European Journal of Education Studies
ISSN: 2501 - 1111
ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111
Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu
Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.268656
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND
COOPERATIVE LEARNINGi
Ayfer Kocabasii
Dokuz Eylul University, Buca Educational Faculty,
Department of Primary Education, ‛uca, İzmir, Turkey
Abstract:
The aims of Village Institutes were to create modern Turkey and start development
from the villages by presenting civilization and revolutions to Turkish villagers and to
supply primary education in the villages at
% percent. In
‚pril
, Village
Institutes were founded by Ministry of National Education Hasan ‚li Y(cel and his
General Director of Primary Education İsmail Hakkı Tonguç. The most important
principles of them were; education in work, education with work, education for work.
The Village Institutes system allowed the students to participate actively into education
with their own actions leading to educated, critical thinking and creative individuals
being capable of using their rights in the right manner; moreover, leading the formation
of a creative society. In this article, similar and common dimensions of the group works
applied in the Village Institutes and Cooperative Learning have been presented. Also,
being aware of this educational system in Turkey in the past is tried to be provided. As
a result, the value of The Village Institutes system should be regiven to humanity by
using its positive aspects in today s education systems.
Keywords: village institutes, cooperative learning, primary education
1. Introduction
The earliest date in bibliographies for the history of cooperative learning is known as
1898 (Johnson, Johnson & Holubec, 1994). The researches which compare the
cooperative learning and the learning techniques which are based on competition and
This article was presented in the conference Cooperative Learning Meeting the challenges of the
Century, University College Lillebaelt, Odense-Denmark (1-3 October 2015).
i
Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved.
© 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group
.
47
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
individualism date back to 1890s. The years that Kurt Levin (1890-1947), (1935) and
(1920) Morton Deutch (1949) had started their researches which were based on the place
of competition and cooperation in social psychology are the years when The Village
Institutes were prepared for being opened and were tried to be closed. In 1935, there
had been 12 years since the new founded Republic of Turkey was established. 80% of
population was living in villages and literacy rate was too low. There were 15.000
teachers already, however 36.000 teachers were needed. It was necessary to solve the
primary school problem and to make everyone be literate as immediate as possible. It
was a must to create modern people who are loyal to the reforms of the Republic,
reforms and principles of Atatürk; are supporters of enlightenment; adopt democracy;
help to improve the country culturally and educationally and to boost the
socioeconomic side of the country starting from villages. In 1940, in Village Institutes
Law numbered
With the decision of the Ministry of National Education, The Village
Institutes are founded on cultivated lands to educate teachers who will become useful in
villages. was written. When the law was enacted, İsmail Hakkı Tonguç was the General
Director of Primary Education, and Hasan Ali Yücel was the Minister of National
Education (Tonguç, 2007: 34-40).
After the World War II, The Village Institutes entered in the process of being
closed with the reasons like improving the political and economical affiliation with the
USA quickly, avarseness of landlord members of the parliament against that the
teachers graduated from the Village Institutes would educate the public and raise their
awareness, failure of actualisation of land reform. In 1946, with the winning of
Demokrat Parti on the election, Hasan Ali Yücel the Minister of National Education and
İsmail Hakkı Tonguç the General Director of Primary Education who was the ideational
father and practitioner of The Village Institutes were eased out. In 1950, mixed-sex
education was terminated. In 1954, they were closed with the law numbered 6234
amalgamating with Primary Teacher Schools in
T(rkoğlu,
.
