Last Sunday, families awaited the statements of National Education Minister İsmet Yılmaz, regarding the new application which is to replace the Transition from Elementary to Secondary Education Examination (TEOG). Minister Yılmaz started his statement by expressing that the transition to a “plain” and “clear” model was concluded. According to this new model, students are no longer obliged to take an examination while transitioning from elementary to secondary education. Approximately 90% of students will be able to register to high schools that are in the vicinity of their residence. Neither a base score nor examination result will not be demanded. Parents can choose among schools within a particular district.

This is a good decision as high schools were included to compulsory education with the 4+4+4 education reform. Having an obligatory examination for the transition to high school in such a system was unreasonable. However, TEOG could still be regarded as a good provisional application which allowed to manage the increased demand for high schools. Nevertheless, TEOG was provisional and it needed transformation.

Selective schools and the entrance examination

Minister Yılmaz continued his statement by adding that only certain schools will continue to admit students through examination. In this respect, he expressed that a limited number of selective schools, which correspond to 10% of the total student population, will remain in the system. Top 10% of students, who are scored according to examination results, will continue to be educated at high schools that are to be determined by the Ministry. Science high schools, social science high schools and “project high schools,” which consist of Anatolian high schools, thematic vocational high schools and Anatolian Imam-Hatip high schools, are included within these selective schools. Designing the top 10% of schools to include all types of high schools assures equality and justice. Otherwise, vocational high schools would have especially suffered.

Having a limited number of schools that require advanced attainment is import for Turkey. Countries, like Japan, Korea, UK, and Singapore, which have good education systems, have similar selective school applications. However, it should be noticed that there were no inclinations to increase the number of these schools in any of these countries. Keeping the number of selective schools and their students limited will not cause injustice or inequality in the education system.

Meanwhile, an extensive explanation is yet to be made about the scope of the entrance exam to these selective schools. The ministry has so far only announced that the 6^th, 7^th and 8^th grade curricula will be included to this exam and that the exam would consist of 80 questions in two parts, quantitative and verbal. First of all, the distinction between quantitative (math and science) and verbal (Turkish Language, social sciences and foreign language) in the exam will cause this division to be lowered to middle school level, possibly having a negative impact on courses. Moreover, this division isn’t meaningful for those who want to study foreign languages. It would be more meaningful to make this distinction based on the courses.

Moreover, if the ministry aims to associate middle schools and high schools in this process, middle school curricula should be assessed with correct types of questions in the examination. As an expert in the field of education, I believe this is necessary for a fair education. In fact, 7^th grade students who are to enter the examination next year should only be assessed according to 7^th and 8^th grade curricula. Students who are in 6^th grade now could be assessed according to 6^th, 7^th and 8^th grade curricula. In this respect, the examination could be implemented gradually, preventing victimization. Regardless of question types, both parents and students would be relieved. Otherwise, extra-curricular initiatives and issues regarding resources will emerge once again.

Inclination towards unauthorized educational resources

It is a matter of discussion whether this new application will increase the need for unauthorized educational resources such as private lectures and private study centers (even though they are all closed down). Strong communications between the ministry and Provincial Directorates of National Education should be the priority here, as otherwise all the flues the ministry leaves in its communication will be occupied by extra-curricular initiatives or sources.  In addition, the ministry should increase the quality of education in these high schools that admit students without examination, while gradually decreasing the number of selective schools in the following years. As long as academic and social disparities exist among schools, it is not possible to prevent extra-curricular inclinations. What I suggest is not mediocritizing, or having average schools. The following 10 clauses should be prioritized in order to increase the qualities of schools and closing the gap between them without mediocritizing:

1. Guidance and Counseling services in middle schools should be improved in terms of quality and become professionalized.
2. Regular monitoring exams should be held in middle schools and high schools, new strategies should be determined according to their results.
3. Schools should become more accountable.
4. Professional school administration trainings should be held and the “school administrator” should become a professional position.
5. Teacher academies should be established in certain city centers and professional support to teachers should be provided.
6. Programs supporting academic and social aspects of students at certain schools within determined education districts should be implemented.
7. Affirmative action policies towards the disadvantaged should be implemented and priority zones in terms of educational support should be determined.
8. Alternative curricula and textbooks projects should be developed in schools.
9. Mentorship programs should be designed in elementary and high schools with NGOs.
10. Deficiencies in school equipment and infrastructure should be compensated.

It is possible to elaborate on each of these points or to add more to the list. If all of these are realized, the inclination towards unauthorized resources in Turkey will be eradicated. The academic and social skills of students, their interest in school and the sense of belonging will be improved. Therefore, schools will become more successful academically and socially. Achieving this is also important for school administrators and teachers as their interest and sense of belonging is as crucial as students. In the new system, managing students who come from various academic and social backgrounds in the same class might be initially challenging. For instance, managing the classroom might be exhausting at first. In this respect, teachers will require professional on-the-job training support.

