Journal of Economy Culture and Society

GÖNDERBİLGİ
EnglishTürkçe

Araştırma Makalesi


DOI :10.26650/JECS346079   IUP :10.26650/JECS346079    Tam Metin (PDF)

Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi

Bilgehan Özbaylanlı, Mustafa Hilmi Çolakoğlu

Bu çalışmada kültürel sermayenin Türkiye’deki ortaokul öğrencilerinin öğrenim başarılarındaki rolü ele alınmaktadır. Bu çerçevede Bourdieu’nun (1986) kültürel sermaye ile öğrenim başarısı arasında var olduğunu öne sürdüğü güçlü ilişki, Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı tarafından sağlanan veriler kullanılarak regresyon modeliyle test edilmiştir. Bu sayede farklı kültürel sermaye faktörlerinin tek tek veya farklı bileşimler halinde öğrenim başarısında ne derece etkilerinin olduğu ortaya koyulmuştur. Analizlerde özel okullar ve devlet okulları arasındaki farklılaşmaya da yer verilmiştir. Çalışmada kültürel sermaye ile ilgili yoksunlukların öğrenim başarısını önemli ölçüde olumsuz etkilediği saptanmış ve söz konusu etkilerin düzeyleri ortaya konulmuştur. Özel okulların bu yoksunlukları azaltma konusunda devlet okullarına göre daha etkili olduğu gözlemlenmiştir. Bu bağlamda, özel okul destekleri sağlanırken iki ayaklı bir önceliklendirme politikası önerilmiştir. Bir taraftan sosyal içermeyi sağlamak üzere dezavantajlı gruplara odaklanılması, diğer taraftan ülkenin rekabeti gücünü ciddi oranda artırabilecek yıldız bilim insanları ve profesyoneller yetiştirmek üzere kültürel sermaye düzeyi en yüksek seviyede olan öğrencilere öncelik verilmesi önerilmektedir. Bu sonuçların doğuracağı sorular üzerine çeşitli araştırmalar önerilmekle birlikte benzer çalışmanın üniversite sınavı kullanılarak yapılmasının bu alandaki politikaların belirlenmesinde etkili bir veri sunacağı değerlendirilmektedir. 
Anahtar Kelimeler: Kültürel Sermaye, eğitim, öğrenim başarısı, aile özellikleri, Bourdieu
DOI :10.26650/JECS346079   IUP :10.26650/JECS346079    Tam Metin (PDF)

Effects of Cultural Capital on Educational Attainment in Turkey

Bilgehan Özbaylanlı, Mustafa Hilmi Çolakoğlu

This study investigates the role of cultural capital on educational attainment of secondary school students in Turkey. In this context, the strong role suggested and hypothesized by Bourdieu (1986) between cultural capital and educational attainment is tested with a regression model that utilizes the data provided by the Ministry of Education. Thus, the levels of effects of different types of cultural capital and their various combinations on educational attainment are demonstrated. Differentiation between private schools and public schools is also analyzed. Deprivations of cultural capital are found to negatively affect educational attainment to an important degree, and the levels of mentioned effects are detailed. Private schools are observed to perform significantly better in alleviating these negative effects for the students deprived of cultural capital, as well as executing an additional attainment boost to the students who possess the highest levels of cultural capital. In this regard, a two-pronged approach regarding incentives related to private schools is proposed; which on the one hand suggests to prioritize on the students who are deprived mostly of cultural capital in order to improve the levels of social inclusion in education and on the other hand advise to specialize students with the highest levels of cultural capital to nurture and produce more star scientists and professionals. Several further studies based on these findings are suggested, and especially a similar study using university entrance examinations results will potentially produce quite insightful findings. 
Anahtar Kelimeler: Cultural capital, education, educational attainment, family aspects, Bourdeiu

GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET


This study investigates the role of cultural capital on the educational attainment of secondary school students in Turkey. Bourdieu (1986) suggests that cultural capital is the most important and influential factor for educational attainment. The main objective of this study is to test the stated hypothesis, as well as to decipher the potential role of cultural capital on the Turkish education system. The main part of cultural capital is formed by the family, especially by the parental factors: Is the father and/or mother alive? Are they together or separated? What are the parents’ education levels and occupations? The gender of the student, as well as the number and gender of siblings, is also an important factor. The other important part of cultural capital is influenced and shaped by the environment. Geographic region, hometown, rural or urban residence, district, neighborhood and the house the family lives in are all have their impacts on formation of cultural codes of the student. The theoretical basis of the study is built on the action theory of Bourdieu (1986). Action theory postulates that action is a function of habitus, capital, and field. “Act” here corresponds to educational attainment. “Habitus” stands for the inclinations and tendencies, and as the subject group in this study are secondary school students, their habitus is mainly formed by family and immediate environment. Capital could be economic, cultural or social. Again, the capital of a student is mainly confined to the economic and cultural capital of the family and his or her network at the school and the neighborhood. The field for a student is also composed of home, neighborhood, and school. So under the action theory, we can simplify the functional elements of action (which would be a much more complex task in terms of analyzing an adult) into two main parts: the added value of the school and the factor related to cultural capital. This task would be more complex for an adult

In order to investigate the role of cultural capital on educational attainment, the dataset provided by the Ministry of Education is utilized and augmented with data from Ministry of Development and TEPAV, a Turkish think-tank. The dataset includes data for all secondary school students spread over four cohorts, and covers more than 3.7 million individual students. The outcome variable is the YEP score, which stands for the combined score including scores on both the general tests held nationwide and individual examinations in each classroom. Explanatory variables are a set of cultural capital factors, each of which are composed of ordered categorical subdivisions. In the analysis section, the levels of effects of different types of cultural capital factors and their various combinations on educational attainment are demonstrated. It is identified that deprivations of cultural capital negatively affects educational attainment to an important degree and the levels of mentioned effects are detailed. Study verifies the hypothesis of Bourdieu (1986), which suggests that the cultural capital is the principal factor that determines educational attainment. On a scale of 0 to 500 points of the possible range of YEP scores, the gap between the expected score of the student group with the least amount of cultural capital and the greatest amount of cultural capital is 311.08 points, which is quite sizable.

On the other hand, the most important cultural capital factors are found to be parents’ education levels, gender of student, parents’ occupations, having one’s own room at home, geographical region, parents’ marital status (together or separated) and the province of residence. The lower the level of parental education, the more deprived the student in cultural capital and the less successful in terms of educational attainment. The student is expected to be more successful if parents are working in the public sector and/or if they live in a public housing. Further related factors are observed to be more influential on the educational attainment of the student compared to mother related ones. Girls are found to be significantly more successful per se. Having one’s own room also boosts scores significantly. Only living in the least developed geographical regions has a significant negative effect on the educational attainment, while living in a moderately developed region outpaces living in the most developed regions. The human development level of the city is observed to have only slight effects. On the other hand, only living in the least developed provinces was observed to lead to significant disadvantage.

The differentiation between private schools and public schools is also analyzed within the study. Private schools are observed to perform significantly better in alleviating the mentioned negative effects on those students deprived of cultural capital, as well as executing an additional attainment boost to the students who possess highest levels of cultural capital. In this regard, a two-pronged approach suggested regarding incentives related to private schools, which on the one hand prioritize on the students who are deprived mostly of cultural capital in order to improve the levels of social inclusion in education and on the other hand specialize in students with the highest levels of cultural capital to nurture and produce more star scientists and professionals.

Several further studies based on these findings are suggested, and especially a similar study using the university entrance examinations results will potentially produce quite insightful findings.


