Hollanda Eğitim Sistemi ve Eğitimde Özelleştirme Uygulamaları: Türk Eğitim Sistemi ile Karşılaştırmalı Bir İnceleme
Özet
Bu çalışma, Semih ÇAYAK tarafından kaleme alınmış olup Hollanda ve Türkiye eğitim sistemlerini özelleştirme uygulamaları ve finansman yapıları açısından karşılaştırmalı olarak incelemektedir. 1917 anayasal reformuna dayanan Hollanda eğitim sistemi, eğitim özgürlüğü ilkesi çerçevesinde hem kamu hem de özel okullara eşit devlet finansmanı sağlamaktadır. Ülkedeki okulların yaklaşık %70'i özel yönetimli (dernek veya vakıf) olmasına rağmen, bu kurumlar kâr amacı gütmeyen ve devlet tarafından finanse edilen "devlet eğitimi" niteliğindedir. Zorunlu eğitimin 5-16 yaş arası olduğu Hollanda'da, ilköğretim sonrasında öğrenciler yetenek ve tercihlerine göre akademik (HAVO, VWO) veya mesleki (VMBO, MBO) ortaöğretim yollarına ayrılmaktadır. Yükseköğretim ise araştırma üniversiteleri ve uygulamalı bilimler üniversiteleri şeklinde ikili bir yapı sunar. 2010-2018 yılları verilerine göre Hollanda'nın öğrenci başına yaptığı eğitim harcamaları OECD ortalamasının üzerindeyken, Türkiye OECD ortalamasının oldukça altında kalmıştır. Hollanda, PISA ve TIMSS gibi uluslararası sınavlarda yüksek başarı sergilemektedir. Çalışmada, Türkiye için uzun vadeli kararlı politikalar geliştirilmesi, herkes için kaliteli ücretsiz kamu eğitimi sunulması, özel okulların sıkı denetlenmesi ve düşük gelirli öğrencilere destek sağlanması önerilmektedir.
Authored by Semih ÇAYAK, this study comparatively analyzes the Dutch and Turkish education systems in terms of privatization practices and financing structures. Based on the 1917 constitutional framework, the Dutch education system grants equal state funding to both public and private schools under the principle of freedom of education. Although nearly 70% of schools in the Netherlands are privately managed by foundations or religious associations, these non-profit institutions essentially operate as state-funded public education. Compulsory for children aged 5 to 16, the system tracks primary school graduates into academic (HAVO, VWO) or vocational (VMBO, MBO) secondary pathways based on their abilities and national test results, while higher education features a dual structure of research and applied sciences universities. Data from 2010 to 2018 show that Dutch education expenditure per student consistently exceeds OECD averages, whereas Turkey falls significantly below. Coupled with strong state supervision and equal public funding, the Dutch model yields high international test scores in PISA and TIMSS. Consequently, the study recommends that Turkey establish stable long-term policies, preserve high-quality free public education, enforce strict state regulations on private institutions, and provide financial support mechanisms for disadvantaged students to access private education.
Referanslar
Bakioğlu, A. ve Sarıkaya, A. (2015). Eğitimde özelleştirme, avantaj ve dezavantajlar. Ankara: Nobel yayıncılık.
Belfield, C. ve Levin, H. (2002). Education privatization: Causes, consequences and planning implications. Fundamentals of educational planning-no. 74, UNESCO. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.520.1764&rep=rep1&type=pdf
CBS (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek). (2012). StatLine. Netherlands: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. http://statline.cbs.nl/Statweb/
De Boer, E. (2005). The dynamics of school location and school transportation. TR News, 237, 11–16. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trnews/trnews237schoollocation.pdf
Deborah, N., Henry, B., Gábor, H., & Paulo, S. (2014). OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education: Netherlands 2014. OECD Publishing.
Education Inspectorate (2012). The Dutch inspectorate of education. http://www.onderwijsinspectie.nl/english/summary-profile-of-the-dutch-inspectorate-of-education
EP-Nuffic (2015). Education system Netherlands, https://www.nuffic.nl/en/home/copyright.
Eurydice (2009), Organisation of the education system in the Netherlands 2008/09, Brussels: Eurydice / European Commission. http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/index_en.php
Gonzales, P., Williams, T., Jocelyn, L., Roey, S., Kastberg, D. ve Brenwald, S. (2008). Highlights from TIMSS 2007: Mathematics and Science Achievement of US Fourth-and Eighth-Grade Students in an International Context. NCES 2009-001. National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009001.pdf
Güngör, G. ve Göksu, A. (2013). Türkiye’de eğitimin finansmanı ve ülkelerarası bir karşılaştırma. Yönetim ve Ekonomi: Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 20 (1), 59-72.
