the existing literature is examined, it is seen that the recent studies that examine not only the intellectual development of the sociology discipline and education but also the different dimensions of institutionalization processes on a quantitative basis (Kasapoğlu, 2005, 2016; Yavuzer, 2015; Bulut, 2011, 2014; Parin & Demirci, 2014; Akşit, 1989) are needed to fill in this gap. To this end, in this study, in addition to an investigation of the historical development of the sociology discipline and education in Turkey, the historical change of quantitative data on the present undergraduate and graduate programs in sociology at higher education and the students and academic staff in these programs will be analyzed through quantitative indicators. Through a classification of student and academic staff distribution in sociology field in relation to the geographic locations, the foundation years and the types of the universities, it was intended to provide a general picture for the sociology discipline. In this way, some inferences were made on the sociology discipline’s general trends, status and future projections in Turkish higher education system. In the study, apart from the presentation of data on the preliminary phases of sociology discipline and education in Turkey, the majority of data covered the years of 1995-1996 and 2015- 2016. The historical past of the sociology discipline in Turkey in the last twenty years were examined through quantitative data. In light of these, the data presented in the article had a descriptive nature. The major data collection tools were statistical documents that were obtained from the data archieves of ÖSYM, YÖK1 and the universities. These data were analyzed and presented through certain categorizations in accordance with the aims of the study.

  • Top
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Results
  • Conclusion
  • References
  • Results
    The Development Phases, Quantitative Profile and Change Trend of the Sociology Discipline in Turkey
    In its general sense, sociology is a discipline that focuses on societal behaviors and relationships, in other words on society in a broader sense. How and in what ways societal behaviors and relationships build patterns and how these patterns makes the society possible is one of the basic concerns of sociology. Sociology is an activity dated earlier than 19th century when it first started to be regarded as a discipline. Sociological thought emerged in an atmosphere in which especially societal change accelerated and in this sense, chaos and uncertainties were prevalent. During this process in which society and societal events were treated with caution more than ever, the primary motivation of the sociological thought was to promote social order. This process took place in Europe which is the birthplace of sociology as well as in Turkey. The first traces of sociological thought started to emerge in the second quarter of 19th century onwards in Ottoman Empire. The reform (aka, the Westernization movement) which gained new momentum during this time led to the formation of intellectual groups who aimed at an immediate understanding and solution of societal and political problems. The intellectual group, which is especially called as Jon Turks benefited from science and sociology for this aim, which brought about the recognition and spread of sociology in Ottoman Empire (Bulut 2011, 2014; Demirci & Parin 2014; Çelebi 2008; TALİD 2008). This process is the pre-academy phase of sociological thought at the same time. All of the studies done during this process constitutes the institutionalization phase of the sociology in the academy. The most prominent figure who contributed to the status of sociology in the academy as a discipline was Ziya Gökalp (1876- 1924). Gökalp was the person who built the first sociology dais in Istanbul Darülfünun.2 An important characteristics of the dais was that it was the second private sociology dais after Durkheim’s dais in the world (TALİD, 2008:5). Other significant formations during the processes of sociology’s institutionalization were as follows: the foundation of Turkish Information Society3 including Gökalp as one of the founders in 1913, the “selection of sociology as one of the sub comittees of the society” (Çelebi, 2008: 681); the publication of İçtimaiyat Mecmuası released by Gökalp and Necmettin Sadak in 1917 as press publication of “İçtimaiyat Darülmesaisi” [Sociology Dais] (Kaya, 2008: 715) were important initiatives for the institutionalization of sociology. In addition to being the first field journal, “İçtimaiyat Mecmuası had especially a historical value since it was one of the first sociology journals of the world” (Kaya, 2008: 715). However, all of these positive developments for the presence of sociology and its institutionalization in academy came to a halt due to the end of First World War and especially the suspension of Gökalp from Darulfunun. “Later, professors such as Mehmet İzzet and Necmeddin Sadak were unable to regain the same popularity as the first established department of sociology in Turkey” (Kasapoğlu, 2016: 2). Also until the beginning of 1940s, sociology [at Istanbul University] could not be organized as an independent department and was treated as a lesson taught at the department of Philosophy at the Faculty of Letters or at the Faculty of Economics and Law. Only in 1941 could sociology turn into a dais thanks to the support of Hasan Ali Yücel and efforts of Hilmi Ziya Ülken (http://edebiyat.istanbul. edu.tr/). In the meantime, another formation for sociology stood out in Ankara. “In 1939, Faculty of Letters (Language and History-Geography) was founded in Ankara. Behice Boran and Niyazi Berkes were appointed to the sociology dais in the Philosophy Department” (Çelebi, 2008: 684).

    Ankara University Sociology Department was the first sociology department of the Republic (http://sosyoloji.humanity. ankara.edu.tr/). However, owing to the discharge movement in 1948, the suspension of academicians from universities, the institutionalization process of sociology were interrupted once again. At the beginning of 1960s, an actor got involved in this process in that sociology department was founded at Hacettepe University. In 1968, it was established as part of Ankara University before the foundation of university and in 1968, it became a part of Hacettepe University (http://www. sosyoloji.hacettepe.edu.tr/). Thus, until 1982, there were two separate sociology departments in Turkey, which were Istanbul University and Hacettepe University.

    Though being founded as ‘social sciences department’ in 1959 at Middle East Technical University (METU), there is a need for indicating that METU played a strategic role in the institutionalization process of sociology. In addition to its sociology- centredness, the department was prepared as an interdisciplinary program (including such departments as psychology, economics, philosophy and public administration) and contributed greatly to the sociological literature in the meanwhile (See Akşit, 2008). Sociology was founded as an independent department at METU in 1982. Similarly, sociology education started at the Social Sciences Department at Boğaziçi University [in 1971] (Bulut, 2011: 12). It was initiated at the Department of Behavioral Sciences as part of the Social Sciences Department at Ege University in 1976 (http://sosyoloji.ege.edu.tr/). However, the establishment of sociology as an independent department at these universities became in 1982. In summary, while sociology departments were founded before 1982 at İstanbul University and Hacettepe University, Selçuk Univesity sociology department was established in 1981 and such departments were established in 1982 at Anadolu, Boğaziçi, Cumhuriyet, Ege, METU and Fırat University. From 1982 onwards, Ankara (1983), Mimar Sinan (1984), İnönü (1985), Atatürk (1987), Uludağ (1990) University Sociology Departments were those state universities added to this list.4 The sociology departments at undergraduate level started to become more widespread thanks to the foundation of other state and foundation universities in 1992 and especially after 2000 and 2006.