Besides the regulation of The Village Institutes was well planned; 17.321 village
teacher, 512 sanitarians and midwives, 8756 educators who were graduated from
village institutes have contributed a lot to the society until the years we live in. They
also contributed to basic education to raise the rate of literacy. Teachers graduated from
these schools were not only educators but also sanitarians, carpenters, builders,
blacksmiths, cooperative members and actualisers, shoemakers, musical instrument
makers, electricians, fishers. Some of them have become artist, craftsman, scientist,
politician, a member of parliament, pedagog as well. Teachers graduated from Village
Institutes founded Ege ‛ölgesi Köy 5ğretmenleri Derneği ‚egean Region Village
Teachers ‚ssociation first, and then, Göller ‛ölgesi Köy 5ğretmenleri Derneği Lakes
Region Village Teacher s ‚ssociation . ‚ll the associations founded Teachers
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
48
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
‚ssociations National Federation of Turkey in
and Teachers Union of Turkey in
1965. They are the pioneers of democratic teacher movement. They have always been
the precursors and reformist ones in social, political, cultural, and economic alternation
of Turk society. Teachers graduated from the village instıtutes are the ones who
educated the generation of 1968. Today, they are 84-90 years old and lifelong learning
and solidarity of them have been continued by their children and grand-children in
Yeni Kuşak Köy Enstit(l(ler Derneği New Generation Village Institutes Supporters
‚ssociation . Yeni Kuşak Köy Enstit(l(ler Derneği New Generation Village Institutes
Supporters ‚ssociation was founded in
and it has released a lof of books and
documentaries in which memories of those teachers were compiled. The most
important features of Village Institutes are that T(rkoğlu,
5zgen,
Kocabaş,
2003);
1) The places where The Village Institutes would be founded were planned
considering the fact that it would include 3-4 cities according to the cultural
texture, geographical position and living conditions to develop the country
homogeneously and equally. In this way, equality of opportunity in education in
the country was provided.
2) It was important that these schools were placed on 1000-6000 decares fields and
near the railways (Özgen, 2002).
3) %50 of the programmes of The Village Institutes was arranged for theoretical
courses while the other %50 of those programmes was arranged for agricultural
and technical courses, and the courses were heading for productivity with the
principle education in work, education with work, education for work, education for
production and through group-work techniques.
Table 1: Time Schedule for Five Years in the Village Institutions
Köy Enstit(leri Programı
Courses
Culture lessons
Theoretical and Practical
Week
Period
114 (22 hours in a week)
5060
58 (11 hours in a week)
638
58 (11 hours in a week)
638
Agriculture Courses
Technical Courses and Practices
5-year perpetual vacations
Total
30
260 weeks
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
6336
49
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
4) The education and training principle
education in work, education with work,
education for work, education for production
was being an actual link between
theoretical and practical courses.
5) In each institute, the programmes which were flexible and locally administrated
according to environment features were arranged weekly, monthly and yearly.
6) The common goal was to present intellectual teachers who were supposed to be
a model for the people living in villages and were educated in crafts, in addition
to teaching the people living in a village for the development of that village by
themselves.
7) Students had responsibilities and authority in all the works and the management
of the institutes. All works of the institutes were being done by all students in
groups and sequence. Job training provided students to take an active role for
production necessitated group works and organizing the leader of the group.
Group was seen as a management unit. It was bringing students and teachers
together and organizing them as a family. The leader of the group was like a
parent, and was connecting with the other units of an institute. Kirby (1963:229)
alleged that it was a more developed system than today s counseling system.
Table 2: T(rkoğlu,
207) Division of Tasks in the Village Institutions
Individual responsibility and common goal dependence were working
with the help of this division of tasks
Director
Subject domain teachers and
and head
workmaster
Chair student
Hall Monitors/
Students on duty
of units
Principal/
Various branch teachers,
Related branch
Related Hall Monitors/
Deputy
circulating capital and
headships
Students on duty
Principal
accounting
Head of
Head teachers of groups and all
Head students of groups
Students on duty/ Hall
Education
branch teachers
Head of
Agriculture educators and craft
Head of Agriculture and
Students on duty in
Agriculture
educators
Heads of Cultivated
Agriculture
Monitors
Area
Head of
Heads of atelier, structure-art
Head of Structure – Art
Students on duty in
Structure –
teachers, and craft educators
and Heads of Atelier
Atelier
Head of
Music teachers and craft
Head of music, orchestra
Students on duty in
Music
educators
conductors, choir
Music
Art
conductors
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
50
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
Head of
Gym and folk dance teachers and
Head of sport and Heads
Sport
craft teachers
of dance
Head of
Nurse and sanitarian
Head of health
health –
Responsible Students
Students on duty in
Infirmary
doctor
T(rkoğlu
-409), the writer graduated from The Village Institutes, deals with
the Collective Work System and Group and Organizing the Leader of the Group which
were implemented in the Village Institutes, The Authority and Responsibility to
Students Principle, Coeducation and The Assessment and Evaluation activities
detailedly in the chapter Demokratik Eğitim Patlaması Democratic Education ‛oom
of her book.
