{"id":7355,"date":"2022-03-25T19:59:08","date_gmt":"2022-03-25T16:59:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/?p=7355"},"modified":"2022-06-06T12:49:59","modified_gmt":"2022-06-06T09:49:59","slug":"the-status-and-future-of-evaluation-in-turkish-educational-decision-making-an-introduction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/the-status-and-future-of-evaluation-in-turkish-educational-decision-making-an-introduction\/","title":{"rendered":"T\u00fcrk E\u011fitim Sisteminin Karar Alma S\u00fcrecinde \u201cDe\u011ferlendirme\u201dnin Rol\u00fc ve Gelece\u011fi: Bir Giri\u015f"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\n

De\u011ferlendirme Serisi – I<\/span><\/h2>\n

T\u00fcrk E\u011fitim Sisteminin Karar Alma S\u00fcrecinde <\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

\u201cDe\u011ferlendirme\u201dnin Rol\u00fc ve Gelece\u011fi: Bir Giri\u015f<\/b><\/span>\u00a0<\/b><\/h2>\n

Giri\u015f<\/b>\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n

T\u00fcrkiye Cumhuriyeti Milli E\u011fitim Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2012 y\u0131l\u0131nda Sa\u011fl\u0131k Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve G\u0131da, Tar\u0131m ve Hayvanc\u0131l\u0131k Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile i\u015fbirli\u011fi yaparak \u201cOkul S\u00fct\u00fc Program\u0131\u201d isimli bir proje ba\u015flatt\u0131. Proje, beslenme al\u0131\u015fkanl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 geli\u015ftirerek \u00f6\u011frencilerin okuldaki \u00f6\u011frenimlerini desteklemeyi ama\u00e7l\u0131yordu. <\/i>Fakat <\/i>ba\u015flad\u0131ktan birka\u00e7 ay sonra proje kapsam\u0131nda da\u011f\u0131t\u0131lan bozuk s\u00fctten dolay\u0131 g\u0131da zehirlenmesi ge\u00e7iren bir\u00e7ok \u00f6\u011frenci hastanelye kald\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131. Medyada b\u00fcy\u00fck yank\u0131 bulan olaylar, h\u00fck\u00fcmeti utan\u00e7 verici bir durumda b\u0131rakmakla kalmad\u0131, ayn\u0131 zamanda T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin Avrupa Birli\u011fi (AB) \u00fcyeli\u011fi yolundaki itibar\u0131n\u0131n da zedelenmesine sebep oldu. Bu olaylarla beraber, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de y\u0131llard\u0131r devam eden karar alma mekanizmalar\u0131 ve kararlar\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe konmas\u0131ndaki aksakl\u0131klar ve eksikliklerle ilgili tart\u0131\u015fmalar yeniden g\u00fcndeme geldi. Tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n alt\u0131nda yatan \u00fc\u00e7 temel soru vard\u0131; h\u00fck\u00fcmet bu projeyi tasarlayarak do\u011fru bir karar m\u0131 vermi\u015fti? Proje do\u011fru y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f m\u00fcyd\u00fc? H\u00fck\u00fcmet bu projeyi daha iyi uygulamak i\u00e7in neler yapabilirdi?<\/p>\n

Asl\u0131nda bu sorular; T\u00fcrkiye\u2019deki e\u011fitim sistemi yetkilileri ve \u00f6\u011fretim g\u00f6revlilerinin karar verme sistemlerinde de\u011ferlendirmenin rol\u00fc ve faydas\u0131 (bu konuda- eksikli\u011fi) gibi \u00e7ok daha temel konulara i\u015faret ediyor. <\/i>De\u011ferlendirme, temel olarak, bir kamu politikas\u0131, program veya projesini, uygulanma s\u00fcre\u00e7leri ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131, \u00f6nceden belirlenm\u015f standart ve kriterlere g\u00f6re incelemek anlam\u0131na gelir. Genel olarak, de\u011ferlendirme kamu g\u00f6revlilerinin karar al\u0131rken \u201cHangi projeler, hangi durumlarda, kimlere y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funda ba\u015far\u0131l\u0131 olur\/olmaz?\u201d gibi sorular\u0131 cevaplamalar\u0131na yard\u0131mc\u0131 olur. Akademisyenlerin de belirtti\u011fi gibi de\u011ferlendirmeler karar alma s\u00fcre\u00e7lerinde kamu politikalar\u0131 ve programlar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015far\u0131lar\u0131, eksiklikleri ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131yla ilgili devaml\u0131 bir bilgi ak\u0131\u015f\u0131 sa\u011flayarak ve etkililikleri iyile\u015ftirmelere katk\u0131da bulunmak suretiyle \u00e7ok stratejik bir rol oynarlar. (Weiss, 1998; Patton, 2012; Mark & Henry, 2004; Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen, 2004). De\u011ferlendirmenin h\u00fck\u00fcmetin kararlar\u0131n\u0131n geli\u015ftirilmesine sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 katk\u0131 belirgin olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen, geli\u015fmekte olan di\u011fer \u00fclkelere (\u00f6rne\u011fin Brezilya ve Kore) k\u0131yasla, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin e\u011fitim sistemiyle ilgili karar verme mekanizmas\u0131n\u0131n temeline sistematik bir de\u011ferlendirme uygulamas\u0131 yerle\u015ftirme konusunda geri kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fcyoruz. Mevcut verilere\u00a0 politikalar\u0131n resmi de\u011ferlendirmesinin \u00e7ok nadir olarak yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6steriyor. (Education Reform Initiative, 2009; Russon & Russon, 2000). Avrupa Birli\u011fi i\u00e7indeki uluslararas\u0131 bilgi ekonomisindeki rekabet\u00e7i bask\u0131larla ve ba\u015fa \u00e7\u0131kabilmeyi hedefleyen\u00a0 T\u00fcrkiye, de\u011ferlendirmeye yeterince \u00f6nem vermeyerek, e\u011fitim politika ve programlar\u0131n\u0131 geli\u015ftirme f\u0131rsatlar\u0131n\u0131 ka\u00e7\u0131r\u0131yor. Bu nedenle T\u00fcrk akademisyenler, ulusal\u00a0 \u00e7apta programlar\u0131n T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin sosyal, ekonomik ve k\u00fclt\u00fcrel durumuna g\u00f6re evlerce <\/i>de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fini belirtiyor (Aydagul, 2008).<\/p>\n

Bu makale, AnalizT\u00fcrkiye arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla yay\u0131mlanacak olan, T\u00fcrk h\u00fck\u00fcmetinde ve sivil toplumda de\u011ferlendirmeyi bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma alan\u0131 olarak ele alan ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar serisinin ilkini olu\u015fturuyor. Makale, \u00f6zellikle T\u00fcrk e\u011fitim sisteminin karar alma s\u00fcre\u00e7lerinde de\u011ferlendirmenin yerini ve olas\u0131 gelece\u011fini analiz etmeyi ama\u00e7l\u0131yor. De\u011ferlendirme kavram\u0131, k\u00fcreselle\u015fmi\u015f kuzey \u00fclkelerinde <\/i>olgunla\u015fm\u0131\u015f olan literat\u00fcr\u00fcn tan\u0131mlar\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde ele al\u0131nacak. De\u011ferlendirmenin bir kavram ve uygulama olarak daha iyi anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019deki karar alma s\u00fcre\u00e7lerine nas\u0131l uygulanabilece\u011fi hakk\u0131nda daha net fikir sahibi olunmas\u0131 i\u00e7in bu makale, baz\u0131 \u00f6nemli tan\u0131mlar, terimler ve kavramlar\u0131 da tan\u0131tacak. Bu ara\u015ft\u0131rma ne kadar e\u011fitim sistemine odakl\u0131 olsa da var\u0131lacak olan sonu\u00e7lar ba\u015fka alanlarda da (\u00f6rne\u011fin, sa\u011fl\u0131k, ula\u015f\u0131m, istihdam ve kalk\u0131nma alanlar\u0131nda) kullan\u0131\u015fl\u0131 olabilir.<\/p>\n

Bir \u00c7al\u0131\u015fma Alan\u0131 Olarak De\u011ferlendirme ve Uygulanmas\u0131: Teorik bir \u00c7er\u00e7eve<\/b>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

De\u011ferlendirmenin bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma alan\u0131 <\/i>olarak tan\u0131m\u0131, ama\u00e7lar\u0131 ve kullan\u0131m\u0131 hakk\u0131nda d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmesi, bu kavram\u0131n T\u00fcrk e\u011fitim sistemindeki kullan\u0131\u015fl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve \u00f6nemini daha da g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc k\u0131lacak. Makalenin bu b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde de\u011ferlendirmenin neden bizim i\u00e7in \u00f6nemli oldu\u011fu ve karar alma s\u00fcrecinde neden ciddiye al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131klanacak.<\/p>\n

De\u011ferlendirme<\/i> kavram\u0131na \u00e7e\u015fitli tan\u0131mlar getiren ve ama\u00e7lar belirleyen bir\u00e7ok Bat\u0131l\u0131 akademisyen ve uygulay\u0131c\u0131 bulunuyor (\u00f6rne\u011fin., King & Stevahn, 2012; Patton, 2012; Stufflebeam & Shinkfield, 2007; Rossi, Lipsey, & Freeman, 2004). <\/i>En yayg\u0131n tan\u0131m de\u011ferlendirmeyi \u201cbir \u015feyin liyakat, <\/i>eder ve de\u011ferinin belirlendi\u011fi sistematik s\u00fcre\u00e7\u201d (Scriven, 1991, s. 139) olarak betimliyor. D\u00fc\u015f\u00fck ve orta gelirli \u00fclkelerde ise yak\u0131n zamanlarda vefat eden, ABD\u2019nin \u201cPolitika ve De\u011ferlendirilmesi\u201d \u00fczerine \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan en se\u00e7kin akademisyenlerinden Carol Weiss\u2019in tan\u0131m\u0131 tercih ediliyor (bkz. UNDP, 2011). Weiss\u2019in tan\u0131m\u0131na g\u00f6re de\u011ferlendirme, bir program\u0131n geli\u015fmesine katk\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in o program\u0131n uygulan\u0131\u015f\u0131 ve\/veya sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 belirgin olan ve olmayan <\/i>kriterlere g\u00f6re sistematik bir \u015fekilde analiz etmek demektir (Weiss, 1998, p. 4). Burada program de\u011ferlendirmesini di\u011fer sosyal bilim ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131ndan ayr\u0131 tutmaya dikkat etmek gerekir. Weiss (1998) bu iki ara\u015ft\u0131rma gelen\u011fi aras\u0131nda \u00f6nemli farklar\u0131n alt\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7izmi\u015ftir. E\u011fitim siteminin karar alma mekanizmalar\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirmenin rol\u00fcn\u00fc anlamak i\u00e7in Weiss\u2019in \u00f6zellikle fayda ve m\u00fc\u015fteri kavramlar\u0131 hakk\u0131ndaki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fleri \u00e7ok yerindedir. Weiss\u2019e (1998) g\u00f6re, de\u011ferlendirmeler karar almas\u0131 gereken m\u00fc\u015fteri, karar vericiler, <\/i>y\u00f6netici veya g\u00f6revliler i\u00e7in kullan\u0131\u015fl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurarak yap\u0131l\u0131r. K\u0131saca, de\u011ferlendirmeler, di\u011fer sosyal bilimler ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131ndan farkl\u0131 olarak, baz\u0131 kararlar\u0131 vermek i\u00e7in bilgiye ihtiyac\u0131 olan politika veya program yarat\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik olarak yap\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Net bir tan\u0131mda mutabakat olmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen <\/i>yerel, ulusal ve uluslararas\u0131 seviyelerde kurumsal hedeflerini olu\u015fturmak, y\u00fcr\u00fctmek ve geli\u015ftirmek konusunda de\u011ferlendirmeye olan ilgi gittik\u00e7e art\u0131yor (Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen, 2004). Zaten Bat\u0131l\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131rmac\u0131lar, de\u011ferlendirmenin kamu servis, program ve politikalar\u0131 konusunda etki oldu\u011fundan bahsederler. (Segone, 2008; Mark, Henry, & Julnes, 2000; Scriven, 1991). De\u011ferlendirmelerin kurumsal \u00f6\u011frenme ve kararlar\u0131n etkilili\u011fi konusunda katk\u0131da bulundu\u011fu konusunda hemfikirler. \u00d6yle ki de\u011ferlendirme s\u00fcre\u00e7leri ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 bir bilgi temeli yaratarak programlar\u0131n ve politikalar\u0131n d\u00fczenlenmesi, uygulanmas\u0131, arkalar\u0131ndaki mant\u0131k ve belkenen sonu\u00e7lar ve en \u00f6nemlisi faaliyetlerdeki de\u011fi\u015fikliklerin de\u011fi\u015fmesini sa\u011flayabilir.(Weiss, 1998; Preskill, 2008; Patton, 2012). Fitzpatrick et. al. (2004) \u00a0karar alma s\u00fcrecinde de\u011ferlendirmenin \u00f6nemini s\u00f6yle anlat\u0131yor;<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 De\u011ferlendirme, bir projenin g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc ve zay\u0131f yanlar\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesinde, iyi taraflar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ne plana al\u0131n\u0131p, hatalar\u0131n\u0131n ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131nda \u00f6nemli rol oynar. Fakat tek ba\u015f\u0131na de\u011ferlendirme yapmak problemleri \u00e7\u00f6zmez \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc hatalar\u0131 d\u00fczeltmek, bu s\u00fcre\u00e7te de\u011ferlendirmenin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 onlara yard\u0131mc\u0131 olacak bir ara\u00e7 \u015feklinde kullanan y\u00f6netici ve benzeri idarecilerin i\u015fidir. (s. 27)\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