    Sociology Departments in the Undergraduate Category at State and Foundation Universities
    In the chronology mentioned above, the period from 1980 onwards was an important phase for the shaping of sociology in Turkey. Undoubtedly, the foundation of the Council of Higher Education had a strategic effect on this phase. Accordingly, “sociology departments started to be established independently along with the Law on Higher Education after 1980 while there were only İÜEF Sociology Department and Hacettepe University Sociology Department that served independently as undergraduate programs before 1980. The number reached 13 in total by the end of the 1980s….[between the years of 1990 and 2000] the number of departments that gave sociology education at undergraduate level actively increased to 27 in total” (Parin & Demirci, 2014: 367). Between 2000 and 2015, 59 new sociology undergraduate programs were opened.

    From 2015-16 academic year onwards, there were 86 sociology departments in total having daytime undergraduate education in 54 different cities across Turkey, 65 (75.6%) of which were state universities and 21 (24.4%) of which were foundation universities (Figure 1). There was evening education at 24 departments of sociology at state universities in 24 different cities across Turkey at the same time. In addition to these, in the category of open- distance education, there were totally 3 sociology programs at undergraduate level including Anadolu University (since 2009), İstanbul and Atatürk University (since 2012). Among state universities, two of the sociology departments had English as the medium of instruction whereas French was used in only one department. Among foundation universities, eight of the sociology departments had English as the medium of instruction whereas Turkish/English was used in three departments5.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 1: The Distribution of Sociology Departments at Undergraduate Level at State-Foundation Universities (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015-16 academic year.

    From 2015-16 academic year onwards, when the distribution of sociology departments having daytime undergraduate education was examined by geographic regions, it was seen that there were 29 departments (33.7%) in Marmara Region, 17 departments (19.8%) in Central Anatolia Region, 12 departments (13.8%) in Aegean Region; 11 departments (12.8%) in Black Sea Region; 7 departments (8.1%) in Eastern Anatolia Region; and 3 departments (3.5%) in Mediterranean Region (Figure 2). Therefore, it became clear that more than half of the sociology departments having daytime undergraduate education were at universities located in Marmara and Central Anatolia regions. As for evening education, 7 of 24 sociology programs with evening education were in Central Anatolia Region (29.1%); 5 in Aegean Region (20.9%); 4 in Eastern Anatolia Region (16.7%); 3 in Marmara Region (12.5%); 2 in Black Sea Region (8.3%) and 2 in South Eastern Region (8.3%).


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 2: The Distribution of Sociology Departments at Undergraduate Level at State-Foundation Universitiesby Geographic Regions (2015-16 Acedemic year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015-16 academic year.

    From 2015-16 academic year onwards6, when the distribution of sociology departments having daytime undergraduate education was examined in relation to years of foundation, it was seen that there were 24 undergraduate programs (27.9%) at state universities founded before 1992; 24 programs at state universities founded after 2000 (27.9%); 21 programs at foundation universities (24.4%) and 17 programs at state universities founded in 1992 (19.8%) (Figure 3). Regarding evening education, 9 of 24 sociology evening education programs in Turkey were at state universities founded after 2000 (37.5%), 8 of which were at state universities (33.3%) founded in 1992 and 7 of which were at state universities founded before 1992 (29.2%). Thus, sociology evening education programs were more widespread at universities which were founded more recently.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 3: The Distribution of Sociology Departments at Undergraduate Level at State-Foundation Universities by Years of Foundation (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015-16 academic year.

    Sociology Programs in the Category of Graduate Education at State and Foundation Universities
    From 2015-16 academic year onwards, there were 55 master’s (with thesis) programs in sociology in 38 different cities across Turkey, 49 of which were at state universities (89.1%) and 6 of which were at foundation universities (10.9%). Moreover, there were totally 9 non-thesis master’s programs in sociology in 6 different cities across Turkey, 6 of which were at state universities (66.7%) and 3 of which were at foundation universities (33.3%). There was a total of 27 doctoral programs in sociology in 21 different cities across Turkey, 26 of which were at state universities (96.3%) and one of them was at a foundation university (3.7%) (Figure 4). Taken into consideration that there were totally 86 sociology departments at undergraduate level, it can be highlighted that 64% of these departments had master’s (with thesis) programs, 31.4% had doctoral programs and 10.5% had non-thesis master’s programs.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 4: The Distribution of Sociology Departments at Graduate Level at State- Foundation Universities (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015- 16 academic year.

    From 2015-16 academic year onwards, when the distribution of ‘master’s (with thesis) programs’ in sociology at statefoundation universities were examined by their geographic regions, it was seen that there were 16 departments in Central Anatolia Region (29.1%); 15 in Marmara Region (27.3%);7 in Aegean Region (12.7%); 6 in Eastern Anatolia Region (10.9%); 5 in Southeastern Anatolia Region (9.1%); 3 in Black Sea Region (5.5%) and 3 in Mediterranean Region (5.5%) (Figure 5). According to these, Central Anatolia and Marmara regions had the most density in terms of the number of master’s (with thesis) programs in sociology and it can be argued that these programs became prevalent across all geographic regions.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 5: The Distribution of Master’s (with thesis) Programs in Sociology at State-Foundation Universities by Geographic Regions (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015-16 academic year.

    From 2015-16 academic year onwards, when the distribution of ‘master’s (with thesis) programs’ in sociology at state-foundation universities were examined by their years of foundation, there were 24 such programs at state universities founded before 1992 (43.6%), 14 at state universities founded in 1992 (25.5%), 11 at state universities founded after 2000 (20.0%) and 6 at foundation universities (10.9%).

    From 2015-16 academic year onwards, when the distribution of ‘doctoral programs’ in sociology at state-foundation universities were examined by the geographic regions, it was seen that there were 9 departments in Central Anatolia Region (33.3%); 5 in Marmara Region (18.5%); 5 in Aegean Region (18.5%); 4 in Eastern Anatolia Region (14.8%); 3 in Mediterranean Region (11.1%) and 1 in Black Sea Region (3.7%) (Figure 6).


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 6: The Distribution of Doctoral Programs in Sociology at State-Foundation Universities by Geographic Regions (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015-16 academic year.

