Clinical Research
BibTex RIS Cite

Türkiye’de Öğretim Üyelerinin Bilimsel Çalışma Yapma Motivasyonları, Yetersizlikler ve Yetkinlik Sorunları: Bir Saha Araştırması

Year 2023, Volume: 13 Issue: 2, 331 - 342, 13.10.2023
https://doi.org/10.53478/yuksekogretim.1174288

Abstract

Akademisyenlerin temel sorumluluğundan biri bilimsel çalışmalar yaparak bilgi ve teknoloji üretimine kaynaklık etmektir. Bu sorumluluğu yerine getirirken karşılaştıkları zorluklar akademisyenler arasında sık sık tartışılmakta ve zaman zaman kamuoyuna yansımaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı akademisyenlerin bilimsel çalışma süreçlerinde ve bilimsel çalışmalara destek bulmakta yaşadıkları zorlukları kendi görüşleri üzerinden belirlemektir. Çalışmada veri toplama aracı olarak araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen “Öğretim Üyelerinin Akademik Üretkenlik Ölçeği” kullanılmıştır. Araştırma online anket yöntemiyle Türkiye evreninde üniversitelerde görev yapan öğretim üyeleri üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Verilerin analizinde tanımlayıcı istatistiksel analizler, önemlilik testleri, korelasyon analizinden yararlanılmıştır. Verilerin analizi %95 güven aralığında gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmaya 626 öğretim üyesi katılmıştır. Katılımcıların %44,4’ü (n=278) doktor öğretim üyesi, %28,3’ü (n=177) doçent, %27,3’ü (n=1741) profesördü. Ülkemizde görev yapmakta olan öğretim üyeleri akademik çalışma yapmaya istekli olmalarına rağmen bilimsel çalışma yapmak için; zaman bulmakta zorlandıklarını, alt yapı imkânların yetersiz olduğunu ve mali destek bulmakta zorlandıklarını ifade etmişlerdir. Özellikle yabancı dilde makale yazmakta ve akademik gelişimde zorluklar yaşadıkları tespit edilmiştir. Bilimsel araştırmalar için etik kurul süreçlerinin ve kurumsal izin süreçlerinin bezdirici, geciktirici ve engelleyici olduğunu belirtmişlerdir.

References

  • Akçiğit U, Tok EÖ. (2020). Türkiye bilim raporu, Ankara: TÜBA.
  • Arı A. (2007). Ünı̇versı̇te Öğretı̇m Elamanlarının Sorunları. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 17:65-74.
  • Bagilhole B. (1993). How to Keep a Good Woman Down: An Investigation of the Role of Institutional Factors in the Process of Discrimination against Women Academics. British Journal of Sociology of Education,14(3), 261–274.
  • Boumans NP, de Jong AH, Janssen SM. (2011). Age-differences in work motivation and job satisfaction. The influence of age on the relationships between work characteristics and workers’ outcomes. Int J Aging Hum Dev, 73:331-50.
  • Coşkun R, Altunışık R, Yıldırım E. (2017). Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri SPSS Uygulamalı, Sakarya Yayıncılık, Sakarya.
  • Çelik Z, Gür BS (2013). Turkey’s education policy during the AK Party era (2002-2013). Insight Turkey, 15(4):151-176.
  • Doğan, D. (2013). Yeni Kurulan Üniversitelerin Sorunları ve Çözüm Önerileri. Journal of Higher Education & Science/Yüksekögretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 3;2:108-116.
  • Gür, B.S. (2016). Democratization and massification of higher education in Turkey and challenges ahead. Research&Occational Paper Series: CSHE.3.16. Center for Studies in Higher Education.
  • Mengi F, Schreglmann S. (2013). Akademisyenlik Bağlamında Bilimsel Üretkenliği Etkileyen Çevresel Faktörler. Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2;1:1-17.
  • Hamovitch W, Morgenstern R.D. (2017). Children and the Productivity of Academic Women The Journal of Higher Education, 48:6, 633-645.
  • Hassan A, Tymms P, Ismail H. (2008). Academic productivity as perceived by Malaysian academics. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30; 3: 283–296.
  • Hill C., Corbett C, Rose A. (2010). Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, DC. AAUW.
  • Karagöz, Y. (2017). SPSS ve AMOS Uygulamalı Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri Ve Yayın Etiği. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara.
  • Levin, SG, Stephan PE. (1991). Research Productivity over the Life Cycle: Evidence for Academic Scientists. American Economic Review,81,1: 114–132.
  • Nag S, Yang H, Buccola S, Ervin D. (2013). Productivity and financial support in academic bioscience. Applied Economics, 45;9: 2817–2826.
  • Raj A, Carr PL, Kaplan SE, Terrin N, Breeze JL. (2016). Longitudinal Analysis of Gender Differences in Academic Productivity among Medical Faculty across 24 Medical Schools in the United States. Acad Med, 91;8: 1074–1079.
  • Reed D.A, Enders F, Lindor R, McClees M, Lindor K.D. (2011). Gender Differences in Academic Productivity and Leadership Appointments of Physicians Throughout Academic Careers. Acad Med, 86:43–47.
  • Şen AC, Tekindal MA. (2021). Evaluation Scale of Clinicians’Views and Expectations About Academics and Academic Productivity Process, Validity and Reliability Study. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 11;3: 575-580.
  • Torrisi B. (2012). Academic productivity correlated with well-being at work. Scientometrics,94;2:1-15.
  • Yalçın OM, Kılıç H. (2018). Akademisyenlerin Öğretim Performansları İle Motivasyonları Arasındaki İlişkinin Değerlendirilmesi. Eğitim Kuram Ve Uygulama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4;3: 122-135.
  • Yurdasever E, Karakaya A. (2016). İdari Görevlerin Akademisyenlerin Mesleki Gelişimine Etkileri. Karabük Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi,6;2: 485-503.
  • Yök,Yüksek öğrenim istatistikleri. Erişim adresi; https://istatistik.yok. gov.tr (07 Mart 2023)

