PEN Academic Publishing   |  ISSN: 1554-5210

International Journal of Progressive Education 2018, Vol. 14(2) 121-135

Prospective Teachers’ Perceptions on Education Policy: A Metaphor Analysis

Şenol Sezer

pp. 121 - 135   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2018.139.9   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1803-12-0006

Published online: April 25, 2018  |   Number of Views: 48  |  Number of Download: 88


Abstract

This study aiming to determine the metaphorical perceptions of prospective teachers regarding Turkey’s education policies was modelled in the ‘phenomenological pattern’ which one of the qualitative research methods. The study group was 150 prospective teachers. Data was collected using a metaphor form and via focus group interviews. Descriptive analysis and content analysis techniques were used for data analysis. Prospective teachers produced 135 valid metaphors. The most frequently repeated metaphors were chameleon, jigsaw puzzle, play dough, exchange rate, seasons, Black Sea’s weather, domino stones, human life, Indian silk, swamp, traditional agriculture, tuning of the oriental instrument, vegetable soup, and weather forecast. The main categories were uncertainty, changeability, inevitableness, subjectivity, anxiety, desperation, instability, inconsistency, and awareness. The metaphors and focus group interview results show that the prospective teachers perceive negatively the frequent changing policies and educational practices.

Keywords: education policy, prospective teacher, metaphor, focus group


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Sezer, S. (2018). Prospective Teachers’ Perceptions on Education Policy: A Metaphor Analysis. International Journal of Progressive Education, 14(2), 121-135. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2018.139.9

Harvard
Sezer, S. (2018). Prospective Teachers’ Perceptions on Education Policy: A Metaphor Analysis. International Journal of Progressive Education, 14(2), pp. 121-135.

Chicago 16th edition
Sezer, Senol (2018). "Prospective Teachers’ Perceptions on Education Policy: A Metaphor Analysis". International Journal of Progressive Education 14 (2):121-135. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2018.139.9.