PDF Görünüm

Referanslar

  • Akar, H. (2010). Challenges for schools in communities with internal migration flows: Evidence from Turkey. International Journal of Educational Development, 30, 263–276. google scholar
  • Arun, Ö. (2012). Cultivated citizens? Cultural capital, class, gender and generations in contemporary Turkey. METU Studies in Development, 39(3), 283–302. google scholar
  • Arun, Ö. (2014). İnce zevkler-olağan beğeniler: Çağdaş Türkiye’de kültürel eşitsizliğin yansımaları. Cogito, 76, 167–191. google scholar
  • Baxter, J., Weston, R., & Lixia, Q. (2011). Family structure, co-parental relationship quality, post-separation paternal involvement and children’s emotional wellbeing. Journal of Family Studies, 17(2), 86–109. google scholar
  • Berberoğlu, G. ve Kalender, İ. (2005). Öğrenci başarısını yıllara, okul türlerine, bölgelere göre incelenmesi: ÖSS ve PISA analizi. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 22(4), 21–35. google scholar
  • Blake, J. (1985). Number of siblings and educational mobility. American Sociological Review, 50, 84–94. google scholar
  • Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York, NY: Greenwood Press. google scholar
  • Bourdieu, P. (2013). Seçilmiş metinler (L. Ünsaldı, Çev.). Ankara: Heretik Yayınları. google scholar
  • Bourdieu, P. ve Passeron, J. (2014). Varisler (L. Ünsaldı ve A. Sümer, Çev.). Ankara: Heretik Yayıncılık. google scholar
  • Bourdieu, P. ve Passeron, J. (2015). Yeniden üretim-eğitim sistemine ilişkin bir teorinin ilkeleri (A. Sümer, L. Ünsaldı ve Ö. Akkaya, Çev.). Ankara: Heretik Yayıncılık. google scholar
  • Bourdieu, P. ve Wacquant, L. (2012). Düşünümsel bir antropoloji için cevaplar. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
  • Bracke, P. F., Colman, E., Symoens, S. A., & Van Praag, L. (2010). Divorce, divorce rates, and professional careseeking for mental health problems in Europe: A crosssectional population-based study. BMC Public Health, 10, 224–235. google scholar
  • Caner, A., & Okten, C. (2013). Risk and career choice: Evidence from Turkey. Economics of Education Review, 29, 1060–1075. google scholar
  • Cansız, M. (2016). Türkiye’de akademik girişimcilik. Ankara: Kalkınma Bakanlığı. google scholar
  • Case, A., & Cally, A. (2006). The impact of parental death on school outcomes: Longitidula evidence from South Africa. Demography, 43(3), 402–420. google scholar
  • Cemalciler, Z., & Gökçen, F. (2014). Inequality in social capital: Social capital, social risk and drop-out in the Turkish education system. British Journal of Sociology of Education, google scholar
  • Ceylan, E. (2009). PISA 2006 sonuçlarına göre Türkiye’de fen okuryazarlığında düşük ve yüksek performans gösteren okullar arasındaki farklar. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(2), 55–75. google scholar
  • Chiu, M. M., & Xihua, Z. (2008). Family and motivation effects on mathematics achievement: Analyses of students in 41 countries. Learning and Instruction, 18, 321–336. google scholar
  • Coleman, J. S., Hoffer, T., & Kilgore, S. (1982). High school achievement. New York, NY: Basic Books. google scholar
  • Çelik, Ç. (2014). Sosyal sermaye, ebeveyn ağları ve okul başarısı. Cogito, 76, 265–289. google scholar
  • Ceylan, E. ve Berberoğlu, G. (2007). Öğrencilerin fen başarısını açıklayan etmenler: Bir modelleme çalışması. Eğitim ve Bilim / Education and Science, 32(144), 36–48. google scholar
  • Coleman, J. S. (1988). “Social Capital in Creation of Human Capital”. The American Journal of Sociology, 94(5), 95-120. google scholar
  • Cuff, E. C., Sharrock W. W. ve Francis D. W. (2013). Sosyolojide perspektifler (Ü. Tatlıcan, Çev.). İstanbul: Say Yayınları. google scholar
  • Çiftçi, C. ve Çağlar, Ç. (2014). Ailelerin sosyo-ekonomik özelliklerinin öğrenci başarısı üzerindeki etkisi: Fakirlik kader midir? International Journal of Human Sciences, 11(2), 155–175. google scholar
  • Dinçer, M. A. & Uysal, G. (2010). The determinants of student achievement in Turkey. International Journal of Educational Development, 30, 592–598. google scholar
  • Dinçer, B. ve Özaslan, M. (2004). İlçelerin sosyo-ekonomik gelişmişlik sıralaması araştırması. Ankara: Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı Müsteşarlığı Yayınları. google scholar
  • Ekinci, C. E. (2011). Bazı sosyoekonomik etmenlerin Türkiye’de yükseköğretime katılım üzerindeki etkileri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 36(160), 281–297. google scholar
  • Engin-Demir, C. (2009). Factors influencing the academic achievement of the Turkish urban poor. International Journal of Educational Development, 29, 17–29. google scholar
  • National Committee on Educational Objectives and Policies., & Gachathi, P. J. (1976). Report of the national committee on educational objectives and policies. Nairobi: Govt. Printer. google scholar