K\u00fcresel G\u00fcney ve Kuzey ba\u011flamlar\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirme konusunda \u00f6nc\u00fc olan Patton (2012) program de\u011felendirmelerini alt\u0131 kategoriye ay\u0131r\u0131yor (bkz. Tablo 1) \u00a0ve de\u011ferlendirmenin amac\u0131 ve nas\u0131l kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fc\u015fterilerin \u00f6celiklerine ve ihtya\u00e7 duyduklar\u0131 bilgiye g\u00f6re belirlendi\u011fini savunuyor.<\/p>\n

Tablo 1.<\/b> De\u011ferlendirmenin Ba\u015fl\u0131ca Hedefleri<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
De\u011ferlendirmenin Amac\u0131<\/b><\/td>\nHedef<\/b><\/td>\nDe\u011ferlendirme Sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n Ba\u015fl\u0131ca Kullan\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00d6zetleyici, Yarg\u0131lama<\/td>\nProgram veya politikan\u0131n genel de\u011ferini belirlemek<\/td>\nFon sa\u011flay\u0131c\u0131\u00a0 ve politika yap\u0131c\u0131lar<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Bi\u00e7imlendirici geli\u015fme, \u00d6\u011frenim<\/td>\nProgram veya politikay\u0131 geli\u015ftirmek<\/td>\nProgram idarecileri ve g\u00f6revliler<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Mesuliyet<\/td>\nKaynaklar\u0131n etkin kullan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6stermek<\/td>\nY\u00fcr\u00fctme ve yasama yetkilileri<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
G\u00f6zlemleme<\/td>\nProgram\u0131n idaresi i\u00e7in veri temin etmek<\/td>\nProgram y\u00f6neticileri<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Geli\u015fimsel<\/td>\nProgram\u0131 veya politikay\u0131 ba\u015fka karma\u015f\u0131k ko\u015fullara da uyarlamak<\/td>\nToplumsal geli\u015ftiriciler<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Bilgi \u00dcretimi<\/td>\nEtkilili\u011fe giden yollar\u0131 belirlemek<\/td>\nProgram tasar\u0131mc\u0131lar\u0131<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0Kaynak: Patton (2012, s. 129-132)’dan uyarlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

\u00d6zetle, bu faydac\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmelerin karar vericilere rehber program tasar\u0131m\u0131, uygulamas\u0131 ve geli\u015ftirmesi konusunda yararl\u0131 bilgi sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 varsaymaktad\u0131r. Bu y\u00fczden, de\u011ferlendirmeler y\u00f6netici, idareci ve hatta politika yap\u0131c\u0131lara cazip gelmektedir (Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen, 2004).<\/p>\n

Karar Almada De\u011ferlendirmenin Kullan\u0131m\u0131<\/b><\/p>\n

Literat\u00fcrde ge\u00e7erli olarak de\u011ferlendirmenin kullan\u0131\u015fl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7 farkl\u0131 seviyede a\u00e7\u0131klan\u0131r (Johnson et al., 2009). \u0130lk olarak, ara\u00e7sal kullan\u0131m,<\/i> s\u00f6z konusu program, proje, personel veya politikay\u0131 de\u011fi\u015ftirmek, geli\u015ftrimek veya sona erdirmek i\u00e7in de\u011ferlendirme sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 ile ilgilidir. (Mark & Henry, 2004; Johnson et al., 2009). De\u011ferlendirmenin bu kullan\u0131m\u0131, karar vericilerin eri\u015fimleri olan veya istedikleri bilimsel kan\u0131tlar\u0131 kulland\u0131klar\u0131 rasyonel karar alma s\u00fcre\u00e7lerini varsay\u0131yor.\u00a0 (Almeida & Bascolo, 2006). \u0130kinci olarak, kavramsal kullan\u0131m<\/i>, politikalardaki sorunlar\u0131n ve \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlerinin yeni bir \u015fekilde ayd\u0131nlat\u0131lmas\u0131nda ve anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n de\u011fi\u015fmesinde kullan\u0131lan de\u011ferlendirme sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n dolayl\u0131 kullan\u0131m\u0131na\u00a0 i\u015faret ediyor. Carol Weiss (1998) de\u011ferlendirmelerin sonucunda ula\u015f\u0131lan bilgi in\u015faas\u0131na ve politika yap\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n zamanla bir par\u00e7as\u0131 haline gelmesine ayd\u0131nlanma<\/i> diyor. \u00a0Bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe g\u00f6re de\u011ferlendirme bilgilerinin zamanla politika kararlar\u0131n\u0131 daha incelikli ve dolayl\u0131 yollardan etkileyerek ve mant\u0131ki diyaloglar\u0131n bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olarak politika alan\u0131nda \u201cyeni bir ortak bilgelik\u201d yaratt\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahsediyor. (Weiss, Graham, & Birkeland, 2005, s. 13) olu\u015fturuyor. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc olarak, sembolik kullan\u0131m<\/i>, de\u011ferlendirme bulgular\u0131n\u0131n varolan uygulamalar\u0131 hakl\u0131 \u00e7\u0131karmak, di\u011ferlerini baz\u0131 konularla ilgili ikna etmek ya da siyasi alandaki etkinlikleri ertelemek i\u00e7in kullan\u0131lmas\u0131na at\u0131fta bulunuyor. (Almeida & Bascolo, 2006).<\/p>\n

De\u011ferlendirmenin bu \u00fc\u00e7\u00a0 b\u00fcy\u00fck kullan\u0131m\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde akademisyenler ve uygulay\u0131c\u0131lar, karar almada de\u011ferlendirme bulgular\u0131n\u0131n ve s\u00fcre\u00e7lerinin ara\u00e7sal kullan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 sorguluyorlar. Bu konudaki iddialar\u0131, karar vericilerin kullanabilece\u011fi pek \u00e7ok kan\u0131t kayna\u011f\u0131 oldu\u011fundan de\u011ferlendirmelerin karar\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131nda do\u011frudan etkisi oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131n\u0131n ne kadar ger\u00e7ek d\u0131\u015f\u0131 oldu\u011fu (Weiss, 1998; Chelimsky, 2006). Asl\u0131nda bu akademisyenler \u00e7o\u011funlukla bilimsel ve sosyolojik bilginin siyasi alandaki yerini sorguluyorlar. Siyasi d\u00fczlemde bilginin uygulanan politikalara hemen etki etmedi\u011fini, politikalar\u0131n daha uzun ve dolayl\u0131 yollarla de\u011fi\u015ftirildi\u011fini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcyorlar (Balthasar & Rieder, 2000).<\/p>\n

Asl\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirmenin bir ara\u00e7 olarak kullan\u0131l\u0131p kullan\u0131lamamas\u0131, kan\u0131ta dayal\u0131 karar verme ile ilgili daha geni\u015f tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n bir par\u00e7as\u0131d\u0131r. Bat\u0131 demokrasilerinin son y\u00fczy\u0131lda kamu y\u00f6netimi k\u00fclt\u00fcr\u00fcne dair ge\u00e7irdi\u011fi de\u011fi\u015fimler, kamu servislerinin temin edilmesinde etkililik ve etkinli\u011fin temel payda olarak \u00f6ne \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furdu.\u00a0 (Clarke, 2008). Bu de\u011fi\u015fim, sonuca dayal\u0131 y\u00f6netim ve mesuliyet mekanizmalar\u0131n\u0131 para de\u011ferini g\u00f6stererek tetikledi ve nihayetinde s\u0131k\u0131 bilimsel de\u011ferlendirmelerin karar verme i\u00e7in g\u00fcvenilir, ampirik kan\u0131t \u00fcretmesini \u015fart ko\u015ftu. (Donaldson, 2008). Kan\u0131ta-dayal\u0131 politika ve uygulamalar\u0131 savunanlar, rastgele se\u00e7ilmi\u015f kontroll\u00fc denemeler ve yar\u0131-deneysel tasar\u0131mlarla elde edilmi\u015f bir \u015fekilde, bilimsel olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesinin politika ve programlar\u0131n tasarlan\u0131p uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131 etkileyece\u011fini ve geli\u015ftirece\u011fini varsay\u0131yorlar (Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002).<\/p>\n

Buna ra\u011fmen, bir\u00e7ok akademisyen s\u0131k s\u0131k de\u011ferlendirme sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011frudan kullan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n karar verme s\u00fcre\u00e7lerinde, siyasi ba\u011flamdan \u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fc, k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131 oldu\u011funun alt\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7iziyorlar.\u00a0 \u00d6rne\u011fin Weiss (1998) de\u011ferlendirmelerin politika yap\u0131m\u0131na direk olarak etki edemeyece\u011fini birka\u00e7 nedenle a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131yor. Bu nedenlerden ilki ve en \u00f6nemlisi, de\u011ferlendirmenin olu\u015fturdu\u011fu kan\u0131tlar\u0131n ve bilgilerin politika yap\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131n ula\u015fabildi\u011fi ba\u015fka bir\u00e7ok bilgi ile rekabet i\u00e7inde olmas\u0131d\u0131r. De\u011ferlendirme, siyasi alan\u0131n ba\u015fta gelen bilgi kaynaklar\u0131ndan biri de\u011fil (Weiss & Bucuvalas, 1980; Chelimsky, 2006). A\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki \u015fiir, Weiss ve meslekda\u015flar\u0131n\u0131n bu konudaki fikrini \u00f6zetliyor;<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 De\u011ferlendirme yan\u0131labilir<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 De\u011ferlendirme kan\u0131t kaynaklar\u0131ndan sadece biridir<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 De\u011ferlendirme politika yap\u0131m\u0131nda girdilerden sadece biridir<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Politika faaliyetleri etkileyen fakt\u00f6rlerden sadece biridir<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Uygulama ise \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131lardaki etkilerden sadece biridir. (s. 12-13)<\/em><\/p>\n

\u0130kinci ve daha da \u00f6nemli olarak, Weiss\u2019a g\u00f6re karar verenlerin de\u011ferlendirme sonucunda ortaya \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015f olan verileri karar\u0131n\u0131 al\u0131rken sorgulamadan ve tart\u0131\u015fmadan kullanmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 belirtiyor. Weiss’a g\u00f6re (1987) politikalara karar verme ba\u011flam\u0131 olduk\u00e7a istikrars\u0131z; karar alanlar \u00e7ok say\u0131da ve karar alanlar\u0131n fikirleri farkl\u0131, \u00e7eli\u015fkli ve ihtiya\u00e7lar\u0131 z\u0131t oldu\u011fundan de\u011ferlendirme sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 do\u011frudan kararlara dahil etmek olduk\u00e7a zordur.\u00a0 Cook (1997) da y\u0131llar \u00f6nce bu konu hakk\u0131nda \u015fu a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmu\u015ftur;<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Siyaset\u00e7ilerin ana hedefi teknik bilgilere sayg\u0131 duymaktansa tekrar se\u00e7ilmektir. \u00d6yle ki ki\u015fisel ve partinin siyasi ideolojisi genellikle kan\u0131tlar\u0131n \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde \u00a0\u00a0 se\u00e7ici \u00a0 \u015fekilde kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirir ve siyaset\u00e7iler bir program de\u011ferlendirmesinin par\u00e7as\u0131 olmaktansa, b\u00fct\u00e7e yerle\u015ftirmesinde yer almay\u0131 \u00a0 tercih ederler. (s. 40-41)<\/em><\/p>\n

