Araştırma Makalesi


DOI :10.26650/JECS2020-801234   IUP :10.26650/JECS2020-801234    Tam Metin (PDF)

Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi

Metin ToprakYüksel BayraktarSayım YorgunAyfer Özyılmaz

Türk üniversiteleri son birkaç yıldan bu yana YÖK’ün ve TÜBİTAK’ın geliştirdiği yenilikçi ve girişimci üniversite, araştırma üniversitesi, bölgesel kalkınma odaklı misyon üniversitesi olarak gruplandırılmakta ve bu yönde çalışma yapmaya özendirilmektedir. Covid-19, dijitalleşmeyi öncelikli hale getirmiştir. Avrupa Komisyonu da yükseköğrenimde dijitalleşmeyi öncelikli alan ilan etmiştir. Bu çalışmada, yükseköğrenimde dönüşüm boyutları ışığında, İÜ İktisat Fakültesi için bir dijital araştırma fakültesi modeli geliştirilmiştir. Bu modelin daha genel çerçevede üniversiteye veya daha dar kapsamda bölüm bazında da uyarlanabileceği değerlendirilmektedir. Modelin ilk bileşeninde çevrimiçi eğitim, eğitim 4.0, web 3.0, mikro rozetler, dijital dönüşüm, araştırma konsepti, Bologna Süreci, yeterlilik çerçeveleri, 21’inci yüzyıl becerileri, çekirdek yetkinlikler, akreditasyon ve kurumsal değerlendirme boyutları dikkate alınmıştır. Modelin ikinci bileşeni, yeni eğitim paradigmasıyla uyumlu olarak yeni nesil ofisler ve komitelere ilişkindir. Modelin üçüncü bileşeni, dijitalleşme, paydaş katılımı, araştırma fakültesi, çevrimiçi eğitim, mezun profili ve yönetişim modeline ilişkin metrikleri kapsamaktadır. Modelin dördüncü bileşeni, çeşitli boyutlara ilişkin olarak iç ve dış paydaşlarla iletişim stratejisine ilişkindir. Modelin beşinci ve son bileşeni yeni yaklaşımı somutlaştırarak uygulayacak yönetişim modelinin kurgulanmasına ilişkindir. 20 akran fakülte bazında uygulaması yapılan modelin bir bütün olarak yükseköğrenimde dönüşümü uluslararası trendlere paralel olarak sağlayacak bir yapıya, esnekliğe ve dinamizme sahip olduğu değerlendirilmektedir. 

DOI :10.26650/JECS2020-801234   IUP :10.26650/JECS2020-801234    Tam Metin (PDF)

Digital Transformation, Research University and Restructuring of Higher Education: A Model Proposal for Istanbul University Faculty of Economics

Metin ToprakYüksel BayraktarSayım YorgunAyfer Özyılmaz

Turkey’s higher education and scientific research authorities have categorized the country’s universities as innovative and entrepreneurial universities, research universities, or regional development-oriented universities, and have encouraged them to work in the corresponding direction. With COVID-19, digitalization has become an exceptionally prominent issue in higher education. The European Commission has declared digitalization in higher education to be a priority area. With these factors in mind, a digital research faculty model has been developed for Istanbul University Faculty of Economics, using 20 peer faculty websites to establish proof of concept. This model can be adapted to the university as a whole in a more general framework or to a particular department in a narrower context. The model has five components: (i) It is informed by ideas and discourse in online education, education 4.0, web 3.0, micro badges, digital transformation, research concepts, the Bologna Process, qualification frameworks, 21st century skills, core competencies, accreditation, and institutional evaluation; (ii) it proposes new generation offices and committees in line with the new education paradigm; (iii) it implements metrics related to digitization, stakeholder engagement, research faculty, online education, graduate profile, and governance model; (iv) it engages in a communication strategy with internal and external stakeholders; and (v) it establishes a governance model that will embody and implement the new approach. The model has been implemented on the basis of 20 peer faculties, but could be expanded for use by the entire university or narrowed for the benefit of a specific program.


GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET


Although digitalization has been on the agenda of Turkish universities over the last 10 years, approaches to it have not been systematic. The Council of Higher Education has developed the concepts of the innovative and entrepreneurial university, the research university, and the mission university focused on regional development, and has started to classify applicant universities accordingly. In the wake of COVID-19, the concept of digitalization has gained exceptional prominence.

Digitalization is the result of technological development and pertains to means, scope, and modes of operation rather than to content. Nonetheless, through feedback it also affects the quality, quantity, production, and presentation of content. Digitalization may be conceptualized economically as industry 4.0 in the economy, socially as society 5.0, and educationally as education 4.0. While new jobs that emerge as a result of digitalization require new skills, there will no longer be a need for skills related to jobs that have disappeared.

Although concepts such as e-learning, e-education, web-based learning, internet learning, distance learning, open education, blended learning, mixed learning, etc. each possess particular nuances, they can be used interchangeably. Blended education is defined as a mix of e-learning and face-to-face education. E-training involves designing face-to-face training in a complementary, supportive, and compensatory manner. E-education policy shapes change organizationally and pedagogically. With e-education, the possibility of a customized education for each student comes to the fore, as constraints of time and space are significantly overcome and the student’s opportunities and options for self-learning and group learning are enhanced.

In the literature, no meaningful systemic distinction is drawn between e-education and face-to-face education. New media have enabled a wider range and richness of tools and content for learning activities, relative to traditional course material. E-education is thus presented as a social rather than a technological revolution in terms of its implications and effects.

In the transition process to e-education, it is critical to have sufficient readiness at a corporate level. The factors used to determine the university’s digital readiness level can be listed as follows: (1) regulations, principles and rules, (2) management and operating model, (3) control, supervision, and evaluation, (4) communication network and model, (5) content production, (6) distributed systems, autonomous working, and integration level, (7) support services, (8) human resources policy, (9) education policy, (10) standards and quality assurance, (11) financing model, (12) security, (13) technology (hardware, software, sustainability), (14) psychological counseling and rehabilitation, (15) enterprise resource management, (16) in-service training, (17) new skills policy for new jobs, and (18) gamification policy and competence in education, research, and in-service training.

In the face of increasingly widespread digital technologies, changing ways of doing business, international integration of workforces, marketing, products, and services through networks, and the widespread use of robotic solutions and autonomous systems employing artificial intelligence, human resources must be equipped with digital skills and be kept up-to-date. Making digital infrastructure investments with their technological dimension, ensuring digital readiness in terms of human resources, designing a management and operating model with the appropriate architecture, and establishing decision-making, implementation, and feedback mechanisms with an autonomous system approach, constitute the pillars of the digital perspective.

The transformation of the web plays an important role in the evolution of digital learning. Web 1.0 refers conceptually to access to another location, text, or file via hyperlinks or linked text. Web 2.0 based applications dominate informal/free learning. In addition, web 2.0-based applications in formal and nonformal education are increasing rapidly. With the development of mobile applications, this is leading to structural changes in the editing, presentation, acquisition, and review processes of traditional face-to-face education. Web 3.0 technology offers artificial intelligence, augmented reality, the internet of things, big data analysis, and distributed and autonomous systems.

The transformation of the web plays an important role in the evolution of digital learning. Web 1.0 refers conceptually to access to another location, text, or file via hyperlinks or linked text. Web 2.0 based applications dominate informal/free learning. In addition, web 2.0-based applications in formal and nonformal education are increasing rapidly. With the development of mobile applications, this is leading to structural changes in the editing, presentation, acquisition, and review processes of traditional face-to-face education. Web 3.0 technology offers artificial intelligence, augmented reality, the internet of things, big data analysis, and distributed and autonomous systems.

The model has five key features. First, it is informed by ideas and discourse in online education, education 4.0, web 3.0, micro badges, digital transformation, research concepts, the Bologna Process, qualification frameworks, 21st century skills, core competencies, accreditation, and institutional evaluation dimensions. Second, it proposes new generation offices and committees in line with the new education paradigm. Third, it implements metrics related to digitalization, stakeholder engagement, research faculty, online education, graduate profile, and governance model. Fourth, it engages in a communication strategy with internal and external stakeholders. Finally, it establishes a governance model that will embody and implement the new approach.