As Gelen said (1990:129), the fact that Prof. Dr. Gottfried Hausman from
Hamburg University criticized The Village Institutes saying
In these institutes, peer
learning principle was applied. In school life, job and course education were given at the same
time. Moreover, we can say that students learned from each other and worked together. may be
seen as an important supporting idea for the cooperative learning principles.
2. Cooperative Learning
Cooperative Learning is the instructional use of small groups so that students work
together to maximize their own and each other s learning. When compared with
competitive and individualistic learning, cooperative learning includes higher
achievement, greater productivity, long-term retention, intrinsic motivation, positive
relationships among students and greater psychological healthy. But there are five basic
elements of cooperative learning for fulfilling cooperation. They are,
positive interdependence;
face to face promotive interaction;
individual and group accountability;
interpersonal small group skills;
group processing.
According to Jonhson and Johnson (1994) it is organizational structure that will
affect all aspects of classroom life (Jonhson, Johnson& Holubec, 1994).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
51
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
Table 3: Cooperative School Organizational Structure
(Johnson & Johnson, 1999: 51-58, Ed. Sharan, 1999)
School Board
Superintendent and Staff
Teacher
Collegiality Group
Cooperative Learning Group
Cooperative Learning Group
Teacher
Collegiality Group
Cooperative Learning Group
Cooperative Learning Group
Teacher
Collegiality Group
Cooperative Learning Group
Cooperative Learning Group
Cooperative Learning Group
Teacher
Collegiality Group
Principal Collegiality
Group
Cooperative Learning Group
Principle Collegiality
Group
There are great similarities between (Table 2) division of tasks in the Village Institutions
and (Table 3) cooperative school organizational structure.
3. The Aim and importance of the research
The aim of this research was to reveal the similarities and differences in group works
implemented in The Village Institutes in terms of principles of cooperative learning.
That group works used in The Village Institutes have been researched and
revealed depending on the principles of cooperative learning has importance in the fact
that;
1) It s the best method to reach the achievement in short-term if Turkey implement
the principles of cooperative learning well as in the Village Institutes example
(The Village Institutes had given education for 10 years, 1936-1946),
2) The reasons of long-term positive effects of The Village Institutes on forming a
democratic society in Turkey is comprehended better,
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
52
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
3) The history of cooperative learning may be contributed by The Village Institutes
system of Turkey
4) In Turkish Education History, in a system -like The Village Institutes system- by
which a lot of versatile teachers have been educated, that these principles were
implemented has created awareness at an international level,
5) The Village Institutes are a model for versatile programmes that developing
countries can use in their education system.
3.1 Problem sentence
The problem of this research was formed in the question What are the similarities and
dissimilarities of group works used in The Village Institutes according to the principles of
Cooperative Learning?
3.2 Sub-problem sentences
Research question has been distributed to seven sub-questions;
3.2.1 How was positive interdependence in group works used in The Village Institutes
provided?
3.2.2 How did individual accountability and personal responsibility perform in group
works in the Village Institutes?
3.3.3 How was face-to-face interaction provided in group works in the Village
Institutes?
3.3.4 What were the functions of programme of the Village Institute on developing
interpersonal and small-group skills?
3.3.5 Which methods were used to evaluate in group and individually in group works
in the Village Institutes?
3.3.6 Were group productions formed in group works in the Village Institutes?
3.3.7 What are the differences between the groupworks in the Village Institutes and
cooperative learning?
4. Methodology
In this part, some topics like research design, the sample group of the study, data
collecting and data analysis processes are clarified one by one.
4.1 Research design
This is a qualitative research designed as one of the qualitative research methods, Case
Study , in the model of descriptive research. Scanning case study models are survey
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
53
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
regulations whose goal is to make a judgment about a definite unit in the universe (such
as individual, family, school, hospital, association etc.) by
defining the relations
between the unit and the environment around it and the relation between the unit and
itself (Karasar, 2005: 86). Case study is defined as the method in which one or more
than one incident, environment, programme, social group or other systems which are
tied with each other are investigated intimately according to the quotes transferred
from McMillan (2000) by Büyüköztürk and others (2010). This research has the
characteristics of case study as a study in which groupworks in the Village Institutes are
defined and specialized depending on time and location.