    It became visible that one third of the present doctoral programs in sociology were at universities in Central Anatolia Region. There was not any doctoral program in sociology only in Southeastern Anatolia Region whereas there were more such programs in other regions. From 2015-16 academic year onwards, when the distribution of ‘doctoral programs’ in sociology at state-foundation universities were examined by their years of foundation, it was seen that there were 17 such programs at state universities founded before 1992 (63.0%), 8 at state universities founded in 1992 (29.6%), 1 at state universities founded after 2000 (3.7%) and 1 at foundation universities (3.7%).

    The Statistical Profile of the Sociology Students at Undergraduate Level
    The total number of female-male students at undergraduate level at state/foundation universities between 1995-96 and 2015-16 increased from 4772 to 259007. This means that the total number of sociology students in Turkey increased 4.4-fold in these years. For the distribution of gender, the number of male students reached 5833 from 2529 with 1.3 fold increase while there was a 7.9 fold increase in the number of female students, which rose from 2243 to 20067. Among a total of 25900 sociology students at state-foundation universities in 2015-16 academic year, 77.5% were female and 22.5% were male (Figure 7). In this sense, there is a gradual decline in male student ratio and an increasingly female student ratio.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 7: The Rates of Sociology Students at Undergraduate Level at State-Foundation Universities (periods of 1995-96/2015-16).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of OSYM and Council of Higher Education (periods of 1995- 96/2015-16).

    Apart from these, from 2015-16 academic year onwards, there were totally 138526 students at the sociology departments at Anadolu University, Atatürk University, İstanbul University and Open University Faculty. 83840 of that number consisted of female students (60.5%) and 54686 were composed by male students (39.5%). The number of students who were graduated for every year during these times ranged approximately between the percentages of 15.0% and 20.0%.

    In 2015-16 academic year, according to the distribution of female-male students at sociology departments ‘at undergraduate level’ in relation to the geographic regions in which state-foundation universities were located, the majority of students studied at the universities located in Marmara Region with a percentage of 26.0%. The total percentage of undergraduate students was 23.4% in Central Anatolia Region, 15.0% in Aegean Region, 10.9% in Eastern Anatolia Region, 10.5% in Black Sea Region, 9.3% in Eastern Anatolia Region and 5.0% in Mediterranean Region. Therefore, Marmara and Central Anatolia regions had the most student ratio whereas Mediterranean and Southeastern Anatolia regions had the least ratio (Figure 8). The analysis of the regions’ ‘gender distributions’ among themselves showed that Black Sea (82%) and Central Anatolia regions (80.3%) were the places where female student ratio was the highest. These were followed by Marmara Region (78.8%), Aegean Region (76.9%) and Mediterranean Region (75.7%) respectively. The female student ratio, on the other hand, was relatively lower in Eastern Anatolia (72.3%) and Southeastern Anatolia regions (70%) compared to other regions. It is also possible to argue that the female student ratio at sociology department at undergraduate level increased from the Eastern and Southeastern regions to the West regions.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 8: The Rates of Sociology Students at Undergraduate Level at State- Foundation Universities by Geographic Regions (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015-16 academic year.

    In 2015-16 academic year, according to the distribution of female-male students at sociology departments at undergraduate level in relation to the state-foundation universities’ years of foundation, the percentage of students at foundation universities was 37.3% while it was 62.7% at state universities. The proportion of students at state universities founded after 2000 was 27.0%, that the ratio was 24.6% for state universities founded in 1992 and it was 11.1% for the universities founded before 1992 (Figure 9).


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 9: The Rates of Sociology Students at Undergraduate Level at State-Foundation Universities by Years of Foundation (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015-16 academic year.

    The analysis of these categories’ ‘gender distributions’ among themselves indicated that the sociology departments at state universities which were founded before 1992 and after 2000 had a relatively higher female student ratio than the others. The female student ratio at the universities founded before 1992 was 80.9% while the male student ratio was 19.1%. The female student ratio at the universities founded after 2000 was 80.4% and the male student ratio was 19.6%. The female student ratio at the universities founded in 1992 was 76.4% whereas the male student ratio was 23.6%. Finally, the female student ratio at the foundation universities was 75.9% while the male student ratio was 25%.

    The Profile of Sociology Students at Graduate Level
    The total number of female-male students at the level of master’s (with thesis) programs at state-foundation universities increased from 372 to 3458 between the periods of 1995- 96/2015-16 (Figure 10). This means that the total number of students enrolled in master’s (with thesis) programs in sociology showed a 8.3-fold increase in these years. This amount of increase was more than that of the total number of students in all master’s programs in this period in Turkey. The total number of students enrolled in all master’s programs in Turkey increased from 49853 to 405483 in the last 20 years, which amounted to a 7.1-fold increase.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 10: The Rates of Students at Thesis Master’s Programs in Sociology at State-Foundation Universities (periods of 1995-96/2015-16).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of ÖSYM and Council of Higher Education (periods of 1995-96/2015-16).

    In these years, the number of male students in ‘master’s (with thesis) programs’ in sociology increased from 238 to 1510, which was equal to a 5.3-fold increase. The number of female students, on the other hand, rose to 1.948 from 134, which meant a 13.5-fold increase. The total number of male students at all master’s (with thesis) programs in Turkey had a 6.4-fold increase while the number of female students had a 8.4-fold increase. In this regard, the increase rate of female students in sociology master’s (with thesis) programs between these years was quite higher than the increase rate of female students in all master’s programs over Turkey whereas the increase rate of male students was a bit lower. In 1995-96 academic year, the rate of male students in the number of total students in sociology master’s programs was 64.0% whereas the rate of female students was 36.0%. Among a total of 3458 students who studied in sociology master’s (with thesis) programs of state-foundation universities in 2015-16 academic year was 56.3% composed of female students and 43.7% consisted of male students (Figure 10). In this sense, when the last 20 years of gender distribution in sociology master’s (with thesis) programs were examined, it was apparent that the ratio of male students decreased gradually while the ratio of female students increased gradually.

