Factors affecting the identification of research problems in educational administration studies

Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 23-52

  Yalçın, Mikail ^a   Bektaş, Fatih ^a   Öztekin, Özge ^a   Karadağ, Engin ^a  

^a ESKISEHIR OSMANGAZI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Case study; Educational administration; Knowledge production; Research problems

Indexed keywords

EID: 84960424901     PISSN: 13030485     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.12738/estp.2016.1.0206     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Aydın, A., Erdağ, C., & Sarıer, Y. (2010). A comparison of articles published in the field of educational administration in terms of topics, methodologies and results. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 39, 37–58.
2. Aypay, A., Çoruk, A., Yazgan, D., Kartal, O., Çagatay, M., Tuncer, B., & Emran, B. (2010). The status of research in educational administration: An analysis of educational administration journals, 1999–2007. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 39, 59–77.
3. Bahçekapılı, E., Bahçekapılı, T., Erümit, S. F., Göktaş, Y., & Sözbilir, M. (2013). The factors affecting definition of research problems in educational technology researches. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13, 2330–2335. http://dx.doi.org/10.12738/estp.2013.4.1684
4. Balcı, A. (1990). Eğitim yönetiminde araştırma [The research in educational administration]. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(1), 81–94.
5. Balcı, A. (1993). Etkili okul: kuram, uygulama, ve araştırma [Effective school: theory, practice, and research]. Ankara, Turkey: Yavuz Dağıtım.
6. Balcı, A. (2008). Türkiye’de eğitim yönetiminin bilimleşme düzeyi [Evolution of educational administration as a scientific discipline in Turkey]. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 54, 181–209.
7. Balcı, A. (2011). Eğitim yönetiminin değişen bağlamı ve eğitim yönetimi programlarına etkisi [The changing context of educational administration and its effects on educational administration postgraduate programmes]. Eğitim ve Bilim, 36(162), 196–208.
8. Balcı, A., & Apaydın, Ç. (2009). Türkiye’de eğitim yönetimi araştirmalarinin durumu: Kuram ve uygulamada eğitim yönetimi dergisi örneği [State of the educational administration research in Turkey: The case of the educational administration in theory and practice journal]. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 15(59), 325–343.
9. Bolay, S. H. (2014). Eğitimimizin felsefi temelleri [Philosophical foundations of our education]. Yeni Türkiye Dergisi, 58/59(10), 223–235.
10. Brewer, D. J. (1993). Principals and student outcomes: Evidence from U.S high schools. Economics of Education Review, 12(4), 281–292. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0272-7757(93)90062-l
11. Bridges, E. M. (1982). Research on the school administrator: The state of the art, 1967–1980. Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(3), 12–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013161x82018003003
12. Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. Oxford University Press.
13. Bush, T. (1999). Crisis or crossroads? The discipline of educational management in the late 1990s. Educational Management and Administration, 27(3), 239–252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263211x990273002
14. Bush, T. (2007). Educational leadership and management: Theory, policy, and practice. South African Journal of Education, 27(3), 391–406.
15. Chow, C. W., & Harrison, P. D. (2002). Identifying meaningful and significant topics for research and publication: A sharing of experiences and insights by ‘influential’ accounting authors. Journal of Accounting Education, 20(3), 183–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0748-5751(02)00008-8
16. Christensen, L. B., Johnson, B. R., & Turner, L. A. (2011). Research methods, design, and analysis. Boston, MA: Pearson.
17. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. London, UK: Routledge.
18. Creswell, J. W. (2011). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
19. Donmoyer, R., Imber, M., & Scheurich, J. (1995). The knowledge base in educational administration: Multiple perspectives. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
20. Elliott, G. (1996). Educational management and the crisis of reform in further education. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 48(1), 5–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305787960480101
21. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1996). How to design and evaluate research in education. NY: McGraw Hill.
22. Glatter, R. (1997). Context and capability in educational management. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 25(2), 181–192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263211x97252007
23. Gorard, S. (2005). Current contexts for research in educational leadership and management. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 33(2), 155–164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1741143205051050
24. Greenfield, T. B. (1994). Greenfield on educational administration (P. Ribbins, Ed.). London, UK: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203973561
25. Hallinger, P., Walker, A., & Bajunid, I. (2005). Educational leadership in East Asia: Implications for education in a global society. UCEA Review, 46(1), 1–4.
26. Hoy, W. K. (1996). Science and theory in the practice of educational administration: A pragmatic perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(3), 366–378. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013161x96032003004
27. Hsu, T. (2005). Research methods and data analysis procedures used by educational researchers. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 28(2), 109–133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01406720500256194
28. Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. B. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education.
29. Karadağ, E. (2009a). Türkiye’de eğitim bilimleri alanında yapılmış doktora tezlerinin tematik ve metodolojik açıdan incelenmesi: Bir durum çalışması [A thematic and methodological reviewing on doctoral thesis which made at the area of education sciences in Turkey: A case study] (Doctoral dissertation, Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey). Retrieved from https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/