4.2 Data collecting methods and measurement of instrument
Data were obtained by the way of document investigation in the study. Document
Investigation contains analysis of written materials including information about
phenomena or incidents aimed to be investigated.
4.3 Written materials: Views of teachers graduated from the Village Institutes in
documents, and the books and sources explaining groupworks implemented in the
Village Institutes are considered as document in this research. With the aim of collecting
necessary data, the sources including information about groupworks in the Village
Institutes were reached using one of the qualitative data collecting methods,
Document ‚nalyzing .
4.4 Universe and sample of the research
The universe of the documents used in the research is formed by 20 books in which the
teachers graduated from the Villlage Institutes views, memories related to education
and training process were compiled, and which were published by Yeni Kuşak Köy
Enstitüleri Derneği New Generation Village Institutes Supporters Association) between
the years of 2001-2015. Three of those 20 books constitute the sample of documents.
These are that three books tell us about the three Village Institutes in the West, Middle
and South of Turkey Kızılçullu Köy Enstit(l( Yıllar
The Years in Kızılçullu Village
Institute , D(ziçi Köy Enstit(l( Yıllar The Years in D(ziçi Village Institute and Gönen
Köy Enstit(s( Işığı The Enlightment of Gönen Village Institute). While determining the
documents if they should be taken to the sample or not, criterion sampling of the
methods of nonrandom sampling is used because education processes are told in
interviews and the research mentions about groupworks in education process. In a
research, the observation units may be formed with people, incidents, objects, or
situations that have significant qualities. As a result, the units meeting the determined
criteria (subjects, events) are taken to sample (Büyüköztürk and the others, 2000).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
54
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
Table 4: Distribution of the sample according to graduated teachers views in the books
Name of the books
n
%
Kızılçullu VI
82
49.10
Gönen VI
43
25.74
Düziçi VI
42
25.14
167
100
Total number of the teacher
4.5 Analyzing data
In this research, documents have been analysed according to their content and
categorical aggregation has been used in data analysis. Content analysis is that oral or
written data are summarized and categorized according to a significant problem or
purpose, and that some significant variables or concepts are assessed and categorized
by scanning to make a conclusion on the basis of them (Fox, 1969; transferred by
Tavşancıl and ‚slan,
. Whether group works, which took place in the books used
as the documents which helped us in this research followed the principles of
cooperative learning or not, how often it followed and what the differences were tried
to be revealed through frequency analysis of content analysis. Frequency analysis
simply reveals the frequency of the units in terms of percentage and rate. This type of
analysis provides the comprehension of the importance and frequency of any unit
Tavşancıl and ‚slan,
.
According to this type of analysis, first the data are conceptualized and regulated
in a logical way, then themes are formed in content analysis Yıldırım and Şimşek,
2011). In content analysis, three types of decoding are used in decoding process;
decoding which has been done according to the concepts determined before ,
decoding which has been done according to concepts concluded from the data , and
decoding which has been done depend on a general framework . The first one
decoding which has been done according to the concepts determined before was used
in this research Yıldırım and Şimşek,
.
Accordingly, each question was considered as a category in this research
generally. Sentences and sometimes words have been determined as the analysis units,
themes and sub-themes concluded from these categories have been tried to be revealed.
The decoding has been done through manifest content in general. In addition to data
analysis, the formula of reliability developed by Miles and Huberman (Reliability:
Aggrement/Agreement+Divergence) was used to provide the reliability of this analysis.
According to their formula, three different branch experts analyse the data by decoding
them in the direction of the themes determined before. As the result of these decoding
processes sub-themes were formed. Thus and so, the sub-themes providing agreement
between two experts and the sub-themes causing divergence may be figured out, and
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
55
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
the harmony rate between the opinions of two experts may be understood thanks to the
reliability formula.
4.6 Decoding process
In this research, the principles of cooperative learning in the books in which teachers
sayings about the education process and which were investigated as a document
through concept analysis have been tried to be revealed.
1.
So, the principles of cooperative learning that Johnson & Johnson and Holubec
(1994) indicate were determined as mutual categories before the data analysis. The
concepts, sentences and paragraphs which may be put in all categories have been listed
in the key table and gathered in appropriate titles. The concepts, sentences and
paragraphs used in decoding both come from the literature related to cooperative
learning and from the sayings related to implementations in the Village Institutes.