PDF Görünüm

Referanslar

  • Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., Masa’deh, R., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating e-learning systems success: An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 67—86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004 google scholar
  • Al-Qahtani, A.Y., & Higgins, S.E. (2013). Effects of traditional, blended and e-learning on students’ achievement in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(3), 220—234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00490.x google scholar
  • Amhag, L., Hellström, L., & Stigmar, M. (2019). Teacher educators’ use of digital tools and needs for digital competence in higher education. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 35(4), 203—220. https:// doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1646169 google scholar
  • Annansingh-Jamieson, F. (2017). Gamified e-learning in higher education. Proceedings of the 44th Annual NBEA Conference, Port Jefferson, New York. 2017. google scholar
  • Aramburo, A. S. (2019). The future of national libraries. The Journal of National and International Library and Information Issues, 29(3), 225—227. https://doi.org/10.1177/0955749019892373 google scholar
  • Aldemir, T., Çelik, B., & Kaplan, G. (2018). A qualitative investigation of student perceptions of game elements in a gamified course. Computers in Human Behaviour, 78, 235—254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.001 google scholar
  • Ayebi-Arthur, K. (2017). E-learning, resilience and change in higher education: helping a university cope after a natural disaster. E-Learning and Digital Media, 14(5), 259—274. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753017751712 google scholar
  • Babic, T., Vilovic, G., & Tomic, L. B. (2019). The usage of social media for higher education purposes. INFuture2019: Knowledge in the Digital Age. 206—214. google scholar
  • Barna, B., & Fodor, S. (2017). An empirical study on the use of gamification on it courses at higher education. Proceedings of the International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL 2017): Teaching and Learning in a Digital World (pp. 684—692). google scholar
  • Berggren, B., Fili, A., & Nordberg, O. (2015). Digital examination in higher education - experiences from three different perspectives. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT). 11(3), 100—108. google scholar
  • Bloomberg, J. (2018, April). Digitization, digitalization, and digital transformation: confuse them at your peril. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonbloomberg/2018/04/29/digitization-digitalization-and-digital-transformation-confuse-them-at-your-peril/#7143f1a52f2c google scholar
  • Bogoviz, A. V. (2019). Diversification of educational services in the conditions of industry 4.0 on the basis of ai training. On the Horizon, 27(3/4), 206—212. google scholar
  • Bradley, L., & Soldo, B. (2011). The new information poor: how limited access to digital scholarly resources impacts higher education. The Serials Librarian, 61(3-4), 366—376. google scholar
  • Bridgstock, R. (2016). Educating for digital futures: what the learning strategies of digital media professionals can teach higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 53(3), 306—315. google scholar
  • Brown, J. S., & Adler, R. P. (2008). Minds on fire: Open education, the long tail, and learning 2.0. Educause Review, 43(1), 16—22. google scholar
  • Bykov, D., Frank, E., Surnin, O., Sitnikov, P., Ivaschenko, A., & Golovnin, O. (2019, September). Samara Polytech Innovation: Digital Campus 2.0. XXI International Conference Complex Systems: Control and Modeling Problems (CSCMP), Samara, Russia. doi: 10.1109/CSCMP45713.2019.8976613. google scholar
  • Caena, F. (2011). Literature review teachers’ core competences: requirements and development. European Commission. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/education/experts-groups/2011-2013/teacher/ teacher-competences_en.pdf. google scholar
  • Cabinet Office. (2020). Society 5.0. Retrieved from https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/english/society5_0/index. html#container google scholar
  • Carretero, S., Vuorikari, R., & Punie, Y. (2017). DigComp 2.1: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens with Eight Proficiency Levels and Examples of Use. EUR-Scientific and Technical Research Reports, No. 28558 google scholar
  • Cedefop. (2017). Defining, Writing and Applying Learning Outcomes: A European Handbook. Luxembourg: Publications Office. http://dx.doi.org/10.2801/566770 google scholar
  • Çakıroğlu, Ü., Başıbüyük, B., Güler, M., Atabay, M., & Memiş, B. Y. (2017). Gamifying an ICT course: Influences on engagement and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior. 69, 98—107. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.018. google scholar
  • Eggers, W. D., & Bellman, J. (2015). The journey to government’s digital transformation. deloitte insights. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/topics/digital-transformation/digital-transformation-ingovernment.html google scholar