    According to the distribution of the total female-male students in sociology “master’s (with thesis)” programs based on geographical regions where state-foundation universities were located in 2015-16 academic year, the rate of master’s (with thesis) programs students at universities located in Central Anatoli Region was 34.6%, 28.6% in Marmara Region, 14.6% in Aegean Region, 6.0% in Eastern Anatolia Region, 5.8% in Black Sea Region, 5.4% in Mediterranean Region and 4.9% in Southeastern Anatolia Region. In this context, the highest rate of students in master’s (with thesis) programs was at universities in Central Anatolia and Marmara regions. The universities in Central Anatolia and Marmara regions had two out of three of total amount students in sociology master’s (with thesis) programs over Turkey (Figure 11). When “gender distributions” only in regions were evaluated, Mediterranean (65.4%), Aegean (62.5%), Marmara (60.2%) and Black Sea (58.9%) regions came to the fore as places having the highest ratio of female students. Although the numbers of male and female students in Central Anatolia Region were relatively close to each other, the number of female students was higher in this region. On the other hand, the ratio of male students in Southeastern Anatolia and Eastern Anatolia regions was higher. The ratio of male students was 55.6% whereas the ratio of female students was 44.4% in Southeastern Anatolia Region. Likewise, the ratio of male students was 54.5% whereas the rate of female students was 45.5% in Eastern Anatolia Region. When evaluated generally, it was possible to state that the proportion of female students in sociology master’s (with thesis) programs increased from Southeastern and Eastern regions to West regions.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 11: The Rates of Students in Sociology Master’s (with thesis) Programs at State-Foundation Universities by Geographical Regions (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015- 16 academic year.

    According to the distribution of total female-male students in sociology “master’s (with thesis)” programs based on foundation terms of state-foundation universities in 2015-16 academic year, the ratio of students in foundation universities was 5.2% whereas the ratio of students in public universities was 94.8%. Among state universities, the ratio of students was 53,4% in pre-1992 state universities and 29.3% in 1992 state universities. The ratio of students in post-2000 state universities was 12.1% (Figure 12). In this context, it was apparent that more than half of the students in sociology master’s (with thesis) programs were at state universities founded before 1992. Another essential part of the students was observed to be in 1992 state universities. The ratio of total sociology master’s (with thesis) programs’ students in these two categories was 82.7%. When “gender distribution” within these categories was evaluated, the proportion of male students was seen to be higher than female students only at state universities founded after 2000. In this category, the ratio of male students was 51.2% whereas the ratio of female students was 48.8%. The categories where the ratio of female students was the highest were at state universities and foundation universities in 1992. Although the proportion of female students was higher than male students at state universities founded before 1992, it was relatively lower when compared with state universities and foundation universities in 1992. Within the category of state universities founded before 1992, the ratio of female students was 54.3% whereas the ratio of male students was 45.7%.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 12: The Rates of Students in Sociology Master’s (with thesis) Programs at State- Foundation Universities by Years of Foundation (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015-16 academic year.

    The total number of students in sociology doctoral programs at state- foundation universities between 1995-96 and 2015-16 academic years increased from 146 to 1078. This means that the total number of students studying at the doctoral level in sociology across Turkey increased 6.4-fold in these years. This increase ratio was higher than the increase ratio total students in all doctorate programs over Turkey between the same periods. The total number of students in all doctorate programs rose from 19673 to 86320 in the last twenty years, which is equal to a 3.4- fold increase. Again, the number of male students in sociology doctoral programs had a 5.1-fold increase from 95 to 583 whereas the number of female students in sociology doctoratal programs rose from 51 to 495 which is equal to 8.7 fold increase between these years. The total number of male students in all doctoral programs over Turkey between these periods increased 3.3 fold whereas the number of female students increased 3.5 fold. In this context, the increase ratio of female students in sociology doctoratal programs between these years was higher than the total increase rates of female and male students in all doctoral programs over Turkey. The ratio of male students in the total number of the students in sociology doctoral programs in 1995-96 academic year was 65.1% whereas the ratio of female students was 34.9%. 54.1% of the total amount of 1078 students in sociology doctoral programs at state- foundation universities in 2015-16 academic year was male and 45.9% was female (Figure 13). In this sense, when the last 20 years of gender distribution in sociology doctoral programs were examined, it was apparent that the proportion of male students decreased gradually while the proportion of female students increased gradually.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 13: The Rates of Sociology Students in Doctoral Programs at State-Foundation Universities (periods of 1995-96/2015-16).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of ÖSYM and Council of Higher Education (periods of 1995-96/2015-16).

    According to the distribution of total amount of female-male students in sociology “doctoral” programs based on the geographical regions where state- foundation universities were located in 2015-16 academic year, Central Anatolia Region has the highest ratio of students with the percentage of 46.4%. The total ratio of doctoral students in Marmara Region was 27.2%, 13.0% in Eastern Anatolia Region, 6.8% in Aegean Region, 5.6% in Mediterranean Region and 1.0% in Black Sea Region. In this context, the universities in Central Anatolia and Marmara regions had the highest ratio of doctoral students. These universities had three out of four of total doctoral students in sociology over Turkey (Figure 14). When the gender distribution in regions was evaluated, Mediterranean (63.9%) and Marmara (52.2%) regions came to the fore as places having the highest ratio of female students. Mediterranean and Marmara regions were two regions where the ratio of female doctoral students was higher than male students. The number of female and male students in Aegean Region was seen to be equal. The ratio of male students was higher in other regions. In this regard, the ratio of male students in Central Anatolia Region was 55.4% and 60% in Black Sea Region. The ratio of male students in Eastern Anatolia Region (72.1%) was prominently higher. On the other hand, there weren’t sociology doctoral programs at universities in Southeastern Anatolia Region. When evaluated generally, the proportion of female students in sociology doctoral programs increased from East regions to West regions.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 14: The Rates of Sociology Students in Doctoral Programs at State-Foundation Universities by Geographical Regions (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015- 16 academic year.

    According to the distribution of total female-male students in sociology “doctoral” programs based on foundation terms of state-foundation universities in 2015-16 academic year, 96.9% of the students were at state universities. Among state universities, the ratio of students was 77.1% in pre-1992 state universities and 16.6% in 1992 state universities. The ratio of students in post-2000 state universities was 3.2%. In this context, it was apparent that more than three out of four of the students in sociology doctoral programs were at state universities founded before 1992. Other essential part of the students was observed to be in 1992 state universities. The ratio of total sociology doctoral programs students in these two categories was 93.7% (Figure 15). When “gender distribution” within these categories was evaluated, the proportion of male students was seen to be higher than the female students in all categories. Especially, the proportion of female students in post-2000 state universities was only 22.9%. Although, there were more balanced rates of gender distribution in other categories, the proportion of male students was relatively a bit higher. In this context, the ratio of female students in foundation universities was 48.5%, 47.3% in pre-1992 state universities and 43.6% in 1992 at state universities. What was remarkable in here was that the proportion of male doctoral students was higher in newer universities.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 15: The Rates of Sociology Students in Doctoral Programs of State- Foundation Universities by Years of Foundation (2015- 16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015- 16 academic year.