  • Garner, C. L., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1991). Neighborhood effects on educational attainment: A multilevel analysis. Sociology of Education, 64(4), 251–262. google scholar
  • Goksen, F., & Cemalcilar, Z. (2010). Social capital and cultural distance as predictors of early school dropout: Implications for community action for Turkish internal migrants. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 34(2), 163–175. google scholar
  • Göker, E. (2007). Ekonomik indirgemeci mi dediniz? içinde: G. Çetin, E. Göker, A. Arlı, Ü. Tatlıcan (Eds.), Ocak ve zanaat: Pierre Bourdieu derlemesi içinde (s. 277-302). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
  • Gürsakal, S. (2012). PISA 2009 öğrenci başarı düzeylerini etkileyen faktörlerin değerlendirilmesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 441–452. google scholar
  • Güvendir, M. A. (2014). Öğrenci başarılarının belirlenmesi sınavında öğrenci ve okul özelliklerinin Türkçe başarısı ile ilişkisi. Eğitim ve Bilim / Science and Education, 39(172), 163–180. google scholar
  • Kıncal, R. Y. ve Ulutaş, M. (2009). İlköğretim 8. Sınıf bilgisayar dersi amaçlarının gerçekleşme düzeyinin değerlendirilmesi. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(1), 293–312. google scholar
  • McEwan, P. J. (2003), Peer effects on student achievement: Evidence from Chile. Economics of Education Review, 22, 131–141. google scholar
  • Memon, G. R., Muhammad, F. J., & Muhammad, A. K. (2010). Impact of parental socioeconomic status on students’ educational achievement at secondary schools of district Malir, Karachi. Middle East Journal of Scientific Research, 6(6),678–687. google scholar
  • Molepo, L., Sodi, T., Maunganidze, L., & Mudhovozi, P. (2012). Behavioural and emotional development in children of divorce. Journal Of Psychology In Africa, 22(2), 251–254. google scholar
  • Özpınar, E. ve Koyuncu, E. (2016). Türkiye’de insani gelişmişlik iller arasında nasıl farklılaşıyor? 81 İl için insani gelişmişlik endeksi. http://www.tepav.org.tr/upload/files/1467929122-9.81_Il_icin_Insani_Gelismislik_Endeksi.pdf adresinden edinilmiştir. google scholar
  • Ritzer, G., Stepnisky, J. (2013). Çağdaş sosyoloji kuramları ve klasik kökleri, Çev: I. E. Howison. Ankara: De ki Basım Yayım Ltd. Şti. google scholar
  • Saifi, S., & Mehmood, T. (2011). Effect of socioeconomic status on students’ achievement. International Journal of Social Science and Education, 1(2), 119–128. google scholar
  • Sarıer, Y. (2010). Ortaöğretime giriş sınavları (OKS-SBS) ve PISA sonuçları ışığında eğitimde fırsat eşitliğinin değerlendirilmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(3), 107–129. google scholar
  • Swartz, D. L. (2013). Kültür ve iktidar, Pierre Bourdieu’nun sosyolojisi (E. Gen, Çev.). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
  • Şişman, M. (2010). Eğitim bilimine giriş. Ankara: Pe­gem Araştırmaları. google scholar
  • Tansel, A. (2002). Determinants of school attainment of boys and girls in Turkey: İndividual, household and community factors. Economics of Education Review, 21, 455–470. google scholar
  • Tansel, A., & Bircan, F. (2006). Demand for education in Turkey: A tobit analysis of private tutoring expenditures. Economics of Education Review, 25, 303–313. google scholar
  • Teachman, J. D. (1987). Family background, educational resources, and educational attainment. American Sociological Review, 52(4), 548–557. google scholar
  • The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). PISA-2009 results: Overcoming social background – equity in learning opportunities and outcomes (Volume II). Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/48852584.pdf google scholar
  • Türk Eğitim Derneği. (2008). Ortaöğretime geçiş sistemi sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. Ankara: Yazar. google scholar
  • Useem, E. L. (1992). Middle schools and maths groups: Parents’ involvement in children’s placement. Sociology of Education, 65, 263–279. google scholar
  • Yağmurlu, B., Çıtlak, B. ve Leyendecker, B. (2009). Türk annelerin çocuk sosyalleştirme hedefleri: Eğitime bağlı kültür-içi değişimin incelenmesi. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 24, 1–15. google scholar
  • Yanıklar, C. (2010). Kültürel sermaye, eğitim ve toplumsal tabakalaşma: Pierre Bourdieu’nun yeniden üretim kuramına eleştirel bir bakış. Sosyoloji Dergisi, 22, 121–138. google scholar
  • Yavuz, S., Odabaş, M. ve Özdemir, A. (2016). Öğrencilerin sosyoekonomik düzeylerinin TEOG matematik başarısına etkisi. Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi, 7(1), 85–95. google scholar
  • Yelgün, A. ve Karaman, İ. (2015). Düşük sosyoekonomik düzeydeki mahallede bulunan bir ilköğretim okulunda akademik başarıyı düşüren faktörler nelerdir? Eğitim ve Bilim, 40(179), 259–268. google scholar
  • Zembar, M. J., & Blume, L. B. (2009). Gender and academic achievement. Middle childhood development: A contextual approach. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice Hall. google scholar