  • Elabnody, M., Fouad, M., Maghraby, F., & Hegazy, A. (2017). Framework for Gamification Based E-Learning Systems for Higher Education in Egypt. International Journal of Intelligent Computing and Information Science, 17(4), 59—71. DOI: 10.21608/ijicis.2017.19816 google scholar
  • Felea, M., Albâstroiu, I., Vasiliu, C., & Georgescu, B. (2018, April). E-learning in higher education: Exploratory survey among Romanian students. The 14th International Scientific Conference E-Learning and Software for Education, Bucharest. google scholar
  • Figaredo, D. D., & Alvarez, J. F. A. (2019). Structural changes in the landscape of Spanish distance universities. Open Praxis, 11(2), 119—128. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.11.2.958 google scholar
  • GetMeACourse. (2018). What Are the Top Ten Skills That Employers Want? Retrieved from https://www. getmeacourse.com/blog/what-are-the-top-ten-skills-that-employers-want/ google scholar
  • Gonzalez, C. (2012). The relationship between approaches to teaching, approaches to e-teaching and perceptions of the teaching situation in relation to e-learning among higher education teachers. Instructional Science, 40(6), 975—998. google scholar
  • Hinds, J., & Joinson, A. N. (2108). What demographic attributes do our digital footprints reveal? A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE, 13(11), 1—40. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207112 google scholar
  • Iancu, B. (2019). Web crawler for indexing video e-learning resources: A youtube case study. Informatica Economica, 23(2), 15—23. DOI:10.12948/issn14531305/23.2.2019.02 google scholar
  • Jackson, N. C. (2019). Managing for competency with innovation change in higher education: examining the pitfalls and pivots of digital transformation. Business Horizons, 62, 761—772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. bushor.2019.08.002 google scholar
  • Jurva, R., Matinmikko-Blue, M., Niemelâ, V., & Nenonen, S. (2020). Architecture and operational model for smart campus digital infrastructure. Wireless Personal Communication,113, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-020-07221-5 google scholar
  • Kallioinen, O. (2010). Defining and comparing generic competences in higher education. European Educational Research Journal, 9(1), 56—68. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2010.9.1.56 google scholar
  • Khannanov, A. (2007). Digital Libraries in Education, Science and Culture: Analytical Survey. Moscow: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. google scholar
  • Kundi, G. M., Nawaz, A (2014). From e-learning 1.0 to e-learning 2.0: Threats & opportunities for higher education institutions in the developing countries. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 3(1), 145—160. Doi: 10.14207/ejsd.2014.v3n1p145 google scholar
  • Llewellyn, A. (2019). Innovations in learning and teaching in academic libraries: A literature review. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 25(2-4), 129—149. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2019.1678494 google scholar
  • Lockhoff, J., Wegejis, B., Durkin, K., Wagenaar, R., Gonzalez, J., Dalla Rosa, L., ... & Gobbi, M. (2010). A Tuning Guide to Formulating Degree Programme Profiles. Competences in Education and Recognition Project. Retrieved from http://www.core-project.eu/documents/Tuning_Guide_Publicada_CoRe.pdf google scholar
  • Lu, H. (2015). The construction and realization of digital-campus-based multi-media access control system. google scholar
  • International Conference of Educational Innovation through Technology, Wuhan. doi: 10.1109/EITT.2015.12. google scholar
  • Maria, M., Shahbodin, F., & Pee, N. C. (2018). Malaysian higher education system towards industry 4.0 - current trends overview. AIP Conference Proceedings. Baltimore: AIP Publishing LLC. google scholar
  • McConnell, D. (2018). E-learning in Chinese higher education: the view from inside. Higher Education. 75(4), 1031—1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0183-4 google scholar
  • Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: results from expert interviews. google scholar
  • Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 1—16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002 google scholar
  • Miller, G., Benke, M., Chaloux, B., Ragan, L. C., Schroeder, R., Smutz, W., & Swan, K. (2013). Leading the e-learning transformation of higher education: Meeting the challenges of technology and distance education. Stylus Publishing, LLC. google scholar
  • Min, Z. (2014). Research and development of virtual digital campus system based on android platform. 7th International Conference on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation. Changsha. google scholar
  • Morris, N. P. Swinnerton, B., & Coop, T. (2019). Support learning lecture notes: contested space between students and teachers. Computers & Education, 140, 1—23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103604 google scholar
  • Moss, M. (2008). Nine O’clock and all’s well’, or ‘fire, fire, the library’s burning: The future of the academic library. google scholar
  • Minerva, 46, 117—125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-007-9077-4 google scholar