Bu \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar asl\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirme alan\u0131nda ba\u015fka bir teze, de\u011ferlendirmelerin asl\u0131nda siyasi ortamlarda yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na i\u015faret ediyor (Weiss, 1998; Mark, Henry, & Julnes, 2000; Greene, 2006; Datta, 2011). Weiss (1987) \u00a0de\u011ferlendirmelerin analiz etti\u011fi programlar\u0131n asl\u0131nda siyasetin bir yan \u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fc oldu\u011funu, de\u011ferlendirmelerin asl\u0131nda programlar hakk\u0131nda siyasi a\u00e7\u0131klamalar oldu\u011funu ve o programlar\u0131n geleceklerini belirledi\u011fini savunuyor.<\/p>\n

Bat\u0131l\u0131 akademisyenler uzun zaman \u00f6nce d\u00fczenli de\u011ferlendirmelerin kamu politikalar\u0131n\u0131 geli\u015ftirdi\u011fi kan\u0131s\u0131na var\u0131rken, geli\u015fmekte olan bir\u00e7ok \u00fclke de (\u00f6rne\u011fin G\u00fcney Afrika, Nijerya, Uganda, vs…) bu fikre yakla\u015fmaya ba\u015flad\u0131. Bilgi \u00fcretiminin siyasi do\u011fas\u0131 ve h\u00fck\u00fcmet alan\u0131ndaki kullan\u0131m\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmenin hem T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de hem de ba\u015fka yerlerde rahat\u00e7a geli\u015fmesini engelliyor. Belki de Carol Weiss\u2019\u0131n de\u011ferlendirmenin karar almadaki rol\u00fcne ger\u00e7ek\u00e7i bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131, T\u00fcrkiye’nin pek \u00e7ok par\u00e7aya b\u00f6l\u00fcnm\u00fc\u015f siyasi manzaras\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamak i\u00e7in uygun bir g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin, \u00f6zellikle, bir\u00e7ok farkl\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce ve \u00e7\u0131karlarla beraber keyfi talepleri de i\u00e7inde bulunduran \u00e7eki\u015fmeli e\u011fitim sistemi, e\u011fitim politikalar\u0131n\u0131 geli\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in de\u011ferlendirmenin getirece\u011fi ayd\u0131nlanmadan \u00e7ok faydalanabilir. Kamu alan\u0131ndaki sosyal bilim ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131 ve de\u011ferlendirmeler sonucu elde edilen bilimsel bilgi ve kamu politikalar\u0131 aras\u0131ndaki u\u00e7urumu kapatma \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 d\u00fcnya \u00e7ap\u0131nda multimilyon dolarl\u0131k bir sekt\u00f6r yaratm\u0131\u015fken pek \u00e7ok bilgi kayna\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan politika kararlar\u0131n\u0131 etkilemek ama\u00e7l\u0131 bombard\u0131mana tutulan T\u00fcrk e\u011fitim g\u00f6revlilerinin d\u00fczenli de\u011ferlendirmeler yap\u0131p \u00e7\u0131kan sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 do\u011frudan karar vermede kullanmalar\u0131n\u0131 ummak ger\u00e7ek\u00e7i de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n

T\u00fcrk E\u011fitim Sistemi Ba\u011flam\u0131nda De\u011ferlendirme<\/b><\/p>\n

Yine de, co\u011frafi olarak Ortado\u011fu\u2019ya ve kurumsal olarak geli\u015fmi\u015f Bat\u0131 \u00fclkelerine yak\u0131nl\u0131\u011f\u0131 nedeniyle T\u00fcrkiye, de\u011ferlendirmenin karar verme a\u015famalar\u0131ndaki \u00f6nemini ara\u015ft\u0131rmak i\u00e7in e\u015fsiz bir \u00f6rnek te\u015fkil etmektedir. K\u00fcresel Kuzey ve G\u00fcney de\u011ferlendirme konusunda kendi \u00f6zg\u00fcn h\u00fck\u00fcmet karar verme k\u00fclt\u00fcrlerinin gelene\u011fini takip ederken T\u00fcrkiye, orta gelirli \u00fclkeler ba\u011flam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirme alan\u0131nda gelecekteki y\u00f6nleri ayd\u0131nlatmak i\u00e7in deneme alan\u0131 olabilir.<\/p>\n

De\u011ferlendirmenin \u00f6nemi g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurularak pek \u00e7ok k\u00fcresel Kuzey kurumu ve de\u011ferlendirmecileri taraf\u0131ndan ortakla\u015fa kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, geli\u015fmekte olan \u00fclkelerde de\u011ferlendirme sistemleri kurma ve uygulama ama\u00e7l\u0131 bu \u00e7aba, de\u011ferlendirme alan\u0131n\u0131n k\u00fcresel Kuzey d\u0131\u015f\u0131na da yay\u0131lmas\u0131na katk\u0131da bulundu. Geli\u015fmekte olan \u00fclkelerin h\u00fck\u00fcmetlerinin de\u011ferlendirme kapasitelerini olu\u015fturmak amac\u0131yla bir\u00e7ok oturum, workshop ve konferans d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f, organizasyon ve kurumlar kurulmu\u015ftur (Mertens & Russon, 2000). Bir uluslararas\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme ortakl\u0131\u011f\u0131 giri\u015fimi olan EvalPartners, veriye dayal\u0131 kamu politikalar\u0131n\u0131 etkilemek \u00fczere sivil toplumun de\u011ferlendirme becerilerini geli\u015ftirmek amac\u0131n\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yor. EvalPartners, var olan G\u00f6n\u00fcll\u00fc Profesyonel De\u011ferlendirme Organizasyonlar\u0131n\u0131 (GPDO) haritaland\u0131rmak i\u00e7in ara\u015ft\u0131rma yapt\u0131 ve 135\u2019i ulusal, 23\u2019\u00fc b\u00f6lgesel ve uluslararas\u0131 olmak \u00fczere toplam 158 GPDO buldu (e-posta g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeleri, Segone, Ocak 2013). Baz\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck ve orta gelirli \u00fclkeler (\u00f6rne\u011fin Brezilya, Kore, Meksika…) kamu politika ve programlar\u0131n\u0131 geli\u015ftirmek \u00fczere h\u00fck\u00fcmet \u00e7ap\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirme sistemleri kurdular (bkz. UNDP, 2011).\u00a0 Son zamanlarda ise, de\u011ferlendirme kalk\u0131nma deste\u011finin de \u00f6tesinde bir meslek alan\u0131 olarak tan\u0131mlanmaya ba\u015fland\u0131 (Carden, 2010).\u00a0 Sonu\u00e7 olarak, 21. Y\u00fczy\u0131lda de\u011ferlendirme uluslararas\u0131 ve k\u00fclt\u00fcrler aras\u0131 geli\u015fimiyle \u00f6n plana \u00e7\u0131kmakta (Patton, 2010).<\/p>\n

Yirmi bir \u00fclkeyi i\u00e7eren ve de\u011ferlendirme k\u00fclt\u00fcrlerinin en kapsaml\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131 olan Furubo, Rist ve Sandahl\u2019\u0131n (2002) \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme yakla\u015f\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck <\/i>yard\u0131m kurulu\u015flar\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan olu\u015fturuldu\u011funu belirtti. Furubo, Rist ve Sandahl\u2019a g\u00f6re, \u201cBelki de modern rasyonel kamu idarecili\u011fini yans\u0131tmak i\u00e7in sonradan geli\u015fen \u00fclkeler de bu fikirleri benimsediler. Fakat burada g\u00f6rmemiz gereken, bu fikirlerin benimsenmesinin \u00e7o\u011funlukla sadece s\u00f6ylemde kald\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r\u201d (s. 17). \u00dclkelerin de\u011ferlendirme s\u00fcre\u00e7lerine ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131na nas\u0131l daha fazla sahip \u00e7\u0131kabilece\u011fini ara\u015ft\u0131ran \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar gittik\u00e7e art\u0131yor. Fakat geli\u015fmi\u015f Bat\u0131 \u00fclkelerinin tecr\u00fcbelerine dayal\u0131 olan de\u011ferlendirme kapasitesinin kalk\u0131nma yard\u0131m\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda nas\u0131l di\u011fer h\u00fck\u00fcmetlerin karar verme s\u00fcre\u00e7lerine entegre edilebilece\u011fi sorusuna \u00e7ok fazla dikkat edilmiyor. Kapasite geli\u015ftirmek, de\u011ferlendirmenin g\u00fcndelik karar verme a\u015famalar\u0131nda rutin bir uygulama olaca\u011f\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelmiyor (Sanders, 2002). Bamberger (1991) de\u011ferlendirme alan\u0131n\u0131n empoze edilmesini \u201ck\u00fclt\u00fcrel emperyalizm\u201d (s. 337) olarak tan\u0131mlarken, Piciotto (2007) ise de\u011ferlendirme kapasitesini geli\u015ftirmenin kaynaklar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u011f\u0131\u015f yapan veya bor\u00e7 veren kurumlarda bulundu\u011funu, ve bu nedenle etkile\u015fimin tek tarafl\u0131 olmas\u0131n\u0131n ola\u011fan oldu\u011funu iddia ediyor (s. 512).<\/p>\n

De\u011ferlendirmenin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck ve orta gelirli \u00fclkelerdeki bu k\u0131sa tarihi T\u00fcrkiye i\u00e7in de yararl\u0131 olabilir. Tarihte e\u011fitimsel kalk\u0131nma programlar\u0131n\u0131n uluslararas\u0131 don\u00f6rler taraf\u0131ndan de\u011ferlendirilmesi, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019deki de\u011ferlendirme sistemlerinin geli\u015fmesini (bu konuda eksikli\u011fini) etkilemi\u015ftir. T\u00fcrkiye, e\u011fitim sistemlerini don\u00f6rlerinin kriterlerine ve ihtiya\u00e7lar\u0131na g\u00f6re (\u00f6rne\u011fin; USAID, 2001; OECD, 2005; World Bank, 2011; UNDP, 2011) de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir. Baz\u0131 akademisyenlere g\u00f6re geli\u015fmi\u015f Bat\u0131 \u00fclkelerinde bulunan kurumlar\u0131n de\u011fer ve \u00f6nceliklerinin \u00f6n planda olmas\u0131, \u00fclkenin karar verme mekanizmalar\u0131n\u0131 kendi kriterlerine g\u00f6re de\u011ferlendirmesini engelleyebilece\u011finden T\u00fcrkiye i\u00e7in baz\u0131 sorunlar olu\u015fturuyor (Hay, 2010; Conlin & Stirrat, 2008).\u00a0 Zira, T\u00fcrkiye don\u00f6r \u00f6nderli\u011finde y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen e\u011fitim programlar\u0131n\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131rarak ve geli\u015ftirmeyi ama\u00e7layarak de\u011ferlendirmek (bi\u00e7imlendirici sorgulama) yerine denetleme ve g\u00f6zleme dayal\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmeyi (denetleme de\u011ferlendirmesi)\u00a0 se\u00e7ebiliyor (bkz. Wadsworth, 2001; Gasper, 2000).<\/p>\n

Ancak, b\u00f6lgedeki ekonomik ve siyasi g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fcn y\u00fckselmesiyle beraber, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin geli\u015fmi\u015f Bat\u0131 \u00fclkelerinin yard\u0131m kurumlar\u0131yla olan ili\u015fkisi de\u011fi\u015fiyor. 1961 y\u0131l\u0131ndan beri OECD’nin (Ekonomik Kalk\u0131nma ve \u0130\u015fbirli\u011fi \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc), 1963\u2019ten beri Avrupa Ekonomi Toplulu\u011fu\u2019nun bir \u00fcyesi olan T\u00fcrkiye, 2005 y\u0131l\u0131ndan beri Avrupa Birli\u011fi \u00fcye aday\u0131; 2012\u2019de d\u00fcnyan\u0131n en b\u00fcy\u00fck 20 ekonomisinde (CIA Factbook, 2012) \u00a0ve 2012 D\u00fcnya Rekabet S\u0131ralamas\u0131’nda 38. s\u0131radad\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan T\u00fcrkiye siyasi istikrars\u0131zl\u0131kla dolu b\u00f6lgesinde \u00f6nemli bir rol oynamaktad\u0131r (Ozturk, 2002). Ayr\u0131ca, bir zamanlar uluslaras\u0131 kurumlarla sadece bir bor\u00e7 al\u0131c\u0131 olarak ili\u015fki i\u00e7inde iken, T\u00fcrkiye de art\u0131k bor\u00e7 verir konuma geldi. \u201c2010 y\u0131l\u0131nda, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin net Resmi Kalk\u0131nma Yard\u0131m\u0131 2009 y\u0131l\u0131ndan bu yana reel anlamda %24.8 artarak 967 milyon dolar\u0131 buldu\u201d (Atwood, 2012, para.5). \u00a0Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, e\u011fitim sisteminin politika ve programlar\u0131n\u0131n geli\u015fitirilmesi i\u00e7in yap\u0131lan \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lar da artmaya ba\u015flad\u0131.<\/p>\n