Holzhacker, D., Chornoivan, O., Yazilitas, D., ve Dayan-Ochir, K. (2009). Privatization in higher education: Cross-country analysis of trends, policies, problems, and solutions. Issue Brief. Institute for Higher Education Policy. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED508091.pdf
Hupe P. L. ve Meijs, L. C. P. M. (2000). Hybrid governance: The impact of the nonprofit sector in the Netherlands. The Hague: Social and Cultural Planning Office. file:///C:/Users/w%C4%B1n7/Desktop/Hybrid_Governance.pdf
Kaiser, F. ve Vossensteyn, J. J. (2005), Access in Dutch higher education: Policies and trends, Ted Tapper ve David Palfreyman (edt.), Understanding mass higher education, Comparative perspectives on access, London: RoutledgeFalmer. https://www.routledge.com/Understanding-Mass-Higher-Education-Comparative-Perspectives-on-Access/Palfreyman-TAPPER/p/book/9780415354912
Karsten, S. (1999). Neoliberal education reform in the Netherlands.Comparative education, 35(3), 303-317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050069927847
Kasapçopur, A. (2007). Avrupa Birliği ülkelerinde eğitim denetimi. Ankara: MEB Teftiş Kurulu Başkanlığı Yayını.
Levin, H. M., Cornelisz, I., ve Hanisch-Cerda, B. (2013). Does educational privatisation promote social justice? Oxford Review of Education, 39(4), 514-532. http://0213eb0pq.y.http.eds.b.ebscohost.com.proxy2.marmara-elibrary.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&sid=a6e528ff-fcf3-45b0-a755-6f90fd8ed7fe%40sessionmgr120&hid=112
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., Kelly, D. L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 international results in mathematics and science. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/international-results/
NUFFIC. (2003). Higher education in the Netherlands: The system, degrees and diplomas. Netherlands Organization for International Cooperation in Higher Education.https://www.epnuffic.nl/en/publications/find-a-publication/education-system-the-netherlands.pdf
OCW. (2011). Key figures 2006–2010. Netherlands: Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. http://www.kcco.nl/doc/kennisbank/key_figures_2006-2010.pdf
OECD (2010). PISA 2009 Results: What makes a school successful? Resources, policies and practices (Volume IV), OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/48852721.pdf
OECD (2012). Public and private schools: How management and funding relate to their socio-economic profile, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264175006-en adresinden 11.03.2016 tarihinde alınmıştır.
OECD (2013). PISA 2012 Results: What makes schools successful? Resources, policies and practices (Volume IV), PISA, OECD Yayınları.
OECD (2022a). Education spending (indicator). doi: 10.1787/ca274bac-en
OECD (2022b). Public spending on education (indicator). doi: 10.1787/f99b45d0-en
OECD (2022c). Private spending on education (indicator). doi: 10.1787/6e70bede-en
OECD (2022d). Spending on tertiary education (indicator). doi: 10.1787/a3523185-en
Patrinos, H. A. (2009). Private education provision and public finance: The Netherlands. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series.
Patrinos, H. A. (2013). Private education provision and public finance: the Netherlands. Education Economics, 21(4), 392-414. http://0213eb0qu.y.http.eds.b.ebscohost.com.proxy2.marmara-elibrary.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=1f3a7b73-8c9d-435f-b662-91c7cb4b80bb%40sessionmgr103&hid=126
Patrinos, H. A., Osorio, F. B., & Guáqueta, J. (2009). The role and impact of public-private partnerships in education. World Bank Publications.
Patrinos, H.A., F. Barrera-Osorio ve J. Guaqueta. (2009). The role and ımpact of public-private partnerships in education. Washington DC: World Bank. http://www.ungei.org/resources/files/Role_Impact_PPP_Education.pdf
UNESCO-IBE (2010). World data on education données mondiales de l’éducation datos mundiales de educación. World Data on Education. 7. baskı. http://www.ibe.unesco.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/WDE/2010/pdf-versions/Palestine.pdf
Vossensteyn, H. (2008). Country report of the Netherlands. Public/private funding of the higher education: a social balance (Edt: Astrid Schwarzenberger). HIS: Forum Hochschule (5). http://www.dzhw.eu/pdf/pub_fh/fh-200805.pdf
Vossensteyn, H. (2013). Widening participation in higher education in the Netherlands. CFE Research. http://doc.utwente.nl/88772/1/2013_WPeffectivenessNeth.pdf
Yıldırım, A., Özgürlük, B., Parlak, B., Gönen, E., & Polat, M. (2016). TIMSS 2015 ulusal matematik ve fen bilimleri ön raporu 4. ve 8. sınıflar. MEB: Ölçme, Değerlendirme ve Sınav Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.TOTL.GB.ZS?end=2018&locations=NL&start=1981&view=chart
http://data.worldbank.org/topic/education
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/education/data/main_tables