Besides the concepts, pre-decided, new-revealed concepts that have been figured out in
the general framework related to the Village Institutes have been included to decoding.
The concepts and states describing the cooperative learning process in the best way
have taken place in decoding.
2.
The concepts, sentences and paragraphs that are similar to each other and have
mutual meanings have been gathered and tried to be put together under the mutual
categories and themes below. These categories are determined as:
2.1
Positive interdependence;
2.2
Individual accountability and personal responsibility to achieve the mutual goals
of the group;
2.3
Face-to-face interaction;
2.4
Interpersonal and small-group skills;
2.5
Assessment of group process;
2.6
Group production.
The concepts, sentence and paragraphs that form a meaningful wholeness in
regard to the principles of cooperative learning in the education process in the Village
Institutes were coded according to page numbers in documents. To provide the
reliability, three researchers specializing in their fields made decodings again, and the
similarity and dissimilarities were compared and a significant reliability percentage was
tried
to
be
reached.
Reliability
Formula
(Reliability:
Aggrement/Agreement+Divergence) by Miles and Huberman (quoted by Akay and
Ültanır,
was used for reliability. The researcher has determined
categories in
regard to the principle of cooperative learning. Afterwards, the second and third
experts have determined the concepts, sentences and paragraphs which are included by
these 6 categories. Then, the three experts have met and determined the points they
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
56
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
have agreement or disagreement about the categories. The reliability analysis towards
the internal consistency was made to determine whether the statements under these
categories formed a meaningful wholeness internally or not. At the end of the analysis,
the value of reliability has been given in Table 5. According to these results, it may be
said that the value of reliability of the categories were at good level. Besides, each
category has been considered as a theme by taking into account the external consistency
related to the fact that all have formed a meaningful wholeness related to cooperative
learning. In this stage, the obtained data have been digitalized and shown in the form of
frequency and percentages. Besides provide opportunity for interpreting the relations,
similarity and dissimilarities between the categories, another purpose of digitalizing is
to provide a chance to test the results with more extensive researches for providing the
reliability.
Table 5: MH Reliability values relation to categories
(Reliability formula developed by Miles ve Huberman, 1994.
Reliability Coefficient: Agreement/ Agreement+Disagreement.100)
MH Reliability Formula and
Categories
Reliability Coefficient:
1. Positive interdependence
MH: 1500/( 1500+301) = 0. 83
2. Individual accountability and personal responsibility
MH: 420/(420+58)=0.88
3. Face-to-face interaction
MH: 457/(457+70)=0.87
4. Interpersonal and small-group skills
MH: 582/(582+116)=0.83
5. Assessment of group processing
MH: 31/(31+42)=0.74
6. Group production
MH: 507/(507+118)=0.81
5. Findings and Interpretations
Themes which have been revealed as a result of categorical regulating in this chapter
have been interpreted with the rates of frequency levels given in the tables.
Table 6: Frequency, percentages and expression models of themes and sub-themes towards
how positive interdependence was provided in group works in the Village Institutes
Theme and sub-themes
Frequency (f)
Percentage (%)
1. Positive interdependence
541
0.35
1.1. Celebrating-Reward Interdependence
321
0.21
1.2. Task Interdependence
218
0.14
1.3. Role Interdependence
115
0.07
1.4. Environmental Interdependence
109
0.07
1.5. Positive Interdependence Against Foreign Forces
86
0.05
1.6. Imaginative Interdependence
82
0.05
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
57
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
1.7. Identity Interdependence
46
0.03
1.8. Source Interdependence
19
0.012
1537
100
Total
The frequency levels and percentages of themes and sub-themes towards (Common
Goal Dependence) positive interdependence in groupworks applied in the Village
Institutes have been reached at the end of data analysis. With the data analysis, that the
percentage of Positive interdependence (f=541) which is one of the principles of
collaborative learning has happened very frequently with the rate of %35 has been
revealed. Celebrating - reward dependence which is one of the sub-themes has followed
common goal dependence (f=321) with its frequency level at the rate of %21. The
frequency level of duty/task dependence (f=115) is at the rate of %14. Role dependence
and environmental dependence have followed duty dependence with the frequency
level at the rate of %7. The frequency level of positive dependence against foreign forces
(f=86) is % and imagination dependence
f=
) is %5. While the frequency level of
positive identity dependence (f=46) is at the rate of %3, the lowest frequency level has
been seen as positive source dependence (f=19) with the rate of %1.