  • NCPPHE. (2008). Partnerships for public purposes: engaging higher education in societal challenges of the 21st century. Retrived from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED501339.pdf google scholar
  • Njenga, J. K., & Fourie, L. C. H. (2010). The myths about e-learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), 199—212. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00910.x google scholar
  • Papachristos, D., Arvanitis, K., Vassilakis, K., Kalogiannakis, M., Kikilias, P., & Zafeiri, E. (2010). An educational model for asynchronous e-learning. a case study in higher technology education. International Journal of Advanced Corporate Learning, 3(1), 32—36. google scholar
  • PRGI (2017). Survey of use of instagram in higher education marketing. 18. Edition. New York: Primary Research Group. google scholar
  • PWC (2018). The 2018 digital university: staying relevant in the digital age. Oslo: PWC Publisher. google scholar
  • Rasouli, A., Rahbania, Z., & Attaran, M. (2016). Students’ readiness for e-learning application in higher education. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology. 4(3), 51—64. google scholar
  • Redecker, C., & Punie, Y. (2017). JRC Science for Policy Report: European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators. Luxembourg: European Commission Publication. google scholar
  • Sanchez, R. A., Cortijo, V., & Javed, U. (2019). Factors driving the adoption of facebook in higher education. google scholar
  • E-Learning and Digital Media, 16 (6), 455—474. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753019863832 google scholar
  • Schall, N., & Becker, M. (2003). Practitioner’s guide: curriculum / syllabus development. Germany: MethodFinder. google scholar
  • Schneiderhan J., Guetterman T. C., & Dobson M. L. (2019). Curriculum development: A how to primer. Family Medicine and Community Health, 7(2), 1—6. DOI: 10.1136/fmch-2018-000046 google scholar
  • Singha, G., & Hardaker, G. (2017). Change levers for unifying top-down and bottom-up approaches to the adoption and diffusion of e-learning in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 22(6), 736—748. https://doi.or g/10.1080/13562517.2017.1289508 google scholar
  • Subbarao, V., Srinivas, K., & Pavithr, R.S. (2019, April). A Survey on internet of things based smart, digital green and intelligent campus. 4th International Conference on Internet of Things: Smart Innovation and Usages (IoT-SIU) Internet of Things: Smart Innovation and Usages. India. google scholar
  • Tham, C. M., & Werner, J. M. (2005). Designing and evaluating e-learning in higher education: a review and recommendations. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 11(2), 15—25. DOI:10.1177/107179190501100203 google scholar
  • Toprak, M. (2018). Ekonomilerin yükseliş ve düşüşü. Ö. Demir (Ed.), Türkiye Ekonomisi kitabı içinde (s. 177—216). Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları google scholar
  • Toprak, M., Bayraktar, Y., & Özyılmaz, A. (2020). Covid-19 pandemisi ve yükseköğrenimde dijital dönüşüm: endüstri 4.0 ve toplum 5.0 perspektifinden bir değerlendirme. D.Demirbaş, B.Bozkurt & S.Yorğun (Eds). Kovid-19 Pandemisinin Ekonomik, Sosyal, ve Siyasal Etkileri ve Türkiye’ye Yönelik Öneriler kitabı içinde (s.232—247). İstanbul: İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları google scholar
  • Toprak, M., Bayraktar, Y., Erdoğan, A., Kolat, D., & Şengül, M. (2020). Yeni Nesil Üniversite: Tematik Teknik Üniversite için Organizasyonel ve Fonksiyonel Bir Yönetişim Modeli Önerisi. Journal of Higher Education, Forthcoming. google scholar
  • Tucker, Jan P., & Gentry, Gary R. (2009). Developing an E-learning strategy in higher education. Foresight, 11(2), 43—49. DOI: 10.1108/14636680910950147 google scholar
  • University of Kent. (2020). Employability Skills. Retrieved from https://www.kent.ac.uk/ces/student/skills.html google scholar
  • Veretekhina, S. V., Krapivka, S. V., & Kireeva, O. I. (2020). Digital university, student’s digital footprint, digital education currency in the system of modern higher education. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(3), 1878—1889. google scholar
  • Wagner, N., Hassanein, K., & Head, M. (2008). Who is responsible for e-learning success in higher education? A stakeholders’ analysis. Educational Technology & Society, 11 (3), 26—36. google scholar
  • WamPPP. (2016). 1.5 Report on Agreed Methodological Approaches in Creation of Curricula, Syllabi and Training Programmes. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/project-result-content/9a80b425-fe86-449f-8d33-caf56cf31174/1.5_Report_on_agreed_methodological_approaches_in_creation_of_ curricula_syllabi_and_training_programmes.pdf google scholar
  • Weber, L., & Bergan, S. (2005). The public responsibility for higher education and research. France: Council of Europe. google scholar
  • Williamson, B. (2019). Policy networks, performance metrics and platform markets: charting the expanding data infrastructure of higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 2794—2809. https://doi. org/10.1111/bjet.12849 google scholar