Kore ve Brezilya\u2019n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirme k\u00fclt\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn tarihi geli\u015fimi, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de karar alma a\u015famalar\u0131nda, programlar\u0131n e\u011fitimi geli\u015ftirmekteki etkinli\u011finin artt\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in program de\u011ferlendirmesinin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 ile ilgili \u00f6nemli bilgiler i\u00e7eriyor. Kore\u2019de 1998 y\u0131l\u0131nda Asya\u2019daki ekonomik krizin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131yla ba\u015fa \u00e7\u0131kabilmek i\u00e7in \u201cHalk i\u00e7in H\u00fck\u00fcmet\u201d program\u0131 ba\u015flat\u0131ld\u0131 (Lee, 2002). Milli ihtiya\u00e7lar ve \u00f6ncelikler \u00fczerine kurulu ulusal reform paketlerinin olu\u015fturulmas\u0131 ve uygulanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in h\u00fck\u00fcmet \u00e7ap\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirme sistemleri geli\u015ftirildi. Say\u0131lar\u0131 yetersiz olsa da, Kore \u015fu anda her kurumun politika yapabilme ve bunu de\u011ferlendirebilme kapasitesinden, bakanl\u0131klar\u0131n \u00f6nemli projelerine kadar bir\u00e7ok konuda b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00e7apta de\u011ferlendirmeler yap\u0131yor (Furubo, Rist, & Sandahl, 2002). Son y\u0131llarda Brezilya\u2019n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirme kapasitesi de benzer \u00e7apta b\u00fcy\u00fcd\u00fc. \u00dclkede de\u011ferlendirme \u00fczerinde 453 y\u00fcksek lisans program\u0131 bulunurken ayn\u0131 zamanda b\u00fct\u00e7e ve planlamas\u0131n\u0131 geli\u015ftirecek \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcmet de\u011ferlendirmelerinin kamuya a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131 konusunda %90\u2019l\u0131k bir art\u0131\u015f da ya\u015fand\u0131 (UNDP, 2011). De\u011ferlendirme uygulamalar\u0131 ile kalk\u0131nman\u0131n geli\u015ftirilmesi aras\u0131nda ampirik bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olsa da, bu konudaki tecr\u00fcbeler ve anlat\u0131lanlar, ikisi aras\u0131nda pozitif bir ili\u015fki oldu\u011funu g\u00f6steriyor (Segone, 2008, 2009). T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin Dokuzuncu Ulusal Kalk\u0131nma Plan\u0131 (2007-2013) da Brezilya ve Kore\u2019deki geli\u015fmeleri \u00f6verek, bu \u00fclkelerin uluslararas\u0131 seviyede karar alma s\u00fcre\u00e7lerindeki etkinliklerinin artaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

E\u011fitim y\u00f6ntemlerinin devaml\u0131 geli\u015fmesi \u00fclkenin en \u00f6nemli uzun vadeli hedeflerinden biri olsa da, Kore ve Brezilya\u2019ya k\u0131yasla T\u00fcrkiye\u2019deki bir\u00e7ok e\u011fitim program\u0131n\u0131n uygulanmas\u0131 ve etkileri hakk\u0131nda fazla bilgi bulunmamaktad\u0131r (E\u011fitim Reformu Giri\u015fimi, 2009; Erguder, 2013).<\/i> T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin Dokuzuncu Kalk\u0131nma Plan\u0131 (2007-2013) T\u00fcrkiye\u2019yi bir bilgi toplumu olarak nitelendiriyor ve uluslararas\u0131 etkinli\u011findeki g\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fcn artaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131, Avrupa Birli\u011fi ile uyumlu hale gelece\u011fini \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fcyor (Kalk\u0131nma Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2006). \u00dclkenin bu hedeflerine ula\u015fmas\u0131nda kaliteli e\u011fitimin \u00f6nemini de kaydeden planla beraber 2012 y\u0131l\u0131nda e\u011fitime yap\u0131lan devlet yat\u0131r\u0131m\u0131 2006\u2019daki %14\u2019e k\u0131yasla %21,9 artt\u0131. Plan her h\u00fck\u00fcmet servisinin g\u00f6zlemlenip de\u011ferlendirilmesini \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fcyor olsa da bu bilgilerin nas\u0131l al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131 ve kullan\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 belirtilmiyor. Bu da karar verme a\u015famas\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirmenin rolune dair bildiklerimizi k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131yor. De\u011ferlendirme bilgisinin olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulunudurulursa MEB’in kendi i\u00e7 ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131 e\u011fitim alan\u0131nda karar verenler i\u00e7in bir kaynak olu\u015fturuyor. Fakat T\u00fcrk akademisyenler, bu arar\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131 yetersiz buluyorlar \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar karar alma mekanizmalar\u0131n\u0131 etkileyebilecek kadar sistematik de\u011fil. (Aydagul, 2008).<\/p>\n

Sivil toplum ile MEB\u2019in de\u011ferlendirme ve karar alma aras\u0131ndaki ili\u015fkiye olan ilgisi art\u0131yor olsa da, genel olarak de\u011ferlendirmeye verilen \u00f6nem bilinmiyor. E\u011fitim politikalar\u0131 ve programlar\u0131 hakk\u0131ndaki bilginin eksikli\u011fi ve bunun etkilerinin bilinmiyor olmas\u0131, \u00fclkenin \u00f6nde gelen ara\u015ft\u0131rma \u00fcniversitelerinden biri olan Sabanc\u0131 \u00dcniversitesi\u2019nin \u0130stanbul Politikalar Merkezi\u2019nin 2003\u2019te E\u011fitim Reformu Giri\u015fimi<\/i>‘ni (ERG) ba\u015flatmas\u0131na sebep oldu. ERG e\u011fitim alan\u0131nda karar alma sistemlerinin geli\u015ftirilmesini ve ara\u015ft\u0131rma, destekleme ve e\u011fitimle yeni bir politika olu\u015fturma k\u00fclt\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn yarat\u0131lmas\u0131 ama\u00e7l\u0131yor (bkz. http:\/\/erg.sabanciuniv.edu\/en\/educationreforminitiative). Bu \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma, \u201ckararlar\u0131n veri ve de\u011ferlendirmelere dayand\u0131r\u0131larak yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n kritik \u00f6nem arz etti\u011fi, devlet, sivil toplum kurulu\u015flar\u0131 ve vatanda\u015flar aras\u0131ndaki etkile\u015fimin \u015feffaf olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi savlar\u0131 \u00fczerine kuruludur\u201d (E\u011fitim Reformu Giri\u015fimi, 2009, s. 6). Yani ERG sivil toplum kurulu\u015flar\u0131, akademik d\u00fcnya, okul, kamu ve \u00f6zel kurulu\u015flar\u0131n temsilcilerini bir araya getirerek e\u011fitim politikalar\u0131 ve programlar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda toplumda kat\u0131l\u0131mc\u0131 ve demokratik bir diyalogu te\u015fvik etmeyi ama\u00e7l\u0131yor. Bu giri\u015fim, bilgilendirilmi\u015f, verilere dayal\u0131 karar alman\u0131n, yarat\u0131c\u0131 ve \u015feffaf \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmler \u00fcretmenin, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin aciliyeti olan e\u011fitim problemlerini \u00e7\u00f6zmeye yard\u0131mc\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunuyor. ERG, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin uzun vadeli hedeflerine ula\u015fabilmesi i\u00e7in herkesin kaliteli e\u011fitim almas\u0131 gerekti\u011fine inand\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan dolay\u0131, kara vericilerin \u00f6nceliklerini ve uygulamalar\u0131n\u0131 etkilemeyi ama\u00e7l\u0131yor (E\u011fitim Reformu Giri\u015fimi, 2010, 2011). Yine de, bu giri\u015fimin h\u00fck\u00fcmetin karar verme y\u00f6ntemlerine nas\u0131l bir etki veya katk\u0131s\u0131 oldu\u011fu hen\u00fcz bilinmiyor.<\/p>\n

De\u011ferlendirme sonucu ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bilgiler ile e\u011fitim politikalar\u0131 aras\u0131ndaki ili\u015fkiyi geli\u015ftirmek konusunda \u00f6nemli rol oynayan ba\u015fka bir kurulu\u015f ise kar amac\u0131 g\u00fctmeyen ve siyasi bir partiye ba\u011fl\u0131 olmayan Ankara merkezli SETA (Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Toplum Ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131 Vakf\u0131). ERG\u2019nin aksine SETA\u2019n\u0131n ilgilendi\u011fi politika alanlar\u0131 e\u011fitimi de i\u00e7ermek \u00fczere uluslarars\u0131 g\u00fcvenlikten enerjiye kadar bir\u00e7ok konuyu kaps\u0131yor. ERG\u2019ye benzer olarak, SETA da kamuoyunu ve karar vericileri bilgilendirmek i\u00e7in ara\u015ft\u0131rmalarak yaparak do\u011fru bilgi \u00fcretmeyi ama\u00e7l\u0131yor (bkz. http:\/\/setav.org\/en<\/a>). Vak\u0131f, uluslarars\u0131 hakkaniyet, hukukun \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve adalet standartlar\u0131na uymay\u0131 ve T\u00fcrk siyasetinin ulusal ve k\u00fclt\u00fcrel \u015fekli ile de uyum i\u00e7erisinde olmay\u0131 hedefliyor. Vakf\u0131n T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin Milli E\u011fitim Sistemi ile ilgili kapsaml\u0131 raporu (Gur & Celik, 2009) \u00fclkedeki e\u011fitim sisteminin en acil problemlerini s\u0131ral\u0131yor ve olas\u0131 politika \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmleri \u00fcretiyor. ERG ile benzer \u015fekilde, her ne kadar ara\u015ft\u0131rma bulgular\u0131 \u00e7o\u011funlukla da\u011f\u0131lsa da, SETA’n\u0131n e\u011fitim kararlar\u0131na etkisi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fclmeyi bekliyor.<\/p>\n