30. Karadağ, E. (2009b). Eğitim bilimleri alanında yapılmış doktora tezlerinin tematik açıdan incelemesi [A thematic analysis on doctoral dissertations made in the area of education sciences]. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3), 75–87.
31. Kerlinger, F. N. (1979). Behavioral research: A conceptual approach. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
32. Kwiatkowski, T., & Silverman, R. (1998). Research fundamentals: II. Choosing and defining a research question. Academic Emergency Medicine, 5(11), 1114–1117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.1998.tb02673.x
33. Lee, M., & Hallinger, P. (2012). National contexts influencing principals’ time use and allocation: Economic development, societal culture, and educational system. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 23(4), 461–482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2012.678862
34. Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2005). Practical research. Planning and Design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
35. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2006). Transformational school leadership for large–scale reform: Effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(2), 201–227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09243450600565829
36. Leung, K. (2007). The glory and tyranny of citation impact: An East Asian perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 510–513. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.25525592
37. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newburry Park, CA: Sage.
38. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing qualitative research. California, CA: Sage.
39. McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education evidence–based inquiry. New York, NY: Pearson Education.
40. Merriam, S. B. (2013). Nitel araştırma: Desen ve uygulama için bir rehber [Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation] (S. Turan, Trans, Ed.). Ankara, Turkey: Nobel.
41. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. H. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
42. Neuman, L. W. (2007). Toplumsal araştırma yöntemleri: Nitel ve nicel yaklaşımlar [Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches] (S. Özge, Trans). İstanbul, Turkey: Yayın Odası.
43. Ogawa, R., Goldring, E., & Conley, S. (2000). Organizing the field to improve research on educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(3), 340–357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00131610021969029
44. Oplatka, I. (2007). The scholarship of educational management: Reflections from the 2006 CCEAM Conference. International Studies in Educational Administration, 35(1), 92–104.
45. Oplatka, I. (2009). Educational administration as a contextually based field of study: Reflections from the 2008 Commonwealth Council for Educational Administration and Management Conference in South Africa. International Studies in Educational Administration, 37(3), 3–19.
46. Örücü, D., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Akademisyenlerin gözünden Türkiye’de eğitim yönetiminin akademik durumu: Nitel bir analiz [The state of educational administration scholarship in Turkey from the scholars’ perspectives: A qualitative analysis]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 17(2), 167–197.
47. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. London, UK: Sage.
48. Punch, K. F. (2005). Sosyal araştırmalara giriş [Introduction to social research] (D. Bayrak, H. B. Arslan, & Z. Akyüz, Trans). Ankara, Turkey: Siyasal.
49. Ratcliff, D. (1995).Validity and reliability in qualitative research. Retrieved from http://qualitativeresearch.ratcliffs.net/Validity.pdf
50. Sandberg, J., & Alvesson, M. (2011). Ways of constructing research questions: Gap–spottingor problematization? Organization, 18(1), 23–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1350508410372151
51. Schmuck, R. (1968). Social Psychological factors in knowledge utilization. In T. L. Eidel & J. M. Kitchel (Eds.), Knowledge production and utilization in educational administration (pp. 143–173). Oregon: University of Oregon Press.
52. Sekaran, U. (2006). Research methods for business: A skill building approach. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
53. Şimşek, H. (1997). Pozitivism ötesi paradigmatik dönüşüm ve eğitim yönetiminde kuram ve uygulamada yeni yaklaşımlar [Post-positivist paradigmatic transformation: New approaches to theory and practice in educational administration]. Eğitim Yönetimi, 3(1), 97–109.
54. Singh, K. (2007). Quantitative social research methods. New Delhi, India: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9789351507741
55. Smith, K. G., & Hitt, M. A. (Eds.). (2005). Great minds in management: The process of theory development. Oxford University Press.
56. Spring, J. (1994). Wheels in the head: Educational philosophies of authority, freedom and culture from Socrates to Paulo Freire. New York, NY: McGraw–Hill.
57. Tharenou, P., Donohue, R., & Cooper, B. (2007). Management research methods. New York: Cambridge University Press.
58. Tsui, A. S. (2006). Contextualization in Chinese management research. Management and Organization Review, 2(1), 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2006.00033.x
59. Turan, S., & Şişman, M. (2013). Eğitim yönetimi alanında üretilen bilimsel bilgi ve Batılı biliş tarzının eleştirisine giriş [Scientific knowledge production and westernized cognitive style in educational administration: An introduction and critique]. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 19(4), 505–514.
60. Turan, S., Karadağ, E., Bektaş, F., & Yalçın, M. (2014). Türkiye’de eğitim yönetiminde bilgi üretimi: Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi 2003–2013 yayınlarının incelenmesi [Knowledge production in educational administration in Turkey: An overview of researches in Journal of Educational Administration: Theory and Practice -2003 to 2013-]. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 20(1), 93–119. http://dx.doi.org/10.14527/kuey.2014.005
61. Willower, D. J., & Forsyth, P. B. (1999). A brief history of scholarship on educational administration. In J. Murphy & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (pp. 1–24). San Francisco, Ca: Jossey–Bass
62. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Ankara, Turkey: PegemA.
63. Zuber–Skerritt, O., & Knight, N. (1986). Problem definition and thesis writing: Workshops for the postgraduate student. Higher Education, 15(1–2), 89–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00138094