Students' Metaphorical Perceptions Regarding the Concept of School, School Satisfaction Levels and Elements Affecting Satisfaction
top of page
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute

Education Quarterly Reviews

ISSN 2621-5799

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
crossref
doi
open access

Published: 15 December 2022

Students' Metaphorical Perceptions Regarding the Concept of School, School Satisfaction Levels and Elements Affecting Satisfaction

Ümran Demir

Alaaddin Keykubat University, Turkey

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf

doi

10.31014/aior.1993.05.04.640

Pages: 511-525

Keywords: Student, School, Satisfaction, Perception, Metaphor

Abstract

In the contemporary education approach, the concepts of satisfaction, teamwork and motivation of school stakeholders, especially the concept of satisfaction are considered important along with approaches such as Human Resources Management, Effective School and Total Quality Management. If it is accepted that the student is at the center of the elements of the school, student satisfaction comes to the fore. The aim of this research is to determine students' perceptions of school through metaphors, to reveal their school satisfaction levels according to some variables and to offer suggestions for increasing satisfaction. The research is mixed method and in the quantitative part, the Students' School Satisfaction Scale (SMSQ) developed by the researcher was applied to the students studying at high schools in Antalya. In the qualitative part, face-to-face interviews were conducted with the students by using a semi-structured interview form prepared by the researcher, and their views on the metaphorical perceptions of the school and the factors affecting their school satisfaction were taken. In the results of the research, it was seen that while the general satisfaction of the students according to the dimensions of the school was moderately satisfied. According to their gender and grade levels, it was determined that there was a significant difference between the groups. The metaphors produced by the students about the school and their reasons are classified and the factors affecting their satisfaction with the school are included.

References

  1. Aksu, Ö.V. ve Demirel, Ö., Bektaş, N. (2011). A research on reinforcement elements in primary school gardens in Trabzon city. Journal of Inonu Üniversity Art and Design, 1(3), 243-254.

  2. Atalay Mazlum, A., & Balcı, A. (2018). School according to vocational high school teachers and students: A metaphor study. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Faculty of Education, (47), 1-26. DOI: 10.21764/maeuefd.339901

  3. Atay, L. & Yıldırım, H. M. (2008). A research on the satisfaction of the students in tourism education at the undergraduate level. Journal of Travel and Hotel Management, 5(3). https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/soid/issue/11376/135944

  4. Aydın, M. (1991). Educational administration (3rd Edition). Ankara: Hatipoglu Publication.

  5. Baker, P. J. (1991). Metaphors of mindful engegament and a vision of better schools. Educational Leadership, 48(7) 32-35

  6. Balcı, A. (1999). Metaphorical images of school: School perceptions of students, teachers and parents from four selected schools (in Ankara), Ankara.

  7. Balcı, A. (2009). Research in social sciences. Methods, techniques and principles (7th Edition). Ankara: Pegem A Press.

  8. Barker, R. G., & Gump, P. V. (1964). Big school, small school: High school size and student behavior. Stanford U. Press.

  9. Çetinkaya, A. N. ve Gülmez, T. S. (2002). School development model (3rd Edition). Ankara: Education Research and Development Department Publications.

  10. Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.

  11. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  12. Demir, C. E. (2007). Metaphors as a reflection of middle school students’ perception of school: A cross cultural analysis. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13(2), 89-107.

  13. Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C. & Adler, T. F. (1984). Grade-related changes in school environment: Effects on achievement motivation. In J. G. Nicholls (Ed.), Advances in motivation and achievement(pp. 283–331).

  14. Elliott, K. M., ve Healy, M. A. (2001). Key Factors Influencing Student Satisfaction Related to Recruitment and Retention. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 10(4), 1-11.

  15. Goglar, R., Gross, M. A., Hartman, J. L. & Cunliffe, A. L. (2008). Meaning in organizational communication. Management Communication Quarterly. 21(3), 393-412.

  16. Hutcheson, G., & Sofroniou, N. (1999). The multivariate social scientist: Introductory statistics using generalized linear models. Sage Publication, Thousand Oaks, CA. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857028075

  17. Inbar, D. E. (1996). The free educational prison. Metaphors and Images Educational Research, 38(1), 77-92.

  18. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.

  19. Karaküçük, S. (2010). Examination of physical/spatial conditions of school guidance services (in the context of guidance teachers' spatial perceptions). Journal of the Social Sciences Institute, 28(1), 421-440.

  20. Kayıkçı, K., Altun, M. ve Karakoç, G., G. (2019). Investigation of school gardens in primary and secondary schools in the framework of the right to quality education (Ed. E. Kıral, E. Bbaboğlan ve A. Çilek) in Educational Research-2019, 207-226. Ankara: EYUDER Publications.

  21. Kıldan, O. (2007). Preschool education environments. Journal of Kastamonu University Faculty of Education. 15(2), 501-510.

  22. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308

  23. Mahlios, M., & Maxson, M. (1998). Metaphors as structures for elementary and secondary preservice Teachers thinking. International Journal of Educational Research, 29(6).

  24. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Revised and Expanded from "Case Study Research in Education". San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

  25. Mou, Y. L., Zhoung, Z., & Sun, Z. (2007). Education is service student is customer quality is life. Journal of Chongqing University of Arts and Sciences.

  26. Özdemir, S., & Akkaya E. (2013). Analysis of general high school students and teachers' perceptions of school and ideal school through metaphor. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 19(2), 295-322.

  27. Özdemir, M. (2012). Examination of high school students' metaphorical school perceptions in terms of various variables. Education ad Science, 37(163), 96-109.

  28. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

  29. Powell, A. G., Farrar, E., & Cohen, D. G. (1985). The shopping mall high school: Winners and losers in the educational marketplace. A Bulletin Special, 40-51.

  30. Saban, A. (2008). Okula ilişkin metaforlar. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 55, 459-496.

  31. Şahin, A. ve Sabancı, A. (2018). Pedagogical formation education students' perceptions of school administrators and teachers: Metaphor study. Turkish Studies. Volume 13/4, Winter, p. 1057-1082.

  32. Şahin, İ. (2007). Predicting student satisfaction in distance education and learning environments. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 113–119.

  33. Seçer, İ. (2015). Psychological Test Development and Adaptation Process. Ankara: Anı P.

  34. Sop, S. A. (2020). The relationship between education-teaching satisfaction, academic procrastination tendency and academic success: A study on tourism students. Journal of Tourism and Gastronomy Studies, 8(2), 983-996

  35. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Applied Social Research Methods Series (Vol.46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  36. Tepebaşılı, F. (2013). Metaphor texts. Konya: Çizgi.

  37. Toker-Gökçe, A., & Bülbül, T. (2014). Schools as a human body: A metaphor study related to perceptions about schools among vocational high school students. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi - Journal of Educational Sciences Research, 4(1), 63-88.

  38. Türk Dil Kurumu. (2019, 07 Mart). Türk Dil Kurumu sözlükleri. http://sozluk.gov.tr/

  39. Uzgören, N. ve Uzgören, E. (2007). Statistical analysis of individual characteristics affecting the satisfaction of undergraduate students at Dumlupınar University - hypothesis test, chi-square test and linear probability model. Dumlupınar University, FEAS Department of Business Administration-Economics, Kütahya.

  40. Ward, C. (1995). American Indian high school competition in rural southeastern Montana. Rural Sociology, 60(3), 416‐434.

  41. Yılmaz, K. (2007). Views of primary school 6th, 7th and 8th grade students on the quality of school life. Journal of Kastamonu University Faculty of Education, 15(2), 485-490.

bottom of page