Career Choice of Deutsche-Schule-İstanbul's Graduates: Influence Of
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Career Choice of Deutsche-Schule-İstanbul’s Graduates: Influence of ‘Hidden Curriculum’ Dissertation Zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Philosophie an der Universität Hamburg Fachbereich Erziehungswissenschaft Vorgelegt von Fulya Damla Kentli Aus İstanbul Hamburg 2008 1.Gutachterin: Prof. Dr. Rosemarie Mielke 2.Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Gordon Mitchell Tag der Disputation: 29 Oktober, 2008 Acknowledgements I would like to express my appreciation to my advisors, Prof. Dr. Rosemarie Mielke and Gordon Mitchell for their continued support and friendship in helping me to complete this study. They asked challenging questions, provided valuable feedback on drafts of the manuscripts, and shared important insights useful in the shaping of this work. I especially appreciate the many hours they spent reviewing my work and helping me forge it into a document of quality. I also want to thank Prof. Dr. Ursula Neumann for her expertise and creative guidance. Also, a special thanks to Dr. Cengiz Sezen for his support and assistance in making arrangements with DSI’s graduates. I also thank all graduates who accept to conduct interview throughout this study. I am also grateful to all the DSI’s administers who allowed me access in the library and conduct interviews. I would like to express my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to my family; my mother, Aysel Hülya, my sister, my brother and my father for supporting me throughout my school years. I would also like to thank to my friends and both Kentli family for providing me their warm support that gave me the strength to complete dissertation. I would like to especially thank my dear friend Ayşe Polat for giving me this support throughout the dissertation process. Thank you for providing a listening ear during all of the hard times. Most important, I would like to thank my beloved husband, Aykut Kentli, who have encouraged me and accompanied me throughout the whole process. I dedicate this study to my husband, Aykut Kentli and my little daughter Bilge İrem Kentli. Without their patience I would not have had the drive to finish. You were my reason for getting this done. i List of tables Table 1.1: Overview of empirical studies on career choice ..................................................7 Table 1.2: Definitions of Hidden Curriculum .......................................................................12 Table 2.1 Foreign schools in present Turkey ........................................................................25 Table 2.2: Percentages of DSI’s graduates’ careers between 1950-89. ................................37 Table 2.3: Percentages of the DSI’s and a French school graduates’ career choice between 1950s-1990s. ..........................................................................................................................38 Table 4.1: Inter-rater consistency table .................................................................................59 Table 5.1: Frequency of the sub-codes of “teaching style” and number of interviews in which the sub-codes were attributed.................................................................................................64 Table 5.2: Relative frequencies of “teaching style” for each interview and mean proportion over all interviews. .................................................................................................................66 Table 5.3: Frequency of the sub-codes of “rules” and number of interviews in which the sub- codes were attributed..............................................................................................................69 Table 5.4: Relative frequencies of “rules” for each interview and mean proportion over all interviews. ..............................................................................................................................70 Table 5.5: Frequency of the sub-codes of “reason forDSI choice” and the number of interviews in which the sub-codes were attributed. ...............................................................71 Table 5.6: Relative frequencies of “reason for DSI choice” for each interview and mean proportion over all interviews. ...............................................................................................72 Table 5.7: Frequency of the sub-codes of “characteristics of graduates” and number of interviews in which sub-codes were attributed. .....................................................................73 Table 5.8: Relative frequencies of “characteristics of graduates” for each interview and the mean proportion over all interviews.......................................................................................74 Table 5.9: Frequency of sub-codes of “teaching style” and the amount of interviews in which the sub-codes were attributed.................................................................................................81 Table 5.10: Frequency of sub-codes of “teaching style” and the number of interviews in which the sub-codes were attributed. .....................................................................................82 Table 5.11: The socio-economic background of graduates’ parents.....................................87 Table 5.12: Frequency of the sub-codes of “teaching style” and number of interviews in which the sub-codes were attributed. .....................................................................................89 Table 5.13: Relative frequencies of “teaching style” for each interview and mean proportion over all interviews. .................................................................................................................90 ii Table 5.14: Frequency of the sub-codes of “rules” and number of interviews in which the sub-codes were attributed.......................................................................................................92 Table 5.15: Relative frequencies of “rules” for each interview and mean proportion over all interviews. ..............................................................................................................................93 Table 6.1: Interconnectivity of Engineering education and the DSI.....................................116 iii List of figures Figure 2.1: DSI’s population of citizenship according to years..............................................24 Figure 2.3: The DSI in the past ...............................................................................................28 Figure 2.4: Picture of DSI’s students in 1907.........................................................................32 Figure 2.5: DSI’s present school structure..............................................................................35 Figure 3.1: The hierarchical structure of activity....................................................................41 Figure 3.2: Model of Mediated Activity .................................................................................42 Figure 3.3: Conceptual model of an activity system...............................................................43 Figure 3.4: The Expansive Cycle............................................................................................47 Figure 3.5: Structure of career choice activity system............................................................49 Figure 3.6: The expansive cycle of activity of decision-making ............................................50 Figure 4.1: Picture of MAXqda window.................................................................................59 Figure 5.1: Main Codes...........................................................................................................61 Figure 5.2: Main and sub-codes..............................................................................................63 Figure 5.3: Characteristics of DSI...........................................................................................64 Figure 5.4: Frequency of sub-codes and number of interviews in which the sub-codes were derived from the main code “teaching style”. .........................................................................65 Figure 5.5: Elektronisches klassenzimmer and messungen am fernsehschrim.......................67 Figure 5.6: Chemistry laboratory ...........................................................................................67 Figure 5.7: Frequency of sub-codes and amount of interviews in which the sub-codes were derived from the main code “rules”. ........................................................................................69 Figure 5.8: Frequency of sub-codes and number of interviews in which the sub-codes were derived from the main code “reason for DSI choice” ..............................................................72 Figure 5.9: Frequency of sub-codes and amount of interviews in which the sub-codes were derived from the main code “characteristics of graduates”......................................................74 Figure 5.10: Relationship between “teaching style” and “characteristics of graduates”. .......76 Figure 5.11: Relationship between the sub-codes of “teaching style”, “characteristics of graduates”, “rules”, “social activities” and “stereotype of engineering” .................................78 Figure 5.12: Relationship between sub-codes of “teaching style”, “rules” and main code “power relations” within the framework of Activity Theory..................................................81 Figure 5.13: Overlaps between “teaching style” and “perceived distinctiveness of the DSI”.84 Figure