Opinions of Educational Administration Academicians on the Future of the Teacher Training System in Turkey

Main Article Content

Kenan Işık; Ferudun Sezgin


The goal of this research is to do an ontological and epistemological analysis of current situation and future problematic areas in terms of organizational extents, of the operation of educational processes, and of the history and social bases of teacher training by analyzing the current situation of the teacher training system in Turkey, and thus, shedding light to the future of the teacher training system. In this research, qualitative research method was used and the phenomenological method was adopted. To determine the participants, purposeful sampling and relevant criterion sampling and maximum variation sampling methods were used. The data of the research was gathered with the semi-structured interview form created by the researcher. The data gathered from the research was examined in detail in terms of organizational extents and the structure of teacher training in Turkey was analyzed as a whole system. With this purpose, by determining the problematic areas of teacher training, education faculties where teachers get their training and programs that provide teacher training were analyzed; the question about how to achieve a unique teacher training structure was discussed and dead-ends of the teacher training system were questioned in terms of their philosophical basis both epistemologically and ontologically. According to the findings of the research, it was seen that there are quantitative and qualitative problems in every dimension of teacher training in Turkey. As a result, considering the own reality of Turkey, it is needed to develop a qualified teacher training system with the solid epistemological and ontological ground in there.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Kenan Işık; Ferudun Sezgin. (2021). Opinions of Educational Administration Academicians on the Future of the Teacher Training System in Turkey. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 26(4), 865–904. https://doi.org/10.17762/kuey.v26i4.31