References
  1. Adem, M. (1997). Ulusal eğitim politikamız nasıl olmalıdır? Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 52 (1), 51-65.  
  2. Aggleton, P., & Rowe, G. (2002). School knowledge and social education. In, G. Whitty (Ed.). Making sense of education policy: Studies in the sociology and politics of education. (p.27-45). London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. 
  3. Aspin, D., & Chapman, J. (2005). Values education and the humanization of the curriculum. In, M. Leicester, C. Modgil & S. Modgil (Eds.). Education, culture and values: Politics, education and citizenship. (p.195-222). New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
  4. Arı, E. (2002). “The Law of Unification of Education and secular education”. GUJGEF, 22(2), 181-192. Accessed May 20, 2017, http://www.gefad.gazi.edu.tr/issue/6765/91026  
  5. Aydın, A. (2015). Education policy. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
  6. Baldwin, R. E. (1976). The political economy of post-war U.S. trade policy. New York: New York University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
  7. Bell, L. & Stevenson, H. (2006). Education policy: Process, themes and impact. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
  8. Bozpolat, E. (2015). “Metaphorical perceptions of prospective teachers toward graduate education.” Elementary Education Online, 15 (4), 1114-1130. Accessed April 20, 2017, http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/ilkonline/article/view/5000148534/ 
  9. Brademas, J. (2002). The politics of education: Conflict and consensus on Capitol Hill. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
  10. Brown, P., & Lauder, H. (2006). “Globalization, knowledge and the myth of the magnet economy.” Globalisation, Societies and Education, 4 (1), 25-57. DOI: 10.1080/14767720600555046. Accessed September 21, 2017, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14767720600555046 
  11. Büyükboyacı, Ş. (2015). “Süleyman Demirel dönemi (1965-1971) eğitim politikaları ve uygulamalarının Türk basınındaki yankıları”. Ulakbilge 3 (6), 19-57.
  12. Carter, P. A. (2008). Education and work as human rights for women: A feminist analysis. In, R. D. Lakes & P. A. Carter (Eds.). Globalizing education for work: Comparative perspectives on gender and the new economy. (pp.17-40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  13. Court, J., Mendizabal, E., Osborne, D., & Young, J. (2006). Policy engagement: How civil society can be more effective. London: Overseas Development Institute.
  14. Cokluk, O., Yılmaz, K., & Oguz, E. (2011). “A qualitative interview method: Focus group interview”. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 4 (1), 95-107, Accessed January 29, 2018, http://www.keg.aku.edu.tr/arsiv/c4s1/c4s1m6.pdf  
  15. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. London: Sage Publications. 
  16. Cummings, W. K. (2010). How educational systems form and reform. In, J. Zajda & M. A. GeoJaJa (Eds.). The politics of education reforms.  (p. 19-40) London: Springer. 
  17. Darom, D. (2005). Humanistic values education: Personal, interpersonal, social and political dimensions. In, M. Leicester, C. Modgil, & S. Modgil (Eds.). Education, culture and values. (pp.24-40). London: Taylor & Francis e-Library.
  18. Dogan, S., & Kavtelek, C. (2015). “Perceptions of lifelong learning institution administrators about lifelong learning.” Abant Izzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 15 (1), 82-104. Accessed September 21, 2017, http://dergipark.gov.tr/aibuefd/issue/1514/18417 
  19. Dye, T. (1992). Understanding public policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  20. Eraslan, L. (2011). “Sociological metaphors.” Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 27, 1-22. Accessed August 28, 2017, http://eski.bingol.edu.tr/media/262572/9sosyolojikdusunme-SOSYOLOJiK-METAFORLAR.pdf 
  21. Furlong J., & Phillips, R. (2001). Introduction and rationale In, R. Phillips & J. Furlong (Eds.). Education, reform and the state: Twenty-five years of politics, policy and practice. (pp.3-11). London: RoutledgeFalmer. 
  22. Gentles, S. J., Charles, C., Ploeg, J., & McKibbon, K. (2015). “Sampling in qualitative research: Insights from an overview of the methods literature.” The Qualitative Report, 20 (11), 1772-1789. http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol20/iss11/5 
  23. Grudens-Schuck, N., Allen, B. L., & Larson, K. (2004). Methodology brief: Focus group fundamentals. Extension Community and Economic Development Publications, 12. Accessed January 29, 2018, http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/extension_communities_pubs/12 
  24. Hasci, T. A. (2003). Children as pawns: The politics of educational reform. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  25. Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2006). Methods in educational research: From theory to practice. USA: Jossey-Bass. 
  26. March, J., & Simon, H. (1959). Organizations. New York: Wiley.
  27. Meşeci-Giorgetti, F., & Batır, B. (2008). “İsmet İnönü’nün cumhurbaşkanliğı döneminde eğitim politikaları”. Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları, 13 (14), 27-55.
  28. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. A. (1994). An expanded sourcebook qualitative data analysis. London, UK: Sage.
  29. Morris, D. (1997). “A drift in the sea of innovations: A response to Alexander, Murphy, and Woods.” Educational Researcher 27 (2), 22-26.
  30. Moser, K. S. (2000). “Metaphor analysis in psychology-method, theory, and fields of application.” Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1 (2), 1-10. Accessed July 30, 2017, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0002212
  31. Moser, K. S. (2001). “Metaphor research in cognitive psychology and in social psychology - A review.” Journal for Psychology, 9 (4), 17-34. 
