An examination of doctoral dissertations in the field of educational administration in Turkey between 2012-2022 in terms of social paradigms
Abstract views: 141
/ 
PDF downloads: 71
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13342931Keywords:
: Research paradigm, educational administration, research design, doctoral dissertationsAbstract
This study aimed to examine the distribution of doctoral dissertations in educational administration (supervision, planning, and economics) in the Department of Educational Sciences in Turkey between 2012 and 2022, regarding social paradigms. The systematic review design's systematic analysis type was used to search through the YÖK National Dissertation Centre database. As a result of the search, 172 doctoral dissertations were included in the scope of this study. The methodology sections of doctoral dissertations were analyzed according to research methods, research designs, data collection techniques knowledge-constitutive interests, philosophical movements, and social paradigms. In the study, it was found that the realism/modernism-based functional paradigm based on technical interest came to the fore, in this direction, the quantitative research method was the most used research method between 2012 and 2022, while idealism-based qualitative and pragmatism-based mixed method research have been used more by researchers since 2020. In addition, according to the research findings, only 10 of the researchers provided information about the philosophy and paradigm they were influenced by. In line with these results, it is recommended that researchers should follow the national and international literature, conduct their studies by following the paradigm transformation in this field, and inform the reader about the philosophy and paradigm on which the research is based in a way that reflects the world view of the researcher in their studies.
References
Arı, G., Armutlu, C., Güneri Tosunoğlu, N., Yücel Toy, B. (2009). Pozitivist ve postpozitivist paradigmalar çerçevesinde metodoloji tartişmalarinin yönetim ve pazarlama alanlarina yansimalari [The reflections of methodological discussions to management and marketing fields within the frame of the positivist and postpositivist paradigms]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 27 (1), 113-141
Aydın, A., Selvitopu, A., Kaya, M. (2018). Sınıf yönetimi alanındaki lisansüstü tezlerin incelenmesi [A review of post graduate theses in the field of classroom management] Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18 (1), 41-56
Bali, R. K.; Wickramasinghe, N.& Lehaney. B. (2009). Knowledge management primer. Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group.
Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. (1979). Social paradigms and organizational analysis: Elements of the sociology of corporate life. Heinemann Educational Books Inc.
Çıvak B ve Sezerel H. (2018). Araştırma paradigmalari ve turizm yazini [Research paradigms and tourism literature], Turizm Akademik Dergisi, 5 (1), 1-14.
Cooper, J. A. P. (2016). Routledge encyclopedia of educational thinkers. Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group.
Creswell, J. W. (2017). Araştırma deseni nitel, nicel ve karma yöntem yaklaşimlari [Research design qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches]. (S. B. Demir Çev.). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Elmas, S., Açıkgöz, S., Aşçı, F.H. (2018). Sporda sosyal alanlarda yapilan lisansüstü tezlerde araştirma paradigmalarinin incelenmesi [The research paradigms of graduate theses in social sub-disciplines of sports]. Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 29 (2), 53–66.
Ergun, M. ve Çilingir, F. (2013). İlköğretim bölümünde yapilan lisansüstü tezlerin incelenmesi: ondokuz mayis üniversitesi örneği [Analysis of postgraduate theses in the department of primary education: the case of Ondokuz Mayis University] VI. Ulusal Lisansüstü Eğitim Sempozyumu Bildiriler El Kitabı, Sakarya.
Fazlıoğulları, O., Kurul, N. (2012). Türkiyedeki Eğitim Bilimleri Doktora Tezlerinin Özellikleri [The Characteristics of Doctoral Dissertations of Educational Sciences in Turkey]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12, (24), 43-75.
Gioia, D.A. and E. Pitre. (1990). Multiparadigm Perspectives on Theory Building. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 584-602.
Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gunbayi, I. (2023). Data analysis in qualitative research. Journal of Action Qualitative & Mixed Methods Research, 2(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7763207
Gunbayi, I. (2019). Liderlik ve toplumsal degisme [Leadership and Social Development]. In N. Guclu & S. Kosar (Eds)., Egitim Yonetiminde Liderlik; Teori, araştırma ve uygulama [Leadership in educational management; Theory, research and practice], (pp.245-279), Ankara: Pegem Academy
Gunbayi, I. (2020). Knowledge-constitutive interests and social paradigms in guiding mixed methods research (MMR). Journal of Mixed Methods Studies, 1, 44-56 [Online] www.jomesonline.com DOI: 10.14689/jomes.2020.1.3
Gunbayı, İ. ve Sorm, S. (2018). Social paradigms in guiding social research design: The functional, interpretive, radical humanist and radical structural paradigms, International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 9 (2), 57-76.
Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2004). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In S. N. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Approaches to qualitative research: A reader on theory and practice, (pp. 17-38), New York: Ox-ford University Press.
Habermas, J. (1987). Knowledge and human interests: A general perspective in knowledge and human interests. Cambridge: Policy.
Hesse, E. (1980). Revolutions and reconstructions in the philosophy of science. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Karadağ, R. (2014). Okuma ilgisi, tutumlari ve alişkanliği konusunda yapilmiş çalişmalarin lisansüstü tezlere dayali analizi: Yök ve Proquest veri tabanlari örneklemi [Analysis of the graduate theses in the field of reading interest, attitudes and habits: The sample of YOK and ProQuest databases]. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35, 1-17.
Köse, E., Yerlisu Lapa, T., Günbayı, İ. (2021). Social Paradigms Shaping Leisure Research Designs: A Systematic Review. Türk Spor ve Egzersiz Dergisi, 23 (2), 230-244.
Kuhn, S. T. (1995). Bilimsel devrimlerin yapisi [The nature of scientific revolutions](4. baskı). Çev. Nilüfer Kuyaş. İstanbul: Alan Yayınevi.
Küçükoğlu ve Ozan, (2013). Sınıf öğretmenliği alanindaki lisansüstü tezlere yönelik bir içerik analizi [A content analysis about master theses and dissertations in classroom teacher education], Uluslararası Avrasya Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt:4, Sayı:12, ss: (27-47)
Leblebici, D. N. (2008). Örgüt kuraminda paradigmalar ve metaforlar [Paradigms and metaphors in organization theory] Sosyal Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8 (15), 345-360.
Maxwell, J. A. (2018). Nitel araştırma tasarımı- Etkileşimli bir yaklaşım [Qualitative research design - An interactive approach]. (Çev: M. Çevikbaş) Ankara: Nobel Akademi.
Miles, M. B. ve Huberman, A. M. (2016). Nitel veri analizi [Qualitative data analysis]. (Çev: S. Akbaba Altun & A. Ersoy) Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Ozan Leylum, Ş., Odabaşı, H. F., & Kabakçı Yurdakul, I. (2017). Eğitim ortamlarında durum çalışmasının önemi [The Importance of Case Study Research in Educational Settings]. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi - Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 5(3), 369-385. www.enadonline.com DOI: 10.14689/issn.2148- 2624.1.5c3s16m
Morgan, G. (1980). Paradigms, Metaphors, and Puzzle Solving in Organization Theory, Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(4): 605-622.
Nieminen, P., Sipilä, K., Takkinen, H. M., Renko, M., & Risteli, L. (2007). Medical dissertations as part of the scientific training in basic medical and dental education: experiences from Finland. BMC Medical Education, 7(1), 51.
Petticrew, M. & Roberts, H. (2008). Systematicreviews in thesocialsciences: A practicalguide. John Wiley&Sons.
Sert, G., Kurtoğlu, M., Akıncı, A., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2012). Öğretmenlerin teknoloji kullanma durumlarını inceleyen araştırmalara bir bakış: Bir içerik analizi çalışması. [Overview of research on teachers’ technology usage: a content analysis study]. Akademik Bilişim, Uşak.
Şan, E. (2020). Türkiye`de eğitim alanında yayınlanan karma yönteme dayalı makalelerin incelenmesi [Examination of articles based on mixed method published in the field of education in Turkey] Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Maltepe Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul.
Torgerson, C. (2003). Systematicreviews. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Yaşar, Ş., Papatğa, E. (2015). İlkokul matematik derslerine yönelik yapilan lisansüstü tezlerin incelenmesi [The analysis of the graduate theses related to mathematics courses]. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 5, Sayı 2, 113-124.
Yin, R. K. (2017). Durum çalışması araştırması uygulamaları [Case study research applications]. (Translated by I. Gunbayi), Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Action Qualitative & Mixed Methods Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