ERG ve SETA ile beraber, T\u00fcrk h\u00fck\u00fcmetinin e\u011fitim programlar\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015ftururken karar verme arac\u0131 olarak program de\u011ferlendirmesini kullanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in bir f\u0131rsat olu\u015fmu\u015ftur. AB kanun ve y\u00f6netmeliklerine ve kamu idarecili\u011finin daha etkinle\u015ftirilmesi \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lar\u0131na uymak amac\u0131yla T\u00fcrkiye B\u00fcy\u00fck Millet Meclisi 2003\u2019te 5018 nolu Kamu Mali Y\u00f6netimi ve Kontrol Kanunu\u2019nu (KMYKK) \u00e7\u0131kard\u0131. Bu kanunla beraber her kamu kurumuna \u2013 bakanl\u0131klara ve devlet \u00fcniversitelerine \u2013 idari performans\u0131n geli\u015ftirilmesini hedefleyen stratejik planlar uygulama zorunlulu\u011fu getirildi. (Ministry of Finance, 2006) Bu h\u00fck\u00fcmetin performans \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcm\u00fcne ili\u015fkin b\u00fct\u00e7elendirme kararlar\u0131n\u0131 verirken mesuliyete de verdi\u011fi \u00f6nemi artt\u0131rd\u0131. Sonu\u00e7 olarak, MEB kurumsal hedef, prensip, politika ve programlar\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturmak, uygulamak ve geli\u015ftirmek amac\u0131yla stratejik bir plan olu\u015fturdu. Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n ilk ve tek stratejik plan\u0131, kurumsal e\u011fitimi ve mesuliyeti geli\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in g\u00f6zlemleme ve de\u011ferlendirme programlar\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe koydu. \u00a0(Turk, Yalcin, & Unsal, 2006) Bu stratejik plan\u0131n 17.4 nolu kurumsal hedefine g\u00f6re bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n stratejik planlamas\u0131n\u0131 ve karar alma s\u00fcrecini geli\u015ftirmesi i\u00e7in kurumsal \u00e7apta g\u00f6zlemleme ve de\u011ferlendirme sistemleri yaratmas\u0131 gerekiyor (MEB Faaliyet Raporu, 2012, s.20). Bu T\u00fcrk kamu idaresi i\u00e7in yeni bir yap\u0131 oldu\u011fundan, T\u00fcrk, Yal\u00e7\u0131n ve \u00dcnsal (2006) stratejik planlaman\u0131n uygulanabilirli\u011fi hakk\u0131ndaki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerini almak i\u00e7in bakanl\u0131kta \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan 135 \u00fcst d\u00fczey g\u00f6revli ile bir anket yapt\u0131. Kat\u0131l\u0131mc\u0131lar\u0131n yar\u0131s\u0131ndan \u00e7o\u011fu stratejik planlama s\u00fcrecine dair yeterli bilgiye sahip olmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 belirtti. Ankete g\u00f6re \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar stratejik planlaman\u0131n e\u011fitim politika ve programlar\u0131n\u0131n geli\u015ftirecek \u015fekilde kurumsal \u00f6\u011frenimi ve y\u00f6neticili\u011fi d\u00fczeltece\u011fine inan\u0131yor. Stratejik planlaman\u0131n kullan\u0131\u015fl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve de\u011feri hakk\u0131ndaki bu yayg\u0131n olumlu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe ra\u011fmen Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n Faaliyet Raporu\u2019na (2012) g\u00f6re e\u011fitim hedeflerine ula\u015f\u0131l\u0131p ula\u015f\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendiren ara\u00e7 ve mekanizmalar performansa ba\u011fl\u0131 b\u00fct\u00e7elendirmenin ilerisine gidemiyor.<\/p>\n

Yeniden d\u00fczenlenmenin \u00f6nc\u00fcs\u00fc \u00d6mer Din\u00e7er\u2019in bakanl\u0131k yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00f6nemde haz\u0131rlanan kararnamenin 652. maddesine dayan\u0131larak Milli E\u011fitim Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131\u2019nda da KMYKK\u2019n\u0131n ard\u0131ndan k\u00f6kl\u00fc de\u011fi\u015fiklikler yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu kararnamenin amac\u0131 MEB\u2019n\u0131n b\u00fcrokrasisini sadele\u015ftirmek, b\u00f6ylece h\u0131zl\u0131 ve etkili \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan bir politika geli\u015ftirme s\u00fcreci olu\u015fturmakt\u0131. Eskiden var olan 32 genel m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fck yerini, bu de\u011fi\u015fikliklerin sonucunda olu\u015fturulan yeni yap\u0131da 17 genel m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe b\u0131rakm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu yeni genel m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin g\u00f6revleri ve sorumluluklar\u0131 netle\u015ftirilmi\u015f, b\u00f6ylece politika yaratma s\u00fcrecinde m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fckler aras\u0131 \u00e7at\u0131\u015fman\u0131n en aza indirgenmesi ama\u00e7lanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yenilenen bakanl\u0131kta neredeyse her genel m\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fckte izleme ve de\u011ferlendirme birimleri olu\u015fturulmu\u015ftur. Bu birimlerin amac\u0131 bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi \u00e7e\u015fitli e\u011fitim faaliyetlerinin etkinli\u011fini ve verimini belirlemektir. Ancak uzun vadede bu kararnamenin ilerideki e\u011fitim politikalar\u0131n\u0131n kaderinde \u00f6nemli bir rol oynamas\u0131 beklenmekteyse bile (Din\u00e7er,Ki\u015fisel haberle\u015fme, 3 Ekim, 2013), izleme ve de\u011ferlendirme birimlerinin T\u00fcrk h\u00fck\u00fcmetinin de\u011ferlendirme prati\u011finin evrimine yard\u0131mc\u0131 m\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131 ya da aksine \u00f6n\u00fcnde engel mi olu\u015fturaca\u011f\u0131 hen\u00fcz bilinmemektedir.<\/p>\n

Ulusal ba\u011flam\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin Avrupa Birli\u011fi\u2019ne (AB) \u00fcyelik giri\u015fimi, 2005\u2019teki Helsinki Zirvesi\u2019nden beri T\u00fcrkiye\u2019deki e\u011fitim politika ve programlar\u0131n\u0131 \u015fekillendiren ve bilgilendiren kayda de\u011fer bir d\u0131\u015f g\u00fc\u00e7t\u00fcr. AB\u2019nin e\u011fitim politikalar\u0131, Avrupa insanlar\u0131 aras\u0131ndaki kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 anlay\u0131\u015f ve k\u00fclt\u00fcrel ba\u011flar\u0131 g\u00fc\u00e7lendirmeyi, e\u011fitimli, rekabet\u00e7i Avrupa insan\u0131 yeti\u015ftirmeyi ve teknolojik geli\u015fme ve kalk\u0131nmay\u0131 te\u015fvik etmeyi ama\u00e7lar (Barkcin, 2002). Lizbon Antla\u015fmas\u0131 (2000) AB\u2019nin k\u00fcresel bilgi ekonomisinde en rekabet\u00e7i akt\u00f6r olmak \u015feklindeki kapsay\u0131c\u0131 hedefinin alt\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7izer ve t\u00fcm \u00fcyeleri ve aday \u00fclkeleri, e\u011fitim program ve politikalar\u0131n\u0131 benzer \u015fekilde uyumla\u015ft\u0131rmaya davet eder. Bu hedefi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in, Milli E\u011fitim Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2006\u2019da, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin e\u011fitim sisteminin AB\u2019ye daha iyi uyum sa\u011flayabilmesine y\u00f6nelik olarak karar olu\u015fturma s\u00fcrecinde yeni usuller benimsemek i\u00e7in 3.7 milyon Avro Kapasite Geli\u015ftirme Hibesi <\/i>ald\u0131 (Avrupa Komisyonu, 2006). AB\u2019nin MEB Kapasitesinin G\u00fc\u00e7lendirilmesi Projesi <\/i>(2008-2010) bakanl\u0131\u011fa, de\u011ferlendirme bilgilerine dayal\u0131 olarak daha iyi politika ve programlar tasarlama ve uygulama konusunda da bir f\u0131rsat yaratt\u0131. Toplamda 4.9 milyon dolarl\u0131k kat\u0131l\u0131m \u00f6ncesi bu deste\u011fin amac\u0131, e\u011fitim politika ve programlar\u0131n\u0131n AB \u00f6ncelikleriyle uyumla\u015fmas\u0131 i\u00e7in MEB\u2019in planlama, uygulama ve izleme kapasitesini geli\u015ftirerek T\u00fcrk e\u011fitim sisteminin yeterlilik ve yararl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 art\u0131rmakt\u0131r. Hibenin temel hedeflerinden biri e\u011fitim sisteminde insan kaynaklar\u0131 kapasitesinin geli\u015ftirilmesiydi. Bu hedef, veri toplama, analiz ve koruma, problem \u00e7\u00f6zme ve karar alma, performans y\u00f6netimi, izleme ve de\u011ferlendirme, e\u011fitimde istatistiklerin kullan\u0131m\u0131 ve uygulanmas\u0131 konular\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7eren bir dizi e\u011fitim ve uygulamal\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalarla sa\u011fland\u0131 (Avrupa Komisyonu, 2006). Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n bu kat\u0131l\u0131m \u00f6ncesi deste\u011fe dayal\u0131 olarak karar olu\u015fturma s\u00fcrecini geli\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in kesintisiz faaliyetlerde bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve nas\u0131l \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusundaki bilgi hala s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131d\u0131r. (E\u011fitim Reformu Giri\u015fimi, 2011).<\/p>\n

Ayr\u0131ca, son on y\u0131l i\u00e7inde, e\u011fitimle ilgili baz\u0131 devlet belgelerindeki (\u00f6rne\u011fin; H\u00fck\u00fcmet Eylem Planlar\u0131, 2008,2011; Milli E\u011fitim \u015euralar\u0131, 2006, 2010; Ulusal Kalk\u0131nma Planlar\u0131, 2000, 2006)\u00a0 s\u00f6ylem, de\u011ferlendirmenin \u00e7e\u015fitli kaynaklardan karar alma s\u00fcreci ba\u011flam\u0131n\u0131 belirli bir kapasiteyle a\u015f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6sterir, ancak e\u011fitimsel programlamada de\u011ferlendirmenin alg\u0131lanan faydas\u0131 ve rol\u00fc belgelenmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

\u00d6ncelikle, H\u00fck\u00fcmet Eylem Planlar\u0131 T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de ki t\u00fcm kamu programlar\u0131 ve politikalar\u0131n\u0131n haz\u0131rlanmas\u0131 ve uygulanmas\u0131nda ba\u015fl\u0131ca rehberli\u011fi sa\u011flar. Bug\u00fcn, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de iyi e\u011fitimli insan ihtiyac\u0131, mevcut h\u00fck\u00fcmetin g\u00fcndeminde yans\u0131t\u0131lan h\u0131zl\u0131 ekonomik b\u00fcy\u00fcmeden dolay\u0131 politika m\u00fczakerelerinde \u00e7ok daha fazla vurgulan\u0131yor. En g\u00fcncel olanlar\u0131, 60. ve 61. H\u00fck\u00fcmet Eylem Planlar\u0131 (2008, 2011), AB\u2019ye tam \u00fcyeli\u011fi de i\u00e7eren ulusal hedefleri ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmede bir \u00f6n ko\u015ful olarak e\u011fitim kalitesinin alt\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7izdi. Bu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc hayata ge\u00e7irmek i\u00e7in her iki plan da en fazla say\u0131da faaliyet ve en y\u00fcksek kamu harcamas\u0131n\u0131 MEB\u2019e ay\u0131rd\u0131. Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n 2011\u2019de ulusal b\u00fct\u00e7eden, toplamda neredeyse 35 milyon TL (yakla\u015f\u0131k olarak 20 milyon dolar) ve GSY\u0130H\u2019n\u0131n 3.8% ini olu\u015fturan b\u00fct\u00e7e tahsisi, tarihindeki en y\u00fcksek de\u011feri olu\u015fturdu (Milli E\u011fitim Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2011).<\/p>\n

H\u00fck\u00fcmet Eylem Planlar\u0131n\u0131n \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, Kalk\u0131nma Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (\u00f6nceki ad\u0131yla Devlet Planlama Te\u015fkilat\u0131) kamu kurulu\u015flar\u0131 i\u00e7in, program ve politikalar\u0131na belirlenmi\u015f bir zaman dilimi i\u00e7in dayanak sa\u011flayan genel bak\u0131\u015f\u0131 eyleme ge\u00e7irmek i\u00e7in, ulusal kalk\u0131nma planlar\u0131 haz\u0131rlad\u0131. Plan, \u00e7ok say\u0131da devlet memuru, akademisyen ve kamu sekt\u00f6r\u00fc ve \u00f6zel sekt\u00f6rlerden uzmanlar\u0131n kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131yla haz\u0131rland\u0131; T\u00fcrkiye B\u00fcy\u00fck Millet Meclisi taraf\u0131ndan onayland\u0131 ve Kalk\u0131nma Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan denetlendi. Planlar neredeyse t\u00fcm sanayi ve sekt\u00f6rleri (\u00f6rne\u011fin; ekonomi, ula\u015ft\u0131rma, sa\u011fl\u0131k, e\u011fitim, k\u00fclt\u00fcr, enerji, sosyal hizmet sistemi, ziraat vs.) kapsar ve \u201csadece kamu sekt\u00f6r\u00fc i\u00e7in de\u011fil ayn\u0131 zamanda toplum i\u00e7in de hedeflerde uzun vadeli \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fc ve birlik\u201d sa\u011flar (Dokuzuncu Kalk\u0131nma Plan\u0131, 2006, s. 12). Hem 8. hem de 9. Kalk\u0131nma Planlar\u0131, bilginin, rekabetin, etkinlik ve etkilili\u011fin \u00f6neminin vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131, h\u0131zla de\u011fi\u015fen, k\u00fcreselle\u015fmi\u015f d\u00fcnyadaki yerini g\u00fcvenceye almak ve savunmak i\u00e7in giri\u015fimde bulundu. \u00d6rne\u011fin, Sekizinci Kalk\u0131nma Plan\u0131\u2019nda (2001-2005) belirtildi\u011fi gibi:<\/p>\n