Table 7: Some of example expressions of sub–themes in relation to
Positive Interdependence
Theme and sub-themes
Example explanations
1. Positive
«The goals of the institutes were to extend the education in rural areas, to
interdependence
provide the structural transformation of the rural areas of Turkey through
education besides educating children born and raised in villages to have
them be teachers»
1.2. Celebrating-Reward
«Teams which were sent to any other institutes, after they had worked for
Interdependence
1-2 months, were being rewarded with nationwide tour. In Saturdays,
entertainments were being organized»
1.2.Task Interdependence
«Students were aware of their responsibilities with the help of studentcentered learning. Tonguç sent a report about including students in
administration»
1.3. Role Interdependence
«Giving individual responsibilities, giving the responsibilities of dining
hall, dormitory, ateliers, classrooms, garden, agriculture, technical ateliers,
student-student interaction learning, having students be on duty»
1.4.Environmental
«Imagination of a developed Turkey, a democratic country, developing the
Interdependence
reforms of Ataturk, development of rural areas, sharing everything, a fair
order, developing opportunities»
1.5. Positive
«Protecting the country against exploitation, supporting and explaining the
Interdependence Against
reforms of Atatürk»
Foreign Forces
1.6. Imaginative
«Imagination of a developed Turkey, a democratic country, developing the
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
58
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
Interdependence
reforms of Ataturk, development of rural areas, sharing everything, a fair
order, developing opportunities»
1.7. Identity
«Ziraat Marşı Tilth ‚nthem , singing the ‚nthem of The Village Institutes
Interdependence
in everywhere and the start of any work, founding association, founding
teacher associations in certion regions, badge-pinning, backing up each
other, interdependence, foregrounding the fact that she/he is from a Village
Institute»
Using same tools, books, materials sharing same buildings, ateliers,
1.8. Source
Interdependence
campus and agricultural lands. The society in institute was the real owner
of the institution»
These findings revealed that the groupworks applied in the Village Institutes formed an
identification in a positive environment and source dependence with the aim of not
only educating teachers but also training them to be useful for both themselves and the
improvement of villages. The students studying in the Village Institutes fulfilled all
their responsibilities and duties, and they compounded all of their effort with the light
of the common goal dependence principle of Cooperative Learning. It has been figured
out that they founded teacher associations, so they got their positive efforts together to
save the country from the politics that would set the country back and from both
foreign forces and the reactionaries living in the country who did not want Turkey to be
changed in this way, with the dream of More Democratic Country .
Table 8: Frequency, percentages levels of themes towards sub problems
how cooperative learning was provided in the Village Institutes
Themes
Frequency (f)
1. Positive interdependence
Percentage (%)
1537
0.35
2. Group production
227
0.32
3. Interpersonal and small-group skills
194
0.27
4. Individual accountability and personal responsibility
162
0.23
5. Face-to-face interaction
98
0.14
6. Assessment of group processing
34
0.05
Total
2252-1537, Others:715
Table 9: The differences between the groupworks in
Cooperative Learning and Village Institutes
Cooperative Learning
Village Institutes
Small groups: 2-6 students
Range of the group : 2 to 20-40 students
Mostly 20 people in one group
Today developed more constructed
Not constructed as today , not based on the research in 1940
based on researches
Many techniques
More similar with Learning Together Technique
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
59
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
Academic, emotional and social
Academic, emotional , social and skill based (psyhcmotor) objectives
objectives are well to the fore
were well to the fore
Applying based on the preferences
Applied in all the Village Institutes around Turkey with a law
of the schools and teachers
Group productions were limited in
Group productions were not limited in the time and location,
the time and location
outputs were various and permanence in the long term
Stakeholders limited generally
All of the students, teachers, administrator, workmaster, villager,
with students and teachers
other institutes were stakeholders as contributing parties to the
group production
6. Conclusions
1. The group works implemented in the Village Institutes between 1937-1946/1954
formed an identification in a positive environment and source interdependence
with the aim of not only educating teachers but also training them to be useful for
both themselves and the improvement of villages as workmaster.