    Total Rates of Academic Staff in Higher Education in Turkey
    The total number of academic staff at İstanbul University increased from 240 in 1930-31 academic year to 1243 in 1942- 1943 (Tekeli, 2010; Günay & Günay, 2011:15). Furthermore, the total number of academic staff over Turkey increased from 20333 in 1984 to 50259 in 1995-96 academic year and to 149999 in 2015-16 academic year. The differences in total numbers of academic staff at state-foundation universities in Turkey in 1995-96 and 2015-16 academic years can be seen in Figure 16. In this regard, the total number of academic staff over Turkey showed an increase of 1.9 fold by increasing from 50259 to 149999. In Turkey, the total number of academicians in Turkey in the years of 1995-96 and 2015-16 is provided.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 16: The Rates of Total Academic Staff in State-Foundation Universities in Turkey (periods of 1995- 96/2015-16).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of ÖSYM and Council of Higher Education (periods of 1995-96/2015-16).

    When the period of last twenty years was evaluated, In 1995- 96 academic year the number of female academics in Turkey increased from 16480 to 64651 in the period of 2015-16. In other words, there was a 2.9-fold increase in this process.

    Given the ratio of change in the number of male-female academics in the total number of academic staff, in the period 1995-96, the ratio of female academics, which was 32.8% in the total number of academic staff, reached to 43.1% in the period until 2015-16. In the academic year of 1995-96, the number of male academics was 33779 and this increased to 85348 in the period of 2015-16. In other words, a 1.5-fold increase was experienced in this process. On the basis of the ratio of change in the proportion of male-female academics in the total number of academic staff, the ratio of male academics was 67.2% of the total number of academic staff in the 1995-96 period whereas it went down to 56.9% in the period until 2015-16.

    Academic Staff Rates in Sociology in Higher Education in Turkey
    The total number of academic staff (Professor; Associate Professor; Assistant Professor; Research Assistant; Lecturer) at ‘sociology’ departments of state-foundation universities increased from 215 to 972 in the years of 1995-96 and 2015- 16. This means that the number of academics in sociology in Turkey increased by 3.5-fold between these years. This increase was considerably higher than the 1.9-fold increase in all higher education levels in Turkey between the same years (Figure 17).


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 17: The Rates of Academic Staff in Sociology Departments at State-Foundation Universities (periods of 1995- 96/2015-16).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of ÖSYM and Council of Higher Education (periods of 1995-96/2015- 16).

    Again, the number of male academics increased from 133 to 532, which was 3-fold higher while the number of female academics rose from 82 to 440 with an increase of 4.4-fold. These rates were higher than the increase in the number of male and female academics at all levels of higher education given above. In the period of 1995-96, the ratio of male academics in the total number of academic staff in sociology was 61.9% while the ratio of female academics was 38.1%. In the period of 2015-2016 54.7% of the 972 academics in the sociology field of state-foundation universities were male and 45.3% were female academics (Figure 17). In 1995-96 period, the male academics ratio was 23.8% higher than the female academics’ ratio, but this difference narrowed to 9.4% until the years of 2015-16. Hence, the proportion of male academics, which have gradually diminished in the last two decades, and the growing proportion of female academics were remarkable.

    The number of ‘Prof. Dr.’ in ‘sociology’ between the years of 1995-96 and 2015-16 increased from 30 to 130 at state-foundation universities. The total number of ‘Prof. Dr.’ increased 3.3-fold between these years. While the ratio of ‘Prof. Dr.’ in the total number of academic staff in the period 1995-96 was 14.0%, this ratio was 13.4% in the period of 2015-16. In this sense, there was a slight decrease in the number of ‘Prof. Dr.’ within the total number of academic staff (Figure 18). During the last two decades, the total number of ‘Assoc. Prof.’ in sociology increased from 19 to 120. This means that the total number of ‘Assoc. Prof.’ increased 5.3-fold between these years. In the 1995-96 period, the number of ‘Assoc. Prof.’ in the total number of academic staff was 8.8% while this ratio was 12.4% in the period of 2015-16. In this sense, there was a 3.6% increase in the ‘Assoc. Prof.’ category within the total number of academics. The total number of ‘Asst. Prof.’ between these years increased from 49 to 353 which is equal to an increase of 6.2-fold. In the years of 1995-96, the number of ‘Asst. Prof.’ in total number of academic staff was 22.8% while this ratio was 36.3% in 2015-16 period. In this sense, a 13.5% increase was seen in ‘Asst. Prof.’ category within the total number of academic staff.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 18: The Rates of Academic Staff in Sociology Departments at State-Foundation Universities by Academic Titles (periods of 1995-96/2015-16).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of ÖSYM and Council of Higher Education (periods of 1995-96/2015-16).

    Again, in the last 20 years, the number of ‘R.A.’ in sociology increased from 99 to 338. This means that the number of ‘‘R. A.’ in sociology in Turkey has increased by 2.4-fold between these years. In the period of 1995-96, the number of ‘R. A.’ in the total number of academic staff was 46.0% while this rate was 34.8% in the period of 2015-16. In this sense, there was a decrease of 11.2% in the ‘R. A.’ category within the total number of academic staff. Finally, the total number of ‘Lecturer’ in sociology between these years rose from 18 to 31. That is, it showed an increase of 0.7-fold. In 1995-96 period, the ratio of ‘Lecturer’ was 8.4% among the total number of academic staff and this rate was 3.2% in 2015-16 period. In this sense, there was a decrease of 5.2% in the ‘Lecturer’ category within the total number of academic staff.

    Overall, the rates of the other categories decreased in the period between 1995-96 and 2015-16, while the number of ‘Asst. Prof.’ and ‘Assoc. Prof.’ categories increased proportionally in the total number of academic staff, respectively. Again, in both periods, the number of ‘R. A.’ and ‘Asst. Prof.’ in the total number of academic staff was the highest in number.