Could this new model trigger immigration?

I don’t foresee such mass mobility with this model. I believe parents should keep calm about this matter. Meanwhile, there might be some micro-level mobility which could be triggered through misinformation. Approaches of the real-estate markets and the media are manipulative. Great responsibility falls on the ministry and the media. The ministry should inform parents about school districts and could even establish call centers in order to answer all kinds of questions that come from parents and students. The mass media, on the other hand, should be more cautious and responsible while covering news on education and should not rely on make-up stories. Correcting false perceptions and misinformation is more challenging than assumed.

Lastly, I don’t believe that this new application, as some assume, will take the country back to the late 90s or early 2000s.  High school education was not compulsory 10-20 years ago. Therefore, the demand on high schools were not at this level. Meanwhile, Turkey’s education sociology has also changed in the past two decades, so the current situation could be summarized as “it’s all water under the bridge.”

With the announcement of Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the abolishment of TEOG, the education system and new reforms have re-emerged on the political and social agenda. Amid critics, there is hope that the Ministry of National Education (MEB) is in desire to implement a system that treats students with justice. Considering the number of students within Turkey’s education system, it is highly difficult to find a solution that suits all. Ipek Coskun, Researcher at SETA spoke to Lacivert magazine in regards to recent developments in the education system in Turkey.

---

We see that there are series of changes implemented in the education system almost every year, which invoke criticism within the public. Why are these system changes implemented frequently? Why hasn’t Turkey been able to settle on an education system?

It should be expressed that it isn’t only Turkey that pursues such changes. Steps for change and innovation in education systems are being taken across the world. The important part is to determine what creates the need for change and the methodology in implementing such changes. At this point, the main issue that we need to discuss is not change, but rather “stability.”

A strong methodology should be followed in order to ensure and facilitate such stability. This methodology should be compatible with our local realities and contemporary global developments. While almost all who specialize in education think of reform when ‘methodology’ is mentioned, it should not be forgotten that Turkey underwent a grand reform in education four years ago with the prominent 4+4+4 mode, in which every child receives a 12 year-compulsory education. I think from now on, Turkey should focus on progressive elaboration based on the local reflections of the post 4+4+4 period. Therefore, hereafter, we need ‘restoration’ instead of ‘reform’ in the field of education. While we must facilitate stability by keeping our local realities at the center, we must also be on the watch for developments all around the world. Otherwise, trying to move a huge system will create fault lines. Failure would be inevitable in such a case. I mean you may develop strong national education policies, but all the changes you make may become clogged at the lowest level, for instance, by a teacher or a school administrator.

We need ‘restoration’ instead of ‘reform’ in the field of education.

Another point that needs to be emphasized is that in Turkey, not only in education but in other fields, change is perceived as the antithesis of tradition. Breaking from tradition in education brings only about a societal memory loss. What I mean by tradition is the change in the value of knowledge and definition over time. Our outlook on knowledge is still very pragmatic and opportunist, which is why knowledge that won’t be questioned in an exam is deemed worthless and useless. For instance, a student reading a story or novel instead of doing tests during his/her exam period is perceived as trash. If you ask me, it is not children, but teachers and parents who deem such valuable extra-curricular activities as useless.

Lastly, it is apparent that we need an educational aristocracy. I’m aware that the word aristocracy can come across as intimidating. However, I’m talking about a type of aristocracy that could facilitate stability and preserve tradition. We can say that there was such an aristocracy in the Republican era, but this was, unexpectedly, a position that was not in favor of diversity in Turkey. We would’ve expected them to set a stable foundation, yet they deepened ideological schisms. Thus, they rendered the system antipathetic, distancing it from an intellectual wealth. Now, we need educational aristocrats who are liberated from their ideological baggage. Respect to human beings and scientific endeavor are the prerequisites of this.

It is not children, but teachers and parents who deem valuable extra-curricular activities as useless.

The fact that the skills of children are determined through exam results is an issue that has been debated for many years. Spare time that children have is consumed by the said system and existing examinations. Recently, President Erdogan made a statement expressing that the Transition from Primary and Secondary Education (TEOG) examination is needless. How healthy are success rates determined by this kind of a system? What are your suggestions for developing an individual-centered education model?

Let’s start from the last question. As part of my job and study area, I work closely with students and teachers. Therefore, it is safe for me to say that I’m not a stranger to the children’s world. Moreover, I have nephews and nieces whose education I closely observe. For instance, one’s educational process is worthy of assessment. After living in the U.S. until school age, my nephew returned to Turkey, where he continued his education from primary school. He was a curious child who asked many questions and his questions were of a confounding kind. We tried to keep his inquisitive nature as intact as possible and always expressed that he should never resort to memorization.