21. y\u00fczy\u0131lda, kendilerini d\u00fcnyadaki \u00e7ok daha h\u0131zl\u0131 geli\u015fen de\u011fi\u015fimlere uyumlu hale getiren, bireylerini bu yeni ortam\u0131n gerektirdi\u011fi yeteneklerle donatan, bilgiyi temin edebilen, \u00fcretebilen ve kullanabilen \u00fclkeler etkili ve ba\u015far\u0131l\u0131 olacakt\u0131r. (s. 244)<\/em><\/p>\n

Her iki plan da kaliteli e\u011fitimi, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin uluslararas\u0131 rekabetini geli\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in bir \u00f6n ko\u015ful olarak, \u00f6ncelikli alanlar aras\u0131nda kabul etmektedir. Bu ama\u00e7la, Dokuzuncu Kalk\u0131nma Plan\u0131, e\u011fitimde kamu yat\u0131r\u0131m\u0131 pay\u0131n\u0131, 2006\u2019daki 14% ten 2013\u2019te 21.9% a art\u0131rmay\u0131 planlar. Belgeler genel olarak, e\u011fitime eri\u015fim ve e\u011fitim kalitesi, teknik ve meslek okullar\u0131 ve m\u00fcfredat konular\u0131, ya\u015fam boyu \u00f6\u011frenme ve y\u00f6netimsel\/yap\u0131sal konulardan, hedef alanlar ve T\u00fcrkiye\u2019deki ba\u015fl\u0131ca zorluklar olarak bahseder. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, Dokuzuncu Plan e\u011fitimsel hedefleri \u015fu \u015fekilde belirler: okulla\u015fma oran\u0131 okul \u00f6ncesi e\u011fitim kurumlar\u0131nda 50%, ilk ve orta okulda 100% ve y\u00fcksek \u00f6\u011fretimde 33% artacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu hedeflere ula\u015fmak i\u00e7in, her iki plan da program de\u011ferlendirme faaliyetleri ve bununla soyda\u015f terimlere (\u00f6rne\u011fin; performans \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcm\u00fc, kalite kontrol\u00fc, izleme) baz\u0131 g\u00f6ndermeler yapar. Sekizinci Kalk\u0131nma Plan\u0131, kamu yat\u0131r\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n etkilili\u011fini art\u0131rmak i\u00e7in \u201cde\u011fi\u015fen ko\u015fullar ve maruz kal\u0131nan darbo\u011fazlar\u0131n h\u0131zl\u0131 bir \u015fekilde saptanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in ulusal seviyede oldu\u011fu kadar proje d\u00fczeyinde de etkili bir izleme ve de\u011ferlendirme sisteminin kurulmas\u0131\u201dn\u0131 talep eder (s. 228). Dokuzuncu Kalk\u0131nma Plan\u0131, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de ilk defa izleme ve de\u011ferlendirme \u00fczerine belli bir b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc olan bir resmi belge olarak kabul edilebilir. Plan\u0131n Uygulama, \u0130zleme ve Koordinasyon<\/i> b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc (s. 113-120) kalk\u0131nmada ilerleme konusunda kamuyu bilgilendirmeyi planlar. Bu b\u00f6l\u00fcm, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin de\u011ferlendirme faaliyetlerini AB normlar\u0131yla uyumlu hale getirmeyi de ama\u00e7lar. Ancak, b\u00f6l\u00fcm bu de\u011ferlendirme faaliyetlerinin hangi kriterler temelinde nas\u0131l uygulanaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ya da sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n e\u011fitim pratiklerini geli\u015ftirmekte nas\u0131l kullan\u0131laca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmez.<\/p>\n

Bununla birlikte, e\u011fitim programlar\u0131 ve politikalar\u0131 \u00fcst\u00fcnde bir di\u011fer etkileyici g\u00fc\u00e7 Milli E\u011fitim \u015euras\u0131\u2019d\u0131r. MEB\u2019in y\u00f6netmeliklerine g\u00f6re, Milli E\u011fitim \u015euras\u0131, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019deki e\u011fitim politika ve programlar\u0131n\u0131 bilgilendiren ve \u015fekillendiren, Milli E\u011fitim Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131\u2019n\u0131n en y\u00fcksek dan\u0131\u015fma kuruludur. Bu dan\u0131\u015fma organ\u0131, se\u00e7ilmi\u015f politikac\u0131lar\u0131n, g\u00f6revlendirilmi\u015f b\u00fcrokratlar\u0131n, akademisyenlerin, sivil toplum kurulu\u015flar\u0131n\u0131n, okul m\u00fcd\u00fcrleri, \u00f6\u011fretmenlerin -ve bazen \u00f6\u011frencilerin- \u00fclkedeki e\u011fitimin ge\u00e7mi\u015fi, bug\u00fcn\u00fc ve gelece\u011fini m\u00fczakere etmek, ilerlemede dikkate al\u0131nacak alanlar\u0131 belirlemek, de\u011fi\u015fiklikler ve faaliyet ad\u0131mlar\u0131 \u00f6nermek \u00fczere bir araya geldi\u011fi ulusal bir kat\u0131l\u0131m s\u00fcrecini i\u00e7erir. \u015eura, yasama yetkisine sahip de\u011fildir; kararlar, Bakanl\u0131\u011fa ba\u011fl\u0131 Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu\u2019nun, karalar\u0131n e\u011fitim yasa ve d\u00fczenlemelerine uygunluk ve uygulanabilirliklerini kontrol edip E\u011fitim Bakan\u0131n\u0131n onay\u0131na sunulduktan sonra uygulanabilir.<\/p>\n

\u015euran\u0131n yasama g\u00fcc\u00fcne sahip olmay\u0131\u015f\u0131, sivil kat\u0131l\u0131mla al\u0131nan kararlar\u0131n yetersiz \u015fekilde uygulanmas\u0131 konusunda tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 ate\u015fledi (Deniz, 2001). Ayd\u0131n (1996) 15. Milli E\u011fitim \u015euras\u0131\u2019n\u0131n kat\u0131l\u0131mc\u0131lar\u0131yla, \u015eura kararlar\u0131n\u0131n e\u011fitim politika ve programlar\u0131na etkisi konusundaki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerini temel alan bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc. Anket kat\u0131l\u0131mc\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fu \u015eura kararlar\u0131n\u0131n e\u011fitim politikalar\u0131 \u00fczerindeki etkisinin s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 oldu\u011funu belirttiler. Kat\u0131l\u0131mc\u0131lar, kararlar\u0131n daha etkili olabilmesi i\u00e7in, \u015euran\u0131n, Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n hiyerar\u015fisi i\u00e7indeki yerinin g\u00fc\u00e7lendirilmesi gerekti\u011fini ifade ettiler. Ancak, \u015eura, 1939\u2019dan beri T\u00fcrk e\u011fitim sisteminde dikkate de\u011fer de\u011fi\u015fikler sa\u011flad\u0131. \u00d6rne\u011fin, zorunlu ilk\u00f6\u011fretim s\u00fcresinin 4306 say\u0131l\u0131 kanun ile 8 y\u0131la \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 1997\u2019de y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girdi (Deniz, 2001).<\/p>\n

\u015eura, de\u011ferlendirme faaliyetlerini \u00e7evreleyen s\u00f6ylemin tetkik edilmesinde \u00f6nemli bir aland\u0131r. 16. Milli E\u011fitim \u015euras\u0131 (1999) s\u0131ras\u0131nda birka\u00e7 \u00f6neri, de\u011fi\u015fen ortam ve ihtiya\u00e7lar temelinde, de\u011ferlendirme sistemlerinin kurulmas\u0131 ve mesleki ve teknik e\u011fitimin kalite ve say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 art\u0131rmak i\u00e7in kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtir. Yedi y\u0131l sonra, 2006\u2019da, 850 se\u00e7ilmi\u015f ve g\u00f6revlendirilmi\u015f \u00fcyeyle 17. Milli E\u011fitim \u015euras\u0131 topland\u0131. 16. \u015euran\u0131n aksine, 17. \u015eura s\u0131ras\u0131nda sunulan \u00f6neriler \u00f6zel e\u011fitimden test ve s\u0131nav sistemlerine kadar \u00e7e\u015fitli konular\u0131 kapsad\u0131. \u00c7e\u015fitli \u00f6neriler e\u011fitim kalite ve miktar\u0131n\u0131n geli\u015ftirilmesi i\u00e7in kan\u0131ta dayal\u0131 uygulamalar\u0131n \u00f6nemine de\u011findi. Ayr\u0131ca, 17. \u015euran\u0131n (2006) baz\u0131 \u00f6nerileri \u00f6zellikle izleme ve e\u011fitim pratiklerinin de\u011ferlendirilmesine de\u011findi. Bir bak\u0131mdan, 17. \u015eura, e\u011fitim kurumlar\u0131nda e\u011fitim kalitesini g\u00fcvenceye almak i\u00e7in akreditasyon sistemlerinin kurulmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nerdi. 16. ve 17. \u015euralarla kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, kan\u0131ta dayal\u0131 uygulamalar, performans izleme ve de\u011ferlendirmeye yap\u0131lan g\u00f6ndermeler 18. \u015eurada (2010) olduk\u00e7a s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131yd\u0131. Baz\u0131 \u00f6neriler k\u00fcresel d\u00fcnyada ulusal e\u011fitim sistemini geli\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in ulusal ba\u011flam ve de\u011ferlerin \u00f6n plana \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131yla ilgili net g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f sundu.<\/p>\n

Sonu\u00e7 olarak, uluslararas\u0131 rekabet g\u00fcc\u00fc ve k\u00fcresel bilgi ekonomisi hakk\u0131ndaki g\u00fcncel politika s\u00f6ylemi, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de e\u011fitimli ve rekabet\u00e7i insanlar yeti\u015ftirmede etkili politika ve programlar\u0131n \u00f6nemini vurgular. \u00d6zellikle, Milli E\u011fitim Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, Kalk\u0131nma Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve Milli E\u011fitim \u015euralar\u0131, geli\u015fmi\u015f planlama, programlama ve izleme ile g\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fcz e\u011fitiminin zorluklar\u0131 \u00fczerine e\u011filmenin alt\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7izer. Geli\u015fmi\u015f karar alma s\u00fcreci ihtiyac\u0131, dolayl\u0131 olarak \u00fclkedeki de\u011ferlendirme sistemleri ihtiyac\u0131n\u0131 i\u015faret etmi\u015f olsa da, birincil T\u00fcrk \u00e7\u0131kar sahiplerinin perspektifinden, de\u011ferlendirmenin bir karar alma arac\u0131 olarak alg\u0131lanan de\u011feri hen\u00fcz belli de\u011fil.<\/p>\n

T\u00fcrk e\u011fitimle ilgili karar alan\u0131ndaki bu son geli\u015fmelere ra\u011fmen, baz\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar program de\u011ferlendirmesinin T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de bir karar alma arac\u0131 olarak de\u011ferini ara\u015ft\u0131rd\u0131. Baz\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck ve orta gelirli \u00fclkelerin, kararnameleri i\u00e7in program de\u011ferlendirmeden nas\u0131l yararland\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda \u00f6nemli say\u0131da anekdotal kan\u0131t olsa da, bu olgunun T\u00fcrkiye i\u00e7in sistematik \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 belgelendirilmemi\u015ftir. Asl\u0131nda, son yirmi y\u0131lda, de\u011ferlendirme toplulu\u011fu, d\u00fcnyan\u0131n ilerlemi\u015f, k\u00fcresel \u00fclkeleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki \u00e7evredeki alanla ilgili olarak dramatik bir b\u00fcy\u00fcmeye \u015fahit oldu (Chelimsky & Shadish, 1997). Pek \u00e7ok Bat\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme ara\u015ft\u0131rmac\u0131s\u0131, de\u011ferlendirmelerin her \u00fclke i\u00e7in temel oldu\u011funu savunarak, prati\u011fin k\u00fcresel geni\u015flemesini yans\u0131tt\u0131lar (Patton, 2010; Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen, 2004). Baz\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131rmac\u0131 ve uygulay\u0131c\u0131lar, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck ve orta gelirli \u00fclkelerde (LMICs \u2013 Low and Middle Income Countries) de\u011ferlendirme sistemleri ve prati\u011finin, anlam ve s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131rd\u0131 (Carden & Alkin, 2011; Furubo, Rist, & Sandahl, 2002; Russon &Russon, 2000). T\u00fcrkiye de dahil olmak \u00fczere, pek \u00e7ok d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck ve orta gelirli \u00fclkede, de\u011ferlendirme, birincil \u00e7\u0131kar sahiplerinin perspektifinden geli\u015fmekte olan \u00fclke karar alma s\u00fcreci ba\u011flam\u0131nda program de\u011ferlendirmenin alg\u0131lanan faydas\u0131 konusunda daha ileri ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar gerektiren,\u00a0 hala olduk\u00e7a yeni bir kuram olarak yer almaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Sonu\u00e7: T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de E\u011fitimle \u0130lgili Karar Alma S\u00fcrecinde De\u011ferlendirmenin \u00d6nemi<\/b>\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n