Atıflar

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


DIŞA AKTAR



APA

Toprak, M., Bayraktar, Y., Yorgun, S., & Özyılmaz, A. (2021). Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi. Journal of Economy, Culture and Society, 0(63), 67-92. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-801234


AMA

Toprak M, Bayraktar Y, Yorgun S, Özyılmaz A. Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi. Journal of Economy, Culture and Society. 2021;0(63):67-92. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-801234


ABNT

Toprak, M.; Bayraktar, Y.; Yorgun, S.; Özyılmaz, A. Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi. Journal of Economy, Culture and Society, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 63, p. 67-92, 2021.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Toprak, Metin, and Yüksel Bayraktar and Sayım Yorgun and Ayfer Özyılmaz. 2021. “Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi.” Journal of Economy, Culture and Society 0, no. 63: 67-92. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-801234


Chicago: Humanities Style

Toprak, Metin, and Yüksel Bayraktar and Sayım Yorgun and Ayfer Özyılmaz. Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi.” Journal of Economy, Culture and Society 0, no. 63 (Jul. 2021): 67-92. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-801234


Harvard: Australian Style

Toprak, M & Bayraktar, Y & Yorgun, S & Özyılmaz, A 2021, 'Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi', Journal of Economy, Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 63, pp. 67-92, viewed 26 Jul. 2021, https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-801234


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Toprak, M. and Bayraktar, Y. and Yorgun, S. and Özyılmaz, A. (2021) ‘Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi’, Journal of Economy, Culture and Society, 0(63), pp. 67-92. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-801234 (26 Jul. 2021).


MLA

Toprak, Metin, and Yüksel Bayraktar and Sayım Yorgun and Ayfer Özyılmaz. Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi.” Journal of Economy, Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 63, 2021, pp. 67-92. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-801234


Vancouver

Toprak M, Bayraktar Y, Yorgun S, Özyılmaz A. Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi. Journal of Economy, Culture and Society [Internet]. 26 Jul. 2021 [cited 26 Jul. 2021];0(63):67-92. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-801234 doi: 10.26650/JECS2020-801234


ISNAD

Toprak, Metin - Bayraktar, Yüksel - Yorgun, Sayım - Özyılmaz, Ayfer. Dijital Dönüşüm, Araştırma Üniversitesi ve Yükseköğrenimde Yeniden Yapılanma: İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi için Bir Model Önerisi”. Journal of Economy, Culture and Society 0/63 (Jul. 2021): 67-92. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2020-801234



ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ


Gönderim01.10.2020
Kabul11.03.2021
Çevrimiçi Yayınlanma22.04.2021

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.