Motivations, Inadequacies and Competence Problems of Academic Staff Members in Conducting Scientific Studies in Türkiye: A Field Study

Year 2023, Volume: 13 Issue: 2, 331 - 342, 13.10.2023
https://doi.org/10.53478/yuksekogretim.1174288

Abstract

One of the main responsibilities of academics is to be a resource of knowledge and technology production by conducting scientific studies. The difficulties they face in fulfilling this responsibility are frequently discussed among academics and occasionally reflected in public opinion. The aim of this study is to determine the difficulties experienced by academic staff in scientific work processes and in finding support for scientific studies, through their own views. The “Academic Productivity Scale of Faculty Members” developed by the researchers was used as the data collection tool in the study. The research was carried out with faculty members working at universities in Türkiye by the online survey method. Descriptive statistical analyses, significance tests and correlation analysis were used in the analysis of the data. Analysis of the data was carried out at 95% confidence interval. 626 faculty members participated in the study. Of the participants, 44.4% (n=278) were assistant professors, 28.3% (n=177) were associate professors, and 27.3% (n=174) were professors. Although the faculty members working in Türkiye are willing to conduct academic studies, they had difficulty in finding time, and had insufficient equipment and financial support. They had difficulties particularly in writing articles in a foreign language and in academic development. They stated that IRB processes for scientific research are tiresome, delaying, and obstructive.