Atıflar

Biçimlendirilmiş bir atıfı kopyalayıp yapıştırın veya seçtiğiniz biçimde dışa aktarmak için seçeneklerden birini kullanın


DIŞA AKTAR



APA

Özbaylanlı, B., & Çolakoğlu, M. (2018). Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 0(58), 127-152. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS346079


AMA

Özbaylanlı B, Çolakoğlu M. Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi. Journal of Economy Culture and Society. 2018;0(58):127-152. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS346079


ABNT

Özbaylanlı, B.; Çolakoğlu, M. Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 58, p. 127-152, 2018.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Özbaylanlı, Bilgehan, and Mustafa Hilmi Çolakoğlu. 2018. “Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0, no. 58: 127-152. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS346079


Chicago: Humanities Style

Özbaylanlı, Bilgehan, and Mustafa Hilmi Çolakoğlu. “Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0, no. 58 (Apr. 2025): 127-152. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS346079


Harvard: Australian Style

Özbaylanlı, B & Çolakoğlu, M 2018, 'Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi', Journal of Economy Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 58, pp. 127-152, viewed 28 Apr. 2025, https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS346079


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Özbaylanlı, B. and Çolakoğlu, M. (2018) ‘Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi’, Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 0(58), pp. 127-152. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS346079 (28 Apr. 2025).


MLA

Özbaylanlı, Bilgehan, and Mustafa Hilmi Çolakoğlu. “Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 58, 2018, pp. 127-152. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS346079


Vancouver

Özbaylanlı B, Çolakoğlu M. Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi. Journal of Economy Culture and Society [Internet]. 28 Apr. 2025 [cited 28 Apr. 2025];0(58):127-152. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS346079 doi: 10.26650/JECS346079


ISNAD

Özbaylanlı, Bilgehan - Çolakoğlu, Mustafa Hilmi. “Türkiye’de Kültürel Sermayenin Öğrenim Başarısı Üzerine Etkisi”. Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0/58 (Apr. 2025): 127-152. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS346079



ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ


Gönderim26.10.2017
Kabul16.08.2018
Çevrimiçi Yayınlanma30.10.2018

LİSANS


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


PAYLAŞ




İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.