    According to Figure 19 showing ‘gender distribution’ of academic staff according to academic titles in sociology in state-foundation universities in the academic year 2015-16, it was observed that the male academics’ ratio increased when the titles rise while especially the ratio of female academics increased at the level of research assistant and assistant professor. Therefore, it was noteworthy that the number of female academics was higher in the categories where more young academics were involved. This finding was especially evident in the male-to-female rates in the ‘Asst. Prof.’ and R. A. categories. According to this, when the last two decades process was evaluated, the number of ‘male’ R. A. increased from 65 to 157, which was 1.4-fold higher while the number of ‘female’ R. A. increased from 34 to 181, an increase of 4.3-fold. Between these years, the number of ‘male’ Asst. Prof. increased from 31 to 198, which was 5.4-fold higher while the number of ‘female’ Asst. Prof. increase from 18 to 155, an increase of 7.6-fold. Between these years, while the number of ‘male’ Prof. Dr. and Assoc. Prof. increased from 29 to 163, that is 4.6-fold, the number of ‘female’ Prof. Dr. and Assoc. Prof. increased from 20 to 87, an increase of 3.4-fold.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 19: The Rates of Academic Staff in Sociology in State-Foundation Universities by Academic Titles and Gender (2015-16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015- 16 academic year.

    According to the distribution of total female-male ‘academics’ in the sociology field in state-foundation universities based on geographical regions in 2015-16 educational year, the highest number of academics was 29.9% (291) in the universities in the Marmara Region. In the Central Anatolian universities, the ratio of total academics was 23.7% (230), 11.8% (115) in the Aegean Region, 11.7% (114) in the Eastern Anatolia Region, 10.7% (104) in the Black Sea Region, 7.0% (68) in Southeastern Anatoli Region and 5.1% (50) in Mediterranean Region. Accordingly, the most academic staff were in the universities in Marmara and Central Anatolia regions while the least staff were in the universities in the Mediterranean and Southeastern Anatolia regions (Figure 20). When the “gender distributions” of the regions were evaluated only within themselves, the Mediterranean Region was the only place where the ratio of female academics was higher than that of male academics. The ratio of female academics was 62.0% and the ratio of male academics was 38.0% in there. The proportion of female and male academics in Central Anatolia was equal to each other. In the remaining regions, male academics were more intense than female academics in varying proportions. According to gender distribution of academics, the regions were as follows: Marmara Region; 46,4% female, 53,6% male; Aegean Region 45.2% female, 54.8% male; Black Sea Region 43,3% female, 56,7% male; Eastern Anatolia Region 34.2% female, 65.8% male; Southeastern Anatolia Region 33.8% female, 66.2% male. The regions with the highest proportion of male academics were Southeast Anatolia and Eastern Anatolia regions respectively. In these regions, it can be said that one of every three academics was female and two were male.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 20: The Rates of Academic Staff in Sociology in State-Foundation Universities by Geographical Region and Gender (2015- 16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015- 16 academic year.

    According to the distribution of total male and female academics in the field of sociology in state-foundation universities based on their foundation year in the academic year 2015-16, 84.6% of the academics were in the state, and 15.4% were in the foundation universities. Among state universities, the ratio of academics in pre-1992 universities was 33.5% (326), and in the post-2000 universities was 28.5% (277). The ratio of academics in 1992 universities was 22.5% (219) (Figure 21). Given the gender distribution of academics in these categories, state universities founded before 1992 was the only category where the ratio of female academics (17.7%) was higher than that of male academics (15.8%). According to the gender distribution of total academic staff only within the universities founded before 1992, the ratio of female academics was 52.8% and the ratio of male academics was 47.2%. At the foundation universities, the intensity of the male and female academics seems almost equal. According to the gender distribution of total academic staff within the foundation universities, there were 49.4% female academics and 50.6% male academics.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 21: The Rates of Academic Staff in Sociology in State-Foundation Universities by Years of Foundation and Gender (2015- 16 Academic Year).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of Council of Higher Education covering 2015- 16 academic year.

    According to the gender distribution of the total academic staff only within the state universities of 1992, the ratio of female academics was 44.3% while that of male academics was 55.7%. State universities founded after the year 2000 have the highest ratio of male academics both within themselves and in total number of academic staff. Universities founded after 2000 have the highest number of male academics with 18.5% of the total number of academic staff. When evaluated only in its own category, the ratio of male academics in post-2000 universities was 65.0%, while that of female academics was only 35.0%.

    The Number of Students Per Faculty Member and Academic Staff in Sociology in Turkey
    In 2015-16 academic year, the total number of undergraduate students (excluding open-school faculty students) per Faculty Member (Prof.; Assoc. Prof.; Asst. Prof.) working in the sociology departments of state-foundation universities was 27. The total number of sociology ‘undergraduate’ students per academic staff (all academic titles) was 43. The total number of ‘graduate’ students per faculty member was 8. When considering the total number of students in ‘undergraduate and graduate level’, the number of sociology students per academic staff was 31 while the number of students per faculty member was 50.

    Given Figure 22, which emerged during the last two decades between 1995-96 and 2015-16, the number of students per academic staff and faculty member in the field of sociology fluctuated a certain degree, but it was generally higher than the average of the higher education in Turkey and the OECD countries. When all higher education institutions in Turkey were considered in 2013, the number of students per faculty member was 48 and the number of students per academic staff was 21, except for open education programs. Again, by 2013, the average number of students per academic staff in OECD countries was 15.6 (Çetinsaya, 2014: 96-97). As a result, the number of students per faculty member and academic staff during the last two decades in sociology has always been high, or in other words higher than the average of Turkey’s higher education and OECD.


    Click Here to Zoom
    Figure 22: The Number of Students Per Faculty Member (Prof.; Assoc. Prof.; Asst. Prof.) and Academic Staff (all academic titles) in Sociology in State-Foundation Universities (periods of 1995-96/2015-16).
    Source: It was compiled from the data of ÖSYM and Council of Higher Education (periods of 1995-96/2015- 16).

    When the total number of undergraduate and graduate sociology students per academic staff was evaluated based on the foundation periods of state-foundation universities in 2015-16 academic year, in state universities founded before 1992, the number of students per academic staff was 17, 35 in 1992 universities, 27 in universities founded after 2000 and 66 in foundation universities. According to this, the sociology departments of the universities founded before 1992 were the categories which have the least students per academic staff. Since foundation universities mostly receive services by paying a fee per course from the academic staff in state universities, the number of students per academic staff of these universities was quite high.

  • Top
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Results
  • Conclusion
  • References
  • Conclusion
    Throughout the study, sociology as an academic discipline in the higher education system of Turkey was aimed to be considered on a statistical basis. In this context; the distribution and intensity of current undergraduate and graduate programs of sociology departments in Turkey, the general views of the number and distribution of academic staff and students in these programs and the changes in the historical process on this basis were focused.