References

  • Akçiğit U, Tok EÖ. (2020). Türkiye bilim raporu, Ankara: TÜBA.
  • Arı A. (2007). Ünı̇versı̇te Öğretı̇m Elamanlarının Sorunları. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 17:65-74.
  • Bagilhole B. (1993). How to Keep a Good Woman Down: An Investigation of the Role of Institutional Factors in the Process of Discrimination against Women Academics. British Journal of Sociology of Education,14(3), 261–274.
  • Boumans NP, de Jong AH, Janssen SM. (2011). Age-differences in work motivation and job satisfaction. The influence of age on the relationships between work characteristics and workers’ outcomes. Int J Aging Hum Dev, 73:331-50.
  • Coşkun R, Altunışık R, Yıldırım E. (2017). Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri SPSS Uygulamalı, Sakarya Yayıncılık, Sakarya.
  • Çelik Z, Gür BS (2013). Turkey’s education policy during the AK Party era (2002-2013). Insight Turkey, 15(4):151-176.
  • Doğan, D. (2013). Yeni Kurulan Üniversitelerin Sorunları ve Çözüm Önerileri. Journal of Higher Education & Science/Yüksekögretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 3;2:108-116.
  • Gür, B.S. (2016). Democratization and massification of higher education in Turkey and challenges ahead. Research&Occational Paper Series: CSHE.3.16. Center for Studies in Higher Education.
  • Mengi F, Schreglmann S. (2013). Akademisyenlik Bağlamında Bilimsel Üretkenliği Etkileyen Çevresel Faktörler. Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2;1:1-17.
  • Hamovitch W, Morgenstern R.D. (2017). Children and the Productivity of Academic Women The Journal of Higher Education, 48:6, 633-645.
  • Hassan A, Tymms P, Ismail H. (2008). Academic productivity as perceived by Malaysian academics. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 30; 3: 283–296.
  • Hill C., Corbett C, Rose A. (2010). Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, DC. AAUW.
  • Karagöz, Y. (2017). SPSS ve AMOS Uygulamalı Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri Ve Yayın Etiği. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara.
  • Levin, SG, Stephan PE. (1991). Research Productivity over the Life Cycle: Evidence for Academic Scientists. American Economic Review,81,1: 114–132.
  • Nag S, Yang H, Buccola S, Ervin D. (2013). Productivity and financial support in academic bioscience. Applied Economics, 45;9: 2817–2826.
  • Raj A, Carr PL, Kaplan SE, Terrin N, Breeze JL. (2016). Longitudinal Analysis of Gender Differences in Academic Productivity among Medical Faculty across 24 Medical Schools in the United States. Acad Med, 91;8: 1074–1079.
  • Reed D.A, Enders F, Lindor R, McClees M, Lindor K.D. (2011). Gender Differences in Academic Productivity and Leadership Appointments of Physicians Throughout Academic Careers. Acad Med, 86:43–47.
  • Şen AC, Tekindal MA. (2021). Evaluation Scale of Clinicians’Views and Expectations About Academics and Academic Productivity Process, Validity and Reliability Study. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 11;3: 575-580.
  • Torrisi B. (2012). Academic productivity correlated with well-being at work. Scientometrics,94;2:1-15.
  • Yalçın OM, Kılıç H. (2018). Akademisyenlerin Öğretim Performansları İle Motivasyonları Arasındaki İlişkinin Değerlendirilmesi. Eğitim Kuram Ve Uygulama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4;3: 122-135.
  • Yurdasever E, Karakaya A. (2016). İdari Görevlerin Akademisyenlerin Mesleki Gelişimine Etkileri. Karabük Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi,6;2: 485-503.
  • Yök,Yüksek öğrenim istatistikleri. Erişim adresi; https://istatistik.yok. gov.tr (07 Mart 2023)
There are 22 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Studies on Education
Journal Section Klinik Araştırma
Authors

Ahmet Kaya 0000-0001-9845-7938

Sedat Bostan 0000-0002-9439-8448

Yasemin Kaya 0000-0001-7360-8090

Early Pub Date September 29, 2023
Publication Date October 13, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2023 Volume: 13 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Kaya, A., Bostan, S., & Kaya, Y. (2023). Türkiye’de Öğretim Üyelerinin Bilimsel Çalışma Yapma Motivasyonları, Yetersizlikler ve Yetkinlik Sorunları: Bir Saha Araştırması. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 13(2), 331-342. https://doi.org/10.53478/yuksekogretim.1174288

Yükseköğretim Dergisi/TÜBA Higher Education Research/Review (TÜBA-HER) does not officially agree with the ideas of manuscripts published in the journal and does not guarantee for any product or service advertisements on both printed and online versions of the journal. Scientific and legal responsibilities of published manuscripts belong to their authors. Materials such as pictures, figures, tables etc. sent with manuscripts should be original or written approval of copyright holder should be sent with manuscript for publishing in both printed and online versions if they were published before. Authors agree that they transfer all publishing rights to the Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA), the publisher of the journal. Copyrights of all published contents (text and visual materials) belong to the journal. No payment is done for manuscripts under the name of copyright or others approved for publishing in the journal and no publication cost is charged; however, reprints are at authors' cost.

To promote the development of global open access to scientific information and research, TÜBA provides copyrights of all online published papers (except where otherwise noted) for free use of readers, scientists, and institutions (such as link to the content or permission for its download, distribution, printing, copying, and reproduction in any medium, without any changing and except the commercial purpose), under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-ND3.0) License, provided the original work is cited. To get permission for commercial purpose please contact the publisher.