Bu makale, de\u011ferlendirmelerin, T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de e\u011fitimle ilgili politika yap\u0131m\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirmelerin dikkate de\u011fer katk\u0131lar\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunur. Son birka\u00e7 on y\u0131l i\u00e7inde, pek \u00e7ok e\u011fitim reformu olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen, T\u00fcrkiye bu s\u00fcreyi bunlardan yararlanamadan ge\u00e7irdi, e\u011fitim politikalar\u0131 ve programlar\u0131 e\u011fitimle ilgili sorunlara \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm getirmekte b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde yetersiz kald\u0131. Ku\u015fkusuz, e\u011fitim reformlar\u0131n\u0131n ve programlar\u0131n\u0131n neden i\u015flemedi\u011fine dair \u00e7ok say\u0131da sebep ve belirleyici var ama T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin e\u011fitimle ilgili problemleri etkili \u015fekilde belirlemesini engelleyen bir zorluk hangi politikalar\u0131n kim i\u00e7in ve hangi \u015fartlar alt\u0131nda e\u011fitimle ilgili programlar\u0131 geli\u015ftirmekte en etkili oldu\u011fu konusundaki, bilgi temelindeki bo\u015fluktur (Yasar, 1998; Court & Young, 2004).\u00a0 Bu \u00f6nemli bir sorundur, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc politikalar\u0131n yararl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusundaki yetersiz bilgiye dayanan kararlar sosyal kaynaklar\u0131n verimsiz kullan\u0131m\u0131na yol a\u00e7abilir (Weiss, 1998). \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc, e\u011fitimle ilgili yat\u0131r\u0131mdan gelen kazan\u00e7 ekonomik olarak \u00e7ok geni\u015ftir (\u00f6rne\u011fin; sosyal hizmet tasarruflar\u0131, yoksulluk oranlar\u0131nda d\u00fc\u015f\u00fc\u015f, artan \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma hayat\u0131 kazan\u0131mlar\u0131, daha az su\u00e7) (Yeh, 2009; Amerikan N\u00fcfus Say\u0131m\u0131 \u0130daresi, 2002), karar al\u0131c\u0131lara, \u00e7e\u015fitli e\u011fitim politikalar\u0131n\u0131n bedeli olan paraya de\u011fip de\u011fmedi\u011fi, devam edilmeli mi edilmemeli mi, toplumsal ihtiya\u00e7lar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lamak i\u00e7in nas\u0131l geli\u015ftirilebilecekleri hakk\u0131nda sistematik bilgi sa\u011flanmas\u0131 faydal\u0131d\u0131r (Bamberger, Rugh, & Mabry, 2012).<\/p>\n

Ayr\u0131ca, bu makale, ulusal karar alma s\u00fcrecini geli\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck ve orta gelirli \u00fclkelerde de\u011ferlendirme sistemlerinin kurulmas\u0131 \u00e7abalar\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7evreleyen bilgi taban\u0131n\u0131 geni\u015fletmek i\u00e7in ilk ad\u0131md\u0131r. Bu zamana kadar, sadece birka\u00e7 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma, geli\u015fmekte olan \u00fclke perspektifinden karar alma ba\u011flam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirme sistemleri ve prati\u011finin de\u011ferine de\u011finmi\u015ftir. Hay\u2019in belirtti\u011fi gibi (2010): \u201cDe\u011ferlendirme ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131, inovasyon ve liderlik kuzey merkezli kurumlar d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalmamal\u0131d\u0131r. De\u011ferlendirme ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131n\u0131n nas\u0131l geli\u015fti\u011fini ve g\u00fcney de\u011ferlendiricilerin ve kurulu\u015flar\u0131n bu s\u00fcre\u00e7te oynad\u0131\u011f\u0131 rol\u00fc incelemeliyiz.\u201d (s. 226). Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, geli\u015fmekte olan bir \u00fclkenin e\u011fitimle ilgili pratiklerini geli\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in bir karar alma arac\u0131 olarak program de\u011ferlendirmesinin de\u011ferini nas\u0131l g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne dair net bir kavray\u0131\u015f olmaks\u0131z\u0131n, alan, d\u00fcnya \u00e7ap\u0131nda sosyal iyile\u015ftirmeye nas\u0131l katk\u0131da bulunaca\u011f\u0131 konusunda gelecek y\u00f6nlendirmelerden yoksun kal\u0131r. Bu makale, k\u00fcresel kuzey ile k\u00fcresel g\u00fcney aras\u0131nda konumlanm\u0131\u015f T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin bu olguyu incelemek i\u00e7in iddial\u0131 bir g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f sunabilece\u011fini savunur.<\/p>\n

Daha ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 olarak, T\u00fcrkiye, ulusal de\u011ferlendirme sistemleri ve prati\u011fi geli\u015ftirmek i\u00e7in, s\u00fcreci ba\u015flatmakta \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde geride kalmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen, di\u011fer orta gelirli \u00fclkelere benzer, beklendik bir \u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc izlemektedir. Kuzey merkezli ve olu\u015fumlu yard\u0131m organizasyonlar\u0131n\u0131n \u2013 \u0130ktisadi \u0130\u015fbirli\u011fi ve Geli\u015fme Te\u015fkilat\u0131\u2019n\u0131n (OECD) T\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin T\u00fcrk\u00e7e bir de\u011ferlendirme terimler s\u00f6zl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc haz\u0131rlamas\u0131n\u0131 istemesi gibi (Kocaman & G\u00fcven, 2008), de\u011ferlendirmeyi bir karar alma arac\u0131 olarak tan\u0131tmas\u0131n\u0131n ard\u0131ndan \u00fclkenin de\u011ferlendirme alan\u0131nda, teorik ve pratik alternatifleri tasfiye etmek i\u00e7in deneysel \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma isteyen, kendi mevkiini aramakta oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir (Cakici 2014, haz\u0131rl\u0131k safhas\u0131nda). Daha \u00f6nce ele al\u0131nan, yak\u0131n zamandaki, bakanl\u0131k, h\u00fck\u00fcmet ve h\u00fck\u00fcmetleraras\u0131 giri\u015fimler, de\u011ferlendirmenin T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de e\u011fitimle ilgili politikalar\u0131 geli\u015ftirme zaman\u0131n\u0131n geldi\u011fini \u00f6ne s\u00fcrer. Ancak, politikalar\u0131n ulusal de\u011ferlendirmelerini kimin, nas\u0131l ve ne ama\u00e7la y\u00fcr\u00fctece\u011fi gibi konularla ilgili bilgimizde bir bo\u015fluk var. Bu sorular, AnalizT\u00fcrkiye\u2019nin De\u011ferlendirme Serileri\u2019nde, takip eden makalelerde daha detayl\u0131 analiz edilecektir.<\/p>\n

Hanife \u00c7ak\u0131c\u0131, Proje Asistan\u0131, T\u00fcrkiye Politika ve Ara\u015ft\u0131rma Merkezi (Analiz T\u00fcrkiye)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Makaleyi \u015fu \u015fekilde referans vererek kullanabilirsiniz:<\/span>
\n\u00c7ak\u0131c\u0131, Hanife \u00a0(Ocak, 2014),\u00a0\u201cT\u00fcrk E\u011fitim Sisteminin Karar Alma S\u00fcrecinde \u201cDe\u011ferlendirme\u201dnin Rol\u00fc ve Gelece\u011fi: Bir Giri\u015f\u201d, Cilt III, Say\u0131 1, s.6-24,\u00a0T\u00fcrkiye Politika ve Ara\u015ft\u0131rma Merkezi (AnalizT\u00fcrkiye), Londra: Analiz T\u00fcrkiye\u00a0<\/em>(http:\/\/researchturkey.org\/dev\/?p=4636&lang=tr)<\/p>\n

Kaynak\u00e7a<\/b><\/p>\n

Atwood, J.B. (2012). Development co-operation report 2012. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Kas\u0131m 2012 http:\/\/www.oecd-ilibrary.org\/docserver\/download\/4312011e.pdf?expires=1353785529&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=BCDC4B77C28FC2853B4886B413CFD209<\/p>\n

Aydagul, B. (2008). No shared vision for achieving Education for All: Turkey at risk. Prospects<\/i>, 38 (3), 401-107.<\/p>\n

Aydin, A. (1996). Milli Egitim Politikalar\u0131 ve Suralar. Ankara: Milli E\u011fitim Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131.<\/p>\n

Bamberger, M. (1991). The politics of evaluation in developing countries. Evaluation and Program Planning<\/i>,\u00a014 <\/i>(4), 325-339.<\/p>\n

Bamberger, M., Rugh, J., & Mabry, L. (2012). RealWorld evaluation: Working under budget, time, data and political constraints<\/i>. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.<\/p>\n

Barkcin, F. (2002). Avrupa Birligine giris sureci icinde VII. ve VIII. bes yillik kalkinma planlarinda egitim politikalari.<\/i> Istanbul: Alman Liseliler Kultur ve Egitim Vakfi.<\/p>\n

Carden, F. (2010). Introduction to the forum on evaluation field building in South Asia. American Journal of Evaluation<\/i>, 31(2), 219-221.<\/p>\n

Carden, F., & Alkin, M. C. (2011). Evaluation roots: An international perspective. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation<\/i>,\u00a08<\/i>(17), 102-118.<\/p>\n

Chelimsky, E., & Shadish, W. R. (Eds.). (1997).\u00a0Evaluation for the 21st century: A handbook<\/i>. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.<\/p>\n

CIA (2012). The world factbook: Turkey. Eri\u015fim tarihi: \u015eubat 2013, https:\/\/www.cia.gov\/library\/publications\/the-world-factbook\/geos\/tu.html<\/p>\n

Clarke, A. (2008). Evidence-based evaluation in different professina domains: Similarities, differences and challenges. In I. Shaw, J. C. Greene, & M. M. Mark (Eds.). Handbook of evaluation: Policies, programs and practices (s. 559-581)<\/i>. Sage Publications.<\/p>\n

Conlin, S., & Stirrat, R. (2008). Current challenges in development evaluation. Evaluation<\/i>, 14, 193-208.<\/p>\n

Cook (1997). Lessons learned in evaluation over the past 25 years. In E. Chelimsky, & W. R. Shadish (Eds.), Evaluation for the 21st century: A handbook<\/i> (s. 30-52). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.<\/p>\n

Court, J. & Young, J. (2004). Research impact on policy: What can researchers do? Newsletter of the Economic Research Forum for the Arab Countries, Iran & Turkey<\/i>, 11(1), 18-25.<\/p>\n

Deniz, M. (2001). Milli e\u011fitim \u015furalar\u0131n\u0131n tarih\u00e7esi ve e\u011fitim politikalar\u0131na etkileri<\/i>. (Bas\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f Tez). Anadolu \u00dcniversitesi, Eskisehir.<\/p>\n

Donaldson, S. I. (2008).\u00a0In search of the blueprint for an evidence-based global society. In S. I. <\/i>Donaldson, C. A. Christie, &\u00a0 M. M. Mark (Eds),\u00a0What counts as credible evidence in applied research and evaluation practice?<\/i>\u00a0(s. 2-18). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.<\/p>\n

Education Reform Initiative (ERI). (2009). Education monitoring report 2009. Eri\u015fim tarihi: \u015eubat 2013: http:\/\/erg.sabanciuniv.edu\/sites\/erg.sabanciuniv.edu\/files\/EIR_2010_Exe_Sum.pdf<\/p>\n

Education Reform Initiative (ERI). (2011). Education monitoring report 2010. Eri\u015fim tarihi: \u015eubat 2013: http:\/\/erg.sabanciuniv.edu\/sites\/erg.sabanciuniv.edu\/files\/EIR_2010_Exe_Sum.pdf<\/p>\n

