ABSTRACT: In an effort to upgrade and modernize the Turkish educational system for both internal economic and social development and in response to the potential for Turkish accession into the European Union, a comprehensive reform of the education sector was attempted during the 1990s, funded in large measure from loans from international agencies such as the World Bank. This paper augments a series of recent studies which have examined the effectiveness of those reform efforts in teacher education reform in Turkey, specifically the development of new school curricula at both elementary and secondary levels (Grossman, Onkol, and Sands, 2007); programs to restructure academic programs in faculties of education across the nation (Grossman and Sands, 2008); and the establishment of accreditation standards for Turkish teachers (Grossman, Sands, and Brittingham, forthcoming). It identifies a persistent theme found in the earlier studies which note that while these reforms were successful by many “objective” criteria, Turkish teacher educators across all structural lines were reluctant to credit the administrative authorities responsible for the reform, even though the reforms themselves were demanded by professional educators in the nation and those demands were largely met. Moreover, while the earlier studies showed some differences in attitudes as a function of personal involvement in the decisions themselves, further inquiry suggests a far deeper respondent reaction which identifies a distrust of and disappointment with the manner in which the reforms were introduced, particularly the “top-down” nature of the changes. This paper utilizes not only the literature of attitudinal differentiation to identify clusters of factors accounting for response differences in the Turkish teacher education community but also examines the potential contribution of studies of institutional, social, and organizational power and authority in explaining the acceptance of specific reforms while rejecting the value/utility of those reforms in a general context. The paper utilizes both quantitative and qualitative data analytic formats and permits examination of the potentially conflicting perspectives of Turkish teacher educators and institutional leaders across the country. Quantitative analysis will employ both descriptive and inferential data analytic techniques. Qualitative analysis will amplify and elaborate the evident conflicts in reponse patterns, Further, the paper examines the theoretical implications for the modernization of teacher education in a national context. Finally, it addresses issues that should be considered for other nations with similar developmental goals.

In 2003-2004, a major study of the effects of the reforms of Turkish teacher education was conducted under the sponsorship of the Fulbright Commission for Educational Exchange Between the United States and Turkey, the largest study of teacher educator attitudes ever conducted in Turkey. The study was founded on a three-part survey of teacher educators and institutional leaders across Turkey and includes both structured and open-ended questions to general issues pertaining to recent reforms as well as the content of specific educational policy changes that were implemented. Respondents were professional university-level teacher educators of all professorial ranks, a subsample of which participated in lenghty personal follow-up interviews on these issues (Levels 1 and 2 of the study). Finally, a sample of Turkish positional leaders were interviewed for their perspectives on these issues, permitting comparisons of attitude responses with the teacher educator sample (Level 3 of the study).

1. Attitudes toward the efficacy of education reform are in part a function of proximity to the decision-making process and decision-makers. 2. Knowledge about the restructuring criteria influences attitudes toward its perceived value. 3. Structural factors (i.e., teacher educator age, rank, position, etc.) are of limited predictive value, in contrast to some arguments found in the literature. 4. Participation in decision-making is a partial, albeit inadequate, explanation of attitude differences. 5. Attitudes toward the agencies of promoting reform are prior to and heavily influence attitudes toward change, regardless of content issues themselves.