He grew up, became an adolescent and more importantly he was to enter TEOG this year. Now, he has greater questions on his mind. I’m sure that TEOG couldn’t assess my nephew’s qualities; neither could the earlier exam models like High School Entrance Examination (OKS) or Placement Test (SBS). I’m not implying that my nephew is perfect or gifted; he is only one among more than a million peers. However, we are in need of a model that observes children not only through their academic achievements but also through their attitudes and behaviors. The only thing that gives us information about the profile of a student who is transitioning from 4^th to 5^th grade or from 8^th to 9^th grade is the scores students obtain from examinations. However, files should be prepared for each student and these files should be examined by their future teachers. While Turkey is in need of a more centralized system, only relying on this will do nothing but increase the number of overambitious students whose primary concern is how high they score on a test. In addition, it’s hard to design a model that would satisfy parents, teachers and students. As an educationalist I value once said, “Pedagogy cannot be built with pleasure.”

We need educational aristocrats that are liberated from their ideological baggage. Respect to human beings and scientific endeavor are the prerequisites of this.

When discussions about the abolition of TEOG begun, many families panicked. What would be your advice to families enduring this process?

I can understand what families are going through and they are rightfully stressful about this issue. At this point it is very important that families do not reflect this tension and exert pressure on their children. As there is always a kind of transition process between different levels of education, children should continue studying and families should encourage them to do so. These studies will inevitably be effective in improving their academic success at high school.

It is useful to remember that even before the debate on TEOG began, families had a love-hate relationship with the examination. This is still the case. There are two types of family profiles in this sense: those that attach a lot of meaning to examinations, and those that hate exams because of the stress they cause. For instance, while TEOG questions would not necessarily require students to resort to extra-school resources, as families began to race against each other, they made the process more challenging by buying extra books, sending their children to additional courses and by employing private tutors.

As I’ve expressed before, these common examinations are not as challenging as families claim them to be. This is reflected by the fact that there are thousands of students who achieve full score in TEOG. The Ministry of National Education did not design TEOG as a centralized examination, but rather wanted to hold a common written examination in Turkey. TEOG didn’t stress students as much as the earlier models like OKS or SBS did. Centralized exam systems have been applied in Turkey since the 1990s and one thing that I have observed is that families have become addicted to such systems. There are families who keep track of the number of tests their children complete daily. This situation within families is merely representative of early stress about university education, as there is a general belief that the first step in entering a good university is to attend a good high school. While they are not completely wrong, even if a child attends one of the best universities in Turkey, it is important not to overlook the ways in which this pressure will reflect on them and how they will turn out to be in the world of employment. Therefore, we should think in a multidimensional way. I believe families should also relieve themselves from their stress.

I believe families should relieve themselves from their stress.

In certain regions of the world, some parents don’t send their children to school and home-school them instead. Have you come across such examples in Turkey? Could this prove to be an alternative to the quandaries of the current system?

I don’t believe it would be a strong alternative, yet we could keep it as an option. Families could be granted with a wider area of action in this matter. As compulsory education in Turkey is 12 years, families attempt this kind of home-schooling models during pre-school education. However, it’s not possible to claim that this practice is widespread. Even if parents are not in employment, children being away from school for a couple of months is not desired by most parents – even the summer break becomes a crisis for many families. In this respect, I don’t believe home-schooling would be a preferred option.

I personally do not welcome a complete home-schooled education. However, we could discuss having certain courses being taught at home or at an alternative location. I don’t have any issues with schools assessing home-schooled students either. Nevertheless, a flexible model that could be substituted with being at school for 40 hours might be designed. For example, while arts such as painting and music can be taught at school, they can also be provided by outside municipalities.

Three basic criteria appear as determinants regarding student selection and placement in high schools across the world: GPA, exit examinations and standardized tests. In this framework, the most commonly applied systems include referring students to the schools located in their neighborhood according to their GPA, placements according to their secondary school GPA and exit exam results, and placements based on the results of a standardized test.

In Turkey, standardized tests constitute the main element that determines student placement. Various examination models have so far been implemented in terms of structure, content, modes of application, target groups, score calculation methods, placements systems and so on. As the examination systems of the past 15 years are considered, it is seen that five different systems have been adopted within this period in high school placement. These are respectively the Entrance Examination for High School (LGS), the Secondary Education Institutions Entrance Exam (OKS), the Placement Examination (SBS) that spread out over three years, an updated version of the SBS exam that was implemented only for 8th graders, and finally the Transition from Primary to Secondary Education (TEOG[1]), which has also been implemented for 8th graders.

At the beginning of the 2017-2018 school year, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan suggested the removal of TEOG on the grounds that it lays a serious stress and financial burden on students and parents. In order to prepare for the exam, students were heavily attending private courses instead of attending extra-curricular activities provided at their schools. Shortly after Erdoğan’s statement, TEOG was abolished, leading to quests for a new system.