    The increase in the number and type of programs in a discipline, the increase or decrease in the number of students and academic staff, will also change the meanings attached to it and make it possible to foresee its future. As it is valid for other disciplines, debates about the future of sociology mostly focus on “whether sociology will survive as a discipline at all; on the other hand whether there are new ideas to inhabit that structure if it survives” (Abbott, 2000: 296). From this point of view, the present appearance of the discipline on the statistical basis and the trend of quantitative change on the historical basis may be an important dimension of the debate about whether the sociology will survive as a discipline. Therefore, we can point out that ‘quantitative profile and changes’ should be considered as an important dimension in the discussions of the structural characteristics of the discipline, and the future projection, and the search for directions. In this sense, what collected data say to us can be summarized as follows:

    Undergraduate and Graduate Sociology Programs in Sociology in Higher Education
    1) The adventure of the discipline of sociology, which started in 1914 in Turkey, has progressed continuously in the higher education system after these years, with increasing number and types of programs. Currently, it was possible to say that the sociology undergraduate programs in Turkey have spread to all the geographical regions in the ‘state’ and ‘foundation’ universities, especially in the post-2000 period, and that each geographical region can meet the student potential. On the other hand, sociology departments in Turkey have a total of 55 master’s (with thesis) programs in 38 different cities, 49 of which were state and 6 were foundation; 9 master’s (non-thesis) programs in 6 different cities, 6 of which were state, 3 were foundations; there were 27 PhD programs in 21 different cities, 26 of which were state and one was foundation. The spread of sociology graduate programs in Turkey has important implications for sociological knowledge production process.

    2) In this framework, it is necessary to think about the role of sociology education in both sociology education and sociological knowledge production process, considering the increase of sociology programs throughout Turkey (considering regional distribution, foundation years and state-foundation distinction). This increase in the number and type of programs indicates a potential for change and transformation in the practices and executions of discipline. Such a widespread sociology program may have a disciplinary effect on student circulation which may bring about a localization issue as a student profile in terms of sociology undergraduate education. Parin and Demirci (2014: 381), assessing this as a “localization” danger in terms of the student profile, pointed out that “opened departments and expanding student admissions encourage students to take sociology formation especially in cities where they were born or near”. Likewise, it is possible to say that this expansion can have a decreasing effect on the movement of academic staff and may lead to a localization issue. However, the localization phenomenon has positive implications as well as having negative implications.

    Because, the spread of students and academics in sociology programs in different geographies and in different universities will make it possible to diversify the discipline and its actors in intellectual basis, to make it easier to deal with local scale problems on the scientific sociological basis and to relate them at macro-micro level.

    The Profile of Undergraduate and Graduate Students in Sociology in Higher Education
    1) The increase in the number of sociology programs resulted in an increase in the number of students and in the last two decades, the number of sociology students in state-foundation universities increased by 4.4-fold. This increase in the quantitative basis observed in the discipline of sociology and the rising trend can be regarded as a result of the quantitative developments in the nationwide recent higher education field, but statistics show that sociology was generally ahead of the overall increase trend in the social sciences. Moreover, this increase in sociology in Turkey also differs from the general tendency in the world. For example, in the United States, there were authors (Zevallos, 2014; Ginsberg, 2011; Summers, 2003, Spalter-Roth, 2003, Dunlap & Catton, 1994) who emphasize the lack of interest and decline in the sociology discipline, especially after the 1980s.

    2) The increase in both the number of programs and the number of students in the sociology undergraduate category naturally reflects on the number of graduate programs and students. In the last two decades, the number of sociology master’s (with thesis) students has increased by 8.3-fold and the number of doctorate students by 6.4-fold. It is also possible to say that the sociology graduate programs are also expanded and diversified at a certain level. Given all these considerations, the increased interest in sociology programs has become one of the issues to be considered as to what the basic dynamics are. On the other hand, this rising trend in student demand is more striking when the discipline of sociology in Turkey is generally taken into account in terms of the difficulty of providing professional business life. Also, it seems possible to add that the current problems at the point of employment of sociology graduates (as well as students who graduated from open educational sociology programs) will increase further in the future.

    3) An important point of particular interest to undergraduate and graduate programs is the gender distribution in sociology programs. Especially, while there was a dominant female student density at the undergraduate level, it has been determined that the increase rates of female students at the graduate and doctoral levels in the last two decades were well above the male student growth rates. Does the growing number of students at the undergraduate and graduate levels transform sociology into one of the examples of ‘gender based professional stratification’? In this context, gender-based studies regarding discipline of sociology are important.

    The Profile of Academic Staff in Sociology in Higher Education
    1) In parallel with the increasing sociology departments throughout Turkey, a considerable increase in the number of academic staff was also observed. This increase was considerably higher than the 1.9-fold increase in all higher education levels in Turkey in the same years. This remarkable increase has an important role in sociological knowledge production process.

    On the other hand, in terms of the profile of academic staff, it was observed that the number of men was decreasing and the number of women was in a rising trend. In particular, it has been observed that the male academics’ ratio has increased in the higher titles, and female academics in the lower titles have intensified. This finding may raise questions about whether the discipline of sociology historically has changed or transformed on the basis of gender in terms of both the student and the academic staff, or whether the trend has changed, or has created a potential, in the practices of discipline. This reveals the necessity of academic studies that focus on patterns and effects of the gender distribution of the discipline.

    2) It was also showed that the number of students per academic staff and faculty member in the field of sociology fluctuated in years but it was generally higher than the average of higher education in Turkey and OECD countries. This brings to the agenda that the issues on education and training activities in sociology and the nature of these activities should be paid more attention.

    As a result, the data of this study, which deals with the processes of the establishment and dissemination of sociology as a discipline within the higher education system of Turkey on a statistical basis, show that the sociology programs have a quantitatively rising trend in Turkey. As Lichtenstein (2013: 31) notes, traditional sociology maintains the importance of for the production of critical thinking, the ability to conduct social analysis, and for a well-educated, well-functioning citizen with a broad developmental role.

  • Top
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Results
  • Conclusion
  • References
  • References

    1) Abbott, A. (2000). Reflections on the future of sociology, Contemporary Sociology, 29(2), 296-300. Retrieved from http://www. jstor.org/stable/2654383

    2) Akşit, B. (1989). Türkiye’de sosyolojinin yerlileşmesi ve uluslararasılaşması. Türkiye’deki İlk Sosyoloji Bölümünün Kuruluşunun 75. Yıl Dönümü, İstanbul Üniversitesi, 9-16 Ekim, İstanbul.