2. The groupworks implemented in the Village Institutes had Common Goal
Interdependence from one of the basic principles of Cooperative Learning
included,
positive
environment,
celebrating-reward,
task,
positive
interdependence against foreign forces, imagination, positive identity, positive
source, role interdependence types. Groupworks applied in the Village Institutes
had group production,
interpersonal and small-group skills,
individual
accountability and personal responsibility, face to face interaction, assessment of
group processing.
The noticeably differences were today Cooperative Learning techniques are
considerably constructed. But in the years of 1940, The Village Institutes group works
were not constructed. It can be said that the groupworks implemented in the Village
Institutes might be early cooperative learning implications. But in terms of group
production, effectiveness on the Turkish Society and suggesting to developing country
the Village Institutes were still contemporary and not to be surpassed for Turkey.
7. Discussion
The most important characteristic as a group works called in Turkish «İmece Yöntemi»
(working together for the community or one of its members) was applied with
principles of cooperative Learning in the Village Institutes.
T(rkoğlu graduated from ‚ksu Village Institutes great author talked about from
İmece Yöntemi in the section of «Democratic Education Explosion» in her books
(2007:335-409) how the group works were implemented in the Village Institutes and
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
60
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
the others
Kaplan,
, Kocabaş
. ‚s Gelen said
, the fact that Prof.
Dr. Gottfried Hausman from Hamburg University about The Village Institutes saying
In these institutes, peer learning principle was applied. In school life, job and course education
were given at the same time. Moreover, we can say that students learned from each other and
worked together.” may be seen as an important supporting idea for the cooperative
learning principles. Research having done by Kocabaş
found that teachers who
were graduated from the Village Institutes had more highest means in mathematical,
musical, interpersonal, ındividual, natural multiple intelligence from the primary
school teachers and candidates of primary school teachers.
There are great similarities between Cooperative School Organizational Structure
(Johnson & Johnson, 1999: 51-58) and division of tasks in the Village Institutions
T(rkoğlu,
. Each figure has present common and similar cooperative school
structure. In Cooperative Institutes cooperation had begun from the building of the
classroom, dormitory, dining hall, garden, farmhouse, ateliers etc. They had shared all
of naturel and educational, social environment and produced a value for themselves.
We can benefit from the positive outcomes of the Village Institutions in Turkish
Educational System and it can be a model for developing country. For more democracy,
every child should be educated being aware of their responsibilities and task divisions
in the school and home. Cooperative Learning as an instructional and class room
organization method might be play an important role realizing democracy in the
country and the world and as behind of the great success.
8. Suggestions
1. The Village Institutes system and group works should be deeply researched by
using different quantitative and qualitative research methods.
2. The group works implemented in the Village Institutes showed the principals of
cooperative learning thus the education system of the Village Institutes should
be considered in the cooperative learning history.
3. For more peace and democracy around the world Cooperative Learning,
techniques should be used worldwide.
4. We should benefit outputs of the Village Institutes especially for developing
countries as an alternative educational system.
References
1. ‚ntel, C.
. Maarifimiz ve Meseleleri, İstanbul, Remzi Kitabevi
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
61
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
2. ‚ky(z, Y.
.T(rk Eğitim Tarihi, ‚nkara, ‚nkara Üniversitesi Eğitim
‛ilimleri Fak(ltesi Yayınları No
3. ‚kay, C., Ültanır, E.
.
. ‚ndragojik Temellere Dayalı Kolaylaştırılmış
Okuma-Yazma Eğitimi KOYE S(recine Yönelik KOYE Eğiticilerinin Gör(şleri.
Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fak(ltesi Dergisi,
4. ‛alcı, ‚.
,
-88
. Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler. ‚nkara
Pegema Yayıncılık
5. ‛(y(közt(rk, Ş., Kılıç, Ç. E., ‚kg(n, 5. E., Karadeniz, Ş., Demirel, F.
.
Bilimsel ‚raştırma Yöntemleri. ‚nkara Pegem Yayıncılık.