Erguder, U. (2013). The indispensable role of education for the centennial goals of the Turkish Republic. Turkish Policy Quarterly<\/i>, 12 (2), 49-63.<\/p>\n

European Commission. (2006). Capacity building support for the Ministry of National Education (Project number TR 06 03 11). Eri\u015fim tarihi: Ocak 2013: http:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/enlargement\/fiche_projet\/document\/TR%2006%2003%2011%20Capacity%20Building%20Support%20for%20the%20MoNE.pdf<\/p>\n

Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2004). Program evaluation. Alternative approaches and practical guidelines <\/i>(3rd Ed.). New York: Pearson Education, Inc.<\/p>\n

Furubo, J.E., Rist, R., & Sandahl, R. (Eds.). (2002). International atlas of evaluation<\/i>. New Brunswick, London: Transaction Publishers.<\/p>\n

Gasper, D. (2000). Evaluating the logical framework approach: towards learning-oriented development evaluation. Public Administration and Development, <\/i>20, 17\u201328.<\/p>\n

Government Action Plan, Republic of Turkey. (2008). 60th<\/sup> government action plan. Retrieved January 2013, from, http:\/\/ekutup.dpt.gov.tr\/plan\/ep2008.pdf<\/p>\n

Government Action Plan, Republic of Turkey. (2011). 61st<\/sup> government action plan. Retrieved January 2013, from, http:\/\/www.basbakanlik.gov.tr\/Forms\/pgGovProgramme.aspx<\/p>\n

Greene, J. C. (2006). Evaluation, democracy, and social change.\u00a0In I. Shaw, J. C.\u00a0 Greene, & M. M. Mark (Eds.), The Sage handbook of evaluation<\/i>.\u00a0 (pp. 118-140). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.<\/p>\n

G\u00fcr, B.S., and Z. \u00c7elik. 2009. Turkiye\u2019de milli egitim sistemi: Yapisal sorunlar ve oneriler [National educational system in Turkey: Structural problems and suggestions]. Ankara: Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research. (Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Toplum Ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar\u0131 Vakf\u0131)<\/p>\n

Hay, K. (2010). Evaluation field building in South Asia: Reflections, anecdotes, and questions. American Journal of Evaluation,<\/i> 31(2), 222-231.<\/p>\n

King, J. A., & Stevahn, L. (2012).\u00a0Interactive evaluation practice: Mastering the interpersonal dynamics of Program Evaluation<\/i>. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.<\/p>\n

Kocaman, O., & Guven, N. (2008). Glossary of key terms in evaluation and results-based management. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Eri\u015fim tarihi: 13 Nisan 2013: http:\/\/www.oecd.org\/dac\/evaluation\/dcdndep\/39059671.pdf<\/p>\n

Lee, Y. (2002). Public policy evaluation in Korea: In search for new direction. In J. E. Furubo, R. C. Rist, & R. Sandahl (Eds.),\u00a0International atlas of evaluation<\/i> (s. 191- 205). Transaction Publishers.<\/p>\n

Mark, M. M., & Henry, G. T. (2004). The mechanisms and outcomes of evaluation influence.\u00a0Evaluation<\/i>,\u00a010 <\/i>(1), 35-57.<\/p>\n

Mark, M. M., Henry, G. T., & Julnes, G. (2000).\u00a0Evaluation: An integrated framework for understanding, guiding, and improving policies and programs<\/i>. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.<\/p>\n

Mertens, D. M., & Russon, C. (2000). A proposal for the International Organization for Cooperation in Evaluation.\u00a0The American Journal of Evaluation<\/i>, 21<\/i>(2), 275-283.<\/p>\n

Ministry of Development, Republic of Turkey. (2001). Eight (8th) five year development plan (2001\u2013 2006). Eri\u015fim tarihi: 25 \u015eubat 2013 http:\/\/www.mod.gov.tr\/en\/plans\/Eight%20Five-Year%20Development%20Plan%202001-2005.pdf<\/p>\n

Ministry of Development, Republic of Turkey. (2006). Ninth (9th) national\u00a0 development plan (2007 \u2013 2013). Eri\u015fim tarihi: 25 \u015eubat 2013: http:\/\/www.maliye.gov.tr\/Lists\/TabMenuIcerik\/Attachments\/106\/9developmentplan.pdf<\/p>\n

Ministry of National Education, Republic of Turkey. (1999). 16th<\/sup> National Council decisions. Eri\u015fim tarihi: 5 Mart 2013: http:\/\/ttkb.meb.gov.tr\/meb_iys_dosyalar\/2012_06\/06021346_16_sura.pdf<\/p>\n

Ministry of National Education, Republic of Turkey. (2002). National education at the beginning of 2002. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Kas\u0131m 2012: http:\/\/www.meb.gov.tr\/Stats\/apk2002ing\/apage29_48.htm<\/p>\n

Ministry of National Education, Republic of Turkey. (2006). 17th<\/sup> National Council decisions. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Mart 2013: http:\/\/ttkb.meb.gov.tr\/meb_iys_dosyalar\/2012_06\/06021327_17_sura.pdf<\/p>\n

Ministry of National Education, Republic of Turkey. (2019). 18th<\/sup> National Council decisions. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Mart 2013: http:\/\/www.meb.gov.tr\/duyurular\/duyurular2010\/ttkb\/18Sura_kararlari_tamami.pdf<\/p>\n

Ministry of National Education, Republic of Turkey. (2011). Activity report. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Ocak 2013: http:\/\/sgb.meb.gov.tr\/www\/meb-2011-yili-faaliyet-raporu\/icerik\/52<\/p>\n

Ministry of National Education, Republic of Turkey. (2011). National education report (to be submitted to the European Commission). Eri\u015fim tarihi: 15 \u015eubat 2013: http:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/education\/lifelong-learning-policy\/doc\/natreport11\/turkey_en.pdf<\/p>\n

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2005). Basic education in Turkey: Background report. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Ekim 2012: http:\/\/www.oecd.org\/education\/preschoolandschool\/39642601.pdf<\/p>\n

Ozturk, A. (2002).\u00a0The domestic context of Turkey’s changing foreign policy towards the Middle East and the Caspian Region<\/i>. German Development Institute.<\/p>\n

Patton, M. Q. (2010).\u00a0Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use<\/i>. The Guilford Press.<\/p>\n

Patton, M. Q. (2012). Essentials of utilization-focused evaluation<\/i>. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.<\/p>\n

Picciotto, R. (2007). The new environment for development evaluation.\u00a0American journal of evaluation<\/i>,\u00a028<\/i>(4), 509-521.<\/p>\n

Preskill, H. (2008). Evaluation’s Second Act A Spotlight on Learning. American Journal of Evaluation<\/i>,\u00a029<\/i>(2), 127-138.<\/p>\n

Rossi, P. H., Freeman, H. E., & Lipsey, M. W. (2003).\u00a0Evaluation: A systematic approach<\/i>. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.<\/p>\n

Russon, C., & Russon, K. (Eds.). (2000). The annotated bibliography of international program evaluation<\/i>. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.<\/p>\n

Scriven, M. (1991).\u00a0Evaluation thesaurus<\/i>. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.<\/p>\n

Segone, M. (Eds.). (2008). Bridging the gap: The role of monitoring and evaluation in evidence-based policy making<\/i>. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Children\u2019s Fund.<\/p>\n

Segone, M. (Eds.). (2009). Country-led monitoring and evaluation systems: Better evidence, better policies, better development results<\/i>. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Children\u2019s Fund.<\/p>\n

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.<\/p>\n

Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (2007).\u00a0Evaluation theory, models, and applications<\/i>\u00a0(Vol. 3). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.<\/p>\n

Turk, E., Yalcin, M., & Unsal, N. (2006). Milli Egitim Bakanligi yoneticilerinin goruslerine dayali stratejik planlama arastirmasi<\/i>. Ankara: Milli Egitim Bakanligi Strateji Gelistirme Baskanligi. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Ekim 2012: http:\/\/sgb.meb.gov.tr\/str_yon_planlama_V2\/stratejik_planlama_arastirmasi.pdf<\/p>\n

United Nations Development Programme. (2010). Assessment of development results: Turkey. Evaluation of UNDP contribution to development results in Turkey. Washington, D.C.: Evaluation Office. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Aral\u0131k 2012: http:\/\/iklim.cob.gov.tr\/iklim\/Files\/Raporlar\/ASSESSMENT%20OF%20DEVELOPMENT%20RESULTS%20Turkey.pdf<\/p>\n

United Nations Development Programme. (2011). Proceedings from the international conference 2011.National evaluation capacities<\/i>. Washington, D.C.: Evaluation Office. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Eyl\u00fcl 2012: http:\/\/web.undp.org\/evaluation\/documents\/NEC\/nec_proceedings_series_1.pdf<\/p>\n

USAID. (2001). Best practices in monitoring and evaluation: Lessons learned from the USAID Turkey population program. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Eyl\u00fcl 2012: http:\/\/www.cpc.unc.edu\/measure\/publications\/sr-01-11<\/p>\n

U.S. Census Bureau. (2002). The big payoff: Educational attainment and synthetic estimates of work-life earnings. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Ekim 2012: http:\/\/www.census.gov\/prod\/2002pubs\/p23-210.pdf<\/p>\n

Wadsworth, Y. (2001). Becoming responsive and some consequences for evaluation as dialogue across distance. In J. C. Greene and T. A. Abma (Eds.), Responsive Evaluation<\/i>. New Directions for Evaluation, 92. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.<\/p>\n

Weiss, C. H. (Eds.). (1977). Using social research in public policy making.<\/i> Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.<\/p>\n

Weiss, C. H., & Bucuvalas, M. J. (1980).\u00a0Social science research and decision-making<\/i>. New York: Columbia University Press.<\/p>\n

Weiss, C. H. (1987). Evaluating social programs: What have we learned?. Society<\/i>,\u00a025<\/i>(1), 40-45.<\/p>\n

Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation<\/i> (2nd<\/sup> Ed). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.<\/p>\n

Weiss, C. H. (1998). Have we learned anything new about the use of evaluation?.\u00a0American Journal of Evaluation<\/i>,\u00a019<\/i>(1), 21-33.<\/p>\n

Weiss, C. H., Murphy-Graham, E., & Birkeland, S. (2005). An alternate route to policy influence how evaluations affect DARE.\u00a0 American Journal of Evaluation<\/i>, 26<\/i>(1), 12-30.<\/p>\n

World Bank. (2007). Turkey: Higher education policy study. Volume 1: Strategic directions for higher education in Turkey. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Ekim 2012: https:\/\/openknowledge.worldbank.org\/handle\/10986\/7628<\/p>\n

World Bank. (2011). Improving the quality of equity of basic education in Turkey: Challenges and opportunities. Eri\u015fim tarihi: Ekim 2012: http:\/\/siteresources.worldbank.org\/TURKEYEXTN\/Resources\/361711-1216301653427\/5218036-1326807255367\/EducationQualityReport2011-en.pdf<\/p>\n

Yasar, S. (1998, April). Evaluation of educational programmes in Turkey. Unpublished paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.<\/p>\n

Yeh, S. (2009). Shifting the bell curve: The benefits and costs of raising student achievement. Evaluation and Program Planning<\/i>, 32, 74-82.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

De\u011ferlendirme Serisi – I T\u00fcrk E\u011fitim Sisteminin Karar Alma S\u00fcrecinde \u201cDe\u011ferlendirme\u201dnin Rol\u00fc ve Gelece\u011fi: Bir Giri\u015f\u00a0 Giri\u015f\u00a0 T\u00fcrkiye Cumhuriyeti Milli E\u011fitim Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2012 y\u0131l\u0131nda Sa\u011fl\u0131k Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve G\u0131da, Tar\u0131m ve Hayvanc\u0131l\u0131k Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile i\u015fbirli\u011fi yaparak \u201cOkul S\u00fct\u00fc Program\u0131\u201d isimli bir proje ba\u015flatt\u0131. Proje, beslenme al\u0131\u015fkanl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 geli\u015ftirerek \u00f6\u011frencilerin okuldaki \u00f6\u011frenimlerini desteklemeyi ama\u00e7l\u0131yordu. Fakat ba\u015flad\u0131ktan birka\u00e7 ay […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":257,"featured_media":8662,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[214,274],"tags":[205,206,207,208,209],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7355"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/257"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7355"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7355\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8667,"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7355\/revisions\/8667"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8662"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7355"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7355"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.researchturkey.org\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7355"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}