  32. Musolff, A. (2012). “The study of metaphor as part of critical discourse analysis.” Critical Discourse Studies, 9 (3), 301-310. Accessed January 29, 2018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2012.688300 
  33. Nalcacı, A., & Bektas, F. (2012). “Teacher candidates’ perceptions regarding the concept of school.” Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırsehir Education Faculty, 13 (1), 239-258. Accessed December 29, 2017, http://kefad.ahievran.edu.tr/ 
  34. Nitta, K. A. (2008). The politics of structural education reform. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
  35. Noddings, N. (2003). Happiness and education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  36. OECD (2010). The high cost of low educational performance: The long-run economic impact of improving PISA outcomes. Accessed April 19, 2017, https://www.oecd.org/pisa/44417824.pdf 
  37. Olssen, M., Codd, J., & O’Neill, A. M. (2004). Education policy: Globalization, citizenship and democracy. New York: Sage Publications.
  38. Orucu, D. (2014). “Pre-service teachers’ metaphors towards school, school administrators and Turkish Education System.” Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 20 (3), 327-358. Accessed December 19, 2017, www.kuey.net/index.php/kuey/article/view/kuey.2014.014 
  39. Ozdemir, M. (2012). “Examination of high school students’ metaphorical school.” Education and Science, 37 (163), 97-106. Accessed November 19, 2017, http://eb.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/viewFile/778/340 
  40. Ozdemir, S., & Akkaya, E. (2013). “The analysis of secondary school students’ and teachers’ mental images of school and ideal school by using metaphor.” Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 19 (2), 295-322. Accessed April 19, 2017, http://dergipark.gov.tr/kuey/issue/10320/126565  
  41. Peters, R. S. (2010). Ambiguities in liberal education and the problem of its content. (Eds. K. A. Strike, & K. Egan). In Ethics and educational policy. (p.2-14). Boston: Taylor & Francis Group.
  42. Phillips, R. (2002). Education, the state and the politics of reform: The historical context, 1976-2001. In, R. Phillips & J. Furlong (Eds.). Education, reform and the state: Twenty-five years of politics, policy and practice. (pp.12-24). London: RoutledgeFalmer. 
  43. Resmi Gazete. (1961). Date, January, 1961. Issue: 10705.
  44. Resmi Gazete. (1997). Date: August, 1997. Issue: 23084.
  45. Saban, A. (2008). “Metaphors about school.” Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 14(3), 459-496. Accessed December 25, 2017, https://www.pegem.net/dosyalar/dokuman/36365-2011060393525-06_sabanahmet.pdf 
  46. Saglam, M., Ozudogru, F., Cıray, F. (2011). Avrupa Birliği eğitim politikalari ve Türk Eğitim Sistemine etkileri. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 8 (1), 87‐109 http://efdergi.yyu.edu.tr  
  47. Schmitt, R. (2005). “Systematic metaphor analysis as a method of qualitative research.” The Qualitative Report, 10 (2), 358-394. Accessed 30 July, 2017 http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR10-2/schmitt.pdf 
  48. Sezer, S. (2016). “School administrators’ opinions on frequently changing regulations related to appointments and relocation: A new model proposal.” Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16 (2), 335-356. DOI 10.12738/estp.2016.2.0197.
  49. Sezgin-Nartgun, Ş., & Gokcer, I. (2014). “Metaphorical perceptions of pedagogical formation students on their occupation, future, employment and education policies.” e-International Journal of Educational Research, 5 (4), 57-69. Accessed July 29, 2017, http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/89827  
  50. Short, G. (2005). Holocaust, education and citizenship: A view from the United Kingdom. In, M. Leicester, C. Modgil, & S. Modgil (Eds.). Education, culture and values. (pp.2-23). London: Taylor & Francis e-Library. 
  51. Spring, J. (2009). Globalization of education. New York, NY: Routledge. 
  52. Steen, G. (2011). “The language of knowledge management: A linguistic approach to metaphor analysis.” Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 28, 181-188. DOI:10.1002/sres.1087 Accessed July 29, 2017, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sres.1087/pdf  
  53. Stromquist, N. P. (2005). Conceptual and empirical issues in educational innovations. In, N. P. Stromquist & M. L. Basile (Eds.). Politics of educational innovations in developing countries: An analysis of knowledge and power. (pp.2-16). New York: Falmer Press.
  54. Suri, H. (2011). “Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis.” Qualitative Research Journal, 11 (2), 63-75. DOI 10.3316/QRJ1102063. Accessed December 29, 2017, http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30064369 
  55. Thornburg, D. (2002). The new basics: Education and the future of work in telematics age. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Publications.
  56. Tural, N., & Karakutuk, K. (1991). Eğitim politikası. Eğitim ve Bilim, 15 (82), 16-24.
  57. Warnock, M. (1977). Schools of thought. London: Faber and Faber.
  58. Whitty, G. (2005). Making sense of education policy: Studies in the sociology and politics of education. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
  59. Yildirim, A., & Simsek, H. (2013). Qualitative research methods in social sciences. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  60. Yuner, B., & Ozdemir, M. (2017). “Examination of the relationship between metaphoric school perception and school dropout tendency according to students’ opinions.” Gazi University Journal of Gazi Education Faculty, 37 (3), 1041-1060. DOI: 10.17152/gefad.303842. Accessed January 28, 2018, http://www.gefad.gazi.edu.tr/download/article-file/393060   
  61. Zheng, H., & Song, W. (2010). “Metaphor analysis in the educational discourse: A critical review.” US-China Foreign Language, 8 (9), 42-49. Accessed January 28, 2018, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED514704.pdf