    3) Akşit, B. (2008). “Bahattin Akşit ile bilimsel araştırmalar ve Türkiye’nin sosyolojik dönüşümü üzerine”. Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi. 6(11), 269-302.

    4) American Sociological Association (ASA). (2012). Research on Sociology: Sociology Degrees Awarded by Degree Level 1966- 2010. Retrieved from http://www.asanet.org/research/stats/ degrees/degrees_level.cfm

    5) Brennan, J. (2008). Higher education and social change. Higher Education, 56(3), 381-393.

    6) Brennan, J. & Teichler, U. (2008). The future of higher education and of higher education research. Higher Education, 56(3), 259-264.

    7) Bulut, Y. (2011). Türkiye’de sosyoloji eğitimi. Sosyoloji Dergisi, 23(3), 1-18.

    8) Bulut, Y. (2014). Türkiye’de sosyolojinin 100 yılı. Sosyoloji Dergisi, 28(3), 1-21.

    9) Coşkun, İ. (1991). Sosyoloji bölümünün tarihine dair. in Coşkun İ. (Ed.). 75. Yılında Türkiye’de Sosyoloji, Ankara: Bağlam Yayınları.

    10) Çelebi, N. (2008). Türkiye’de sosyoloji dernekleri: Süreksizliklerin ardındaki süreklilik. Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi, 6(11), 677-690.

    11) Çetinsaya, G. (2014). Büyüme, kalite, uluslararasılaşma: Türkiye yükseköğretimi için bir yol haritası. Yükseköğretim Kurulu yayın no: 2014/2. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Basımevi. Retrieved from https://yolharitasi.yok.gov.tr/docs/YolHaritasi. pdf

    12) Dunlap, R. E., & Catton, W. R. Jr. (1994). Struggling with human exemptionalism: The rise, decline and revitalization of environmental sociology. The American Sociologist, 25(1), 5-30.

    13) Ginsberg, B. (2011). The fall of the faculty: The rise of the alladministrative university and why it matters. New York, Oxford University Press.

    14) Günay, D., & Günay, A. (2011). 1933’den Günümüze Türk yükseköğretiminde niceliksel gelişmeler, Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 1(1), 1-22.

    15) Gür, B. S., & Küçükcan, T. (2009). Türkiye’de yükseköğretim: Karşılaştırmalı bir analiz. Ankara: SETA

    16) Kasapoğlu, A. (2005). The study of sociology in Turkish higher education, International Education Journal, 6(4), 537-546.

    17) Kasapoğlu, A. (2016). Problems with sociology education in Turkey on its 100th anniversary. SAGE Open January-March 2016: 1-13. Retrieved from http://sgo.sagepub.com/ content/6/1/2158244016628589

    18) Kaya, T. (2008). İçtimaiyat’tan sosyoloji’ye: İstanbul Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Sosyoloji Bölümü’nün tarihine ve sosyoloji dergisine dair. Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi, 6(11), 713-730.

    19) Kılıç, R. (1999). Türkiye’de yükseköğretimin kapsamı ve tarihsel gelişimi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (3), 289-310. Retrieved from https://birimler.dpu.edu.tr/app/ views/panel/ckfinder/userfiles/17/files/DERG_/3/289-310. Pdf

    20) Korkut-Owen, F., Kelecioğlu, H., & Owen, D. W. (2014). Cinsiyetlere göre üniversitelerdeki onbir yıllık eğilim: Kariyer danışmanlığı için doğurgular. International Journal of Human Sciences, 11(1), 794-813.

    21) Lichtenstein, B. (2013). Amerikan sosyolojisi düşüşte mi? Küresel Diyalog, 3(2),30-31.

    22) OECD (2013). Education at a Glance 2013. Paris: OECD Indicators.

    23) Öğrenci Seçme ve Yerleştirme Merkezi (ÖSYM). 1995-96 ve 2012- 13 Dönemlerini kapsayan araştırma, yayın ve istatistikler. Retrieved from http://www.osym.gov.tr/belge/1-128/sureliyayinlar. Html

    24) Özgen, H. N. (2007). Türkiye’de sosyoloji, antropoloji ve kültür araştırmaları alanlarındaki mevcut durum: Akademik araştırmaların içerikleri. Ege Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, 2007, (17): 9-29.

    25) Parin, S., & Demirci, E. Y. (2014). Türkiye’de yükseköğretimde sosyoloji öğretimi: Bir dönemselleştirme denemesi (1914- 2014). Sosyoloji Dergisi, (29), 365-382.

    26) Spalter-Roth, R. (2003). Has sociology suffered the declines predicted ten years ago? Footnotes, 31(2), 1-11.

    27) Summers, J. H. (2003) The end of sociology? Boston Review, 28(6). Retrieved from http://bostonreview.net/BR28.6/contents. Html

    28) Sweet, S. (2015) How departments can respond to the changing popularity of the sociology major. Teaching Sociology, 44(1), 3-16.

    29) Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi (TALİD). (2008). Türk Sosyoloji tarihi sayısı “Sunuş” yazısı. Türkiye Araştırmaları Literatür Dergisi, 6(11), 5-12.

    30) Tekeli, İ. (2010) Tarihsel bağlamı içinde Türkiye’de yükseköğretimin ve YÖK’ün tarihi. Ankara: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları.

    31) Yavuzer, H. (2015) Sosyoloji eğitimi ve toplumsal faydaları. Turkish Studies, 10(14), 753-768.

    32) Yu, P., & Delaney, J. A. (2014) The spread of higher education around the globe a cross-country analysis of gross tertiary education enrollment, 1999-2005. Educational Policy, 30(2), 281–321.

    33) Yükseköğretim Kurulu (YÖK). 2013-14 ve 2015-16 Dönemlerini kapsayan öğrenci ve akademik personel istatistikleri. Retrieved from https://istatistik.yok.gov.tr/

    34) Zevallos, Z. (2014) So social science degrees are in decline? How applied sociology can help? Retrieved from http://www. sociologyyatwork.org/improving-sociology-degrees/

  • Top
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Results
  • Conclusion
  • References
  • [ Başa Dön ] [ Öz ] [ PDF ] [ Benzer Makaleler ] [ Yazara E-Posta ] [ Editöre E-Posta ]
    Şu ana kadar web sayfamız 19490830 defa ziyaret edilmiştir.