6. Gelen, ‚.
. Eğit-Der Yayınları, Kuruluşunun
. Yılında Köy Enstit(leri,
‚nkara, 5zkan Matbaacılık
7. Jacobs, G. M., Lee, C, & Ng, M. (1997). Co-Operative Learning In The Thinking
Classroom. Paper presented at the International Conference on Thinking,
Singapore.
8. Johnson D. W., Johnson, R. T. ve Holubec, J. E. (1994). Nuts&Bolts Of
Cooperative Learning. Minnesota: Interaction.
9. Johnson D. W., Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning Together and Alone, Cooperative
Competetive and Individualistic Learning, Fifth Edition, Massachusetts, Allyn
and Bacon A Viacom Company
10. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. ve Stanne, M. B. (2000). Cooperative Learning
Methods: A Meta-Analysis. Minnesota: University of Minnesota
11. Roger T. And David W. Johnson. (1994). An Overwiev of Cooperative Learning,
Originally published in: J. Thousand, A. Villa and A. Nevin (Eds), Creativity and
Collaborative Learning; Brookes Press, Baltimore, 1994.
12. Kocabaş, ‚.
‚ralık, Sayı ,ss
13. Kocabaş, K.
. Çoklu Zeka Kuramı ve Köy Enstit(leri, Yeniden İmece,
-27
. Kızılçullu Köy Enstit(l( Yıllar, İzmir, Yeni Kuşak Köy
Enstit(l(ler Derneği Yayınları
14. Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative Learning. California: Kagan Publishing.
15. Karasar, N. (1991). ‛ilimsel ‚raştırma Yöntemi, ‚nkara, Sanem yayıncılık
16. Kocabaş, ‚.
. İşbirlikli ve Geleneksel 5ğrenme Yöntemlerinin M(ziğe
İlişkin Tutumlar Üzerindeki Etkisi, TED Eğitim ve ‛ilim Dergisi,
17. Kocabaş, ‚.
,
-40.
. M(zik 5ğretiminin Temelleri, İzmir, Kanyılmaz Matbaası
18. Kocabaş, ‚., ‚şık, ‚., Karaşahin, İ., Erbil, D. G., Erdoğan, F.
. T(rkiye de
İşbirlikli 5ğrenme Yönteminin Uygulandığı Tezlerin İçerik ‚nalizi. VII.
International Congress of Educational Research: 28-
Mayıs
– Muğla
Abstract (s. 175). Ankara, Pegemnces
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
62
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
19. Kocabaş, ‚.
. İkinci Ulusal sınıf 5ğretmenliği Çalıştay Kitabı, Marmara
Üniversitesi ‚tat(rk Eğitim Fak(ltesi, İstanbul, 20. 5zgen, ‛.
‚ralık
. Çağdaş Eğitim ve Köy Enstit(leri, İzmir, Final Matbaacılık
21. Slavin, R.E. (1988). Small Group methods, The Intenational Encyclopedia of
Teaching and Teacher Education. Editör.M.J. Dunkin, Oxford: Pergamon Press
22. Sallan G(l, S.
. Gönen Köy Enstit(s( Işığı, İzmir, Yeni Kuşak Köy
Enstit(leri Derneği Yayınları
23. Tonguç, E.(2007). ‛ir Eğitim Devrimcisi İsmail Hakkı Tonguç, İzmir, Uşşak
Matbaası
24. Tonguç, İ.H. (1974). İş ve Meslek Eğitimi, T5‛-DER Yayınları, ‚nkara.
25. Kurtuluş, Y.
. Köy Enstit(lerinde Sanat Eğitimi ve Tonguç, ‚nkara,
G(ldikeni Yayınları
26. T(rkoğlu, P.
. Tonguç ve Enstit(leri, İstanbul, İş ‛ankası Yayınları
27. Tavşancıl, E. & Aslan, E.A.
. Sözel, yazılı ve diğer materyaller için içerik
analizi ve uygulama örnekleri. ‚nkara Epsilon Yayınları
28. Yıldırım, ‚. ve Şimşek, H.
. Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri.
‚nkara Seçkin Yayınevi
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
63
Ayfer Kocabas
VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING
Creative Commons licensing terms
Author(s) will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms
will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community
to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that
makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this
research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Education Studies shall
not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflicts of interest, copyright violatio ns and
inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated into the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access
Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes
under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017
64