Public Education Centers (PECs) are public non-formal education institutions which are the main provider of adult education in Turkey for more than 50 years. Each year more than one million people participate in the activities in PECs which range from socio-cultural to vocational courses. They are neither schools, nor universities, foundations, nor associations. PECs serve to a very different group of learners as an adult education agency. In terms of their administration, they are part of a highly centralized and bureaucratic system of national education, and they are bound to act within the limits drawn by the laws, by-laws and regulations at the macro level. However, what happens in each individual center at the micro level is utmost important to understand the admistrative processes of these centers. Yet, administration of these centers has not been an attractive research issue previously and has been left untouched. This study aimed at providing necessary information to examine what is happening inside the centers in order to get a better insight of the operation and improvision of them. Along with this general aim, the purpose of the study was to analyze the decision making process which is considered to be the heart of the administrative processes of any organization of public education centers in terms of participation, and democracy level. This paper describes the situation of decision making process as an administrative process in PECs, especially from the point of teachers' participation in decision making process fousing on the following questions;1) Which types of decisions are teachers and tutors involved in PECs? 2) What do participants of the study think about teachers' and tutors' participation in decision making process in PECs? 3) What is the perceived level of democracy in decision making process in PECs according to position of participants (being an administrator, or part-time or full-time teacher)? 4) What is the percieved level happiness of working in PECs according to position of the participants (being an administrator or part-time or full-time teacher)? This study is a descriptive field study aiming to analyze the decision making process in Public Education Centers (PECs)in Istanbul, Turkey. In order to achieve this aim, both qualitative and quantitative research methods were applied. Quantitative research features were utilized to obtain more objective data and qualitative research features were used to attain indebt and more detailed information. In order to guarantee the equal representation of PECs with different characteristics, purposeful sampling method was used. In the sample selection procedures, first of all 33 centers were ranked according to organizational complexity on the basis of the number of the courses offered by the centers. Then, the outliers; the top and the bottom centers were excluded, and remaining centers were stratified into three groups according to organizational complexity as "simple", "medium" and "high", and twelve centers, four centers from each complexity group were selected. All of the staff working in these 12 centers constituted the sample of the study. From 12 PECs, 176 educators (10 principals, 4 head of vice-principles, 19 vice-principals, 2 counselors, 45 full-time teachers/tutors, and 96 part-time teachers/tutors) were included in the study. Data were gathered through a questionnaire developed by the researcher which included closed-ended and open-ended items as well as ranking items. Results were quite interesting. Main conclusions of the study can be stated as follows; o Full-time and part-time teaching staff's level of participation in decision making process of their center was evaluated as sufficient both by the administrators and teachers.o Most of the teaching staff in PECs does not want to participate in decision making more than they do. Their identification of decisions which they should participate in was completely related to instruction, students and themselves. They do not want to involve in administrative decisions like staffing, budgeting or public relations.o General democracy level was evaluated as quiet high, even tough teachers complain about lack of participative / collective decision making, and even tough they reported that principals make nearly all of the decisions.o Most of the personnel reported that they are very happy of working in centers and being a part of that center.(Some of the main references) Anderson, K. (2002). Why teachers participate in decision-making and the thirdcontinuum. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 23. Retrieved on April 2005, from http://www.umanitoba.ca/publications/cjeap/articles/anderson.html Darkenwald, G. G. & Merriam, S. B. (1982). Adult education: Foundations ofpractice. New York: Harper & Row. Duman, A. (2001). An overview on adult education research in Turkey. ESREAConference. Geneva, Switzerland. Retrieved February 28, 2006 from http://www.unige.ch/fapse/esrea02/papers/Paper%20Duman-4.3.02.docGriffiths, D. E. (1969). Administration as decision-making, In Corver, F. D. &Sergiovanni, T. J. (eds.) Organization and human behavior: focus on schools. (pp. 138-149). New York: McGraw Hill Book Company.Harrison, E. F. (1987). The managerial decision making process. Boston: HoughtonMifflin Company. Hoy, W. K. & Miskel, C. G. (2001). Educational administration: Theory, research,and practice. Boston: McGraw-Hill.Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy toandragogy. Chicago: Follett Publishing Company Knox, A. B. (Ed.). (1982). Developing, administering and evaluating adulteducation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Lunenburg, F. C. & Ornstein, A. C. (2000). Educational administration: Conceptsand practices (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. A European or International Journal