What is TEOG?

TEOG is a standardized test which applied to 8th grade students on six core subjects (Turkish, Mathematics, Science and Technology, Atatürk’s Principles and History of the Turkish Revolution, English, and Religion and Ethics). In addition to the test, the student’s GPA and class attendance were also taken into account in high school placement. The overall placement score was calculated by taking 70 percent of the scores of the standardized tests conducted by the National Education Ministry (MEB) and 30 percent of the student’s GPA.

Representing a new approach to the transition to secondary education, TEOG differs from its previous counterparts in terms of its mode of application and placement type. TEOG is considered a more student-friendly and positive implementation compared to the previous examination systems since it is based on holding a standardized test in each semester of 8th grade. The reason for this is due to the fact that students were able to sit their TEOG exam in their own schools, the content of the tests comply with the curriculum of the semester and in addition, due to class attendance contributing to the final grade, this developed a strong tie between the student and school. More, students were offered the chance to sit a make-up exam, which was an additional benefit. However, these positive traits of TEOG unfortunately do not follow its application when the school placement process begins.

Why was TEOG abolished?

TEOG’s placement system ranks all high schools across Turkey from highest to lowest according to the scores of the students that enroll. For instance, while admission to some high schools required 459 points, some accepted students with a score of 50, which consequences in the labelling of a “successful” and “unsuccessful” school depending on their base point. These labels whether directly or indirectly were affecting the decisions students and parents made when deciding which school to enter. To express more tangibly, students have preferred a school with 300 base points that is located far away from where they live to a school with 250 base points located in their vicinity. Or contrarily, students have had to move away from their neighborhood when their scores only suffice to enter a lower ranking school located away from their home.

Furthermore, by ranking schools in hierarchical order, this system widened the quality gap between schools. While successful students prefer science high schools, less successful ones are obliged to go to theology-focused İmam-Hatip high schools or vocational high schools. As a result, the İmam-Hatip and vocational schools, which used to have a more heterogeneous student profile, started to address solely the weaker students. This sheer difference between the types of schools becomes obvious when international exams and university placements are considered.

Of course, it cannot be asserted that TEOG is the only cause of all these problems. The education system confronts various structural problems that are interrelated. The defects in the examination systems constitute a major part of the problem yet they are not the only reason. Therefore, changing the exam system will not suffice to resolving all the problems. For years, Turkey has been tackling and discussing the issues of quality and equal education. President Erdoğan also occasionally makes self-criticism in that the goals in education could not be achieved. However, in an education system encompassing 18 million students, it is not easy to ensure justice and equality-based stability.

In particular, reforming the system by coping with deeply-rooted and long-standing problems is an arduous challenge. Despite that, some quantitative developments have been observed in recent years such as the rises in the budget allocated to education, schooling rates, the number of classrooms and teachers, and the decrease in class quotas. Also, it must be noted that some reformative changes to enable democratization in education were also made during this period. These changes include the abolishment of the headscarf ban and the coefficient system that violated principles of equality and justice, the introduction of the 4+4+4 system and the re-opening of İmam-Hatip secondary schools and the inclusion of religion and culture among elective courses.

Quests for a new system

Following the abolishment of TEOG, while a new examination system is yet to be announced, various scenarios regarding the possible system have taken their place within public discourse. It is known that the MEB has been exerting serious efforts on this subject. As the National Education Minister İsmet Yılmaz stated, several options are currently being evaluated. The first option is introducing a system in which each school will hold individual entrance exams. The second option suggests holding entrance exams only for certain schools while the rest of the schools will admit students based on their place of residence.

The first option does not seem very reasonable in terms of financial costs, logistics and applicability. If a total of 11.000 schools hold separate exams, we will be talking about 11.000 different exams. In such a case, students and parents will have to tour an array of cities to sit for the exams they choose. This option also leads to numerous problems and questions. Who will prepare and evaluate these exams? How will students be placed after the evaluation? How will schools handle the burden of these exams? How will schools cope with the pressure exerted on them by parents, bureaucrats and others, given that these aspects constitute major problems even in standardized systems? Consequently, in current conditions, it does not seem possible for each school to organize its own exam. Also, society has a strong trust in standardized tests. Standardized tests avert the doubts of unequal treatment and have a crucial role in offering important opportunities of vertical transfer although they cannot wipe out socio-economic injustice between students.

As underscored in several previous publications by SETA Foundation, the second option appears as the most reasonable system under present circumstances. Nevertheless, several aspects must be underlined while discussing this system. First of all, the quality of education in different neighborhoods can dramatically differ. With the school rankings shaped by TEOG, this hierarchy has become even stricter in the eyes of people. So, the first thing parents will do is to check the TEOG base points of the school in their place of residence while placing their children. Naturally, they will not wish to send their children to “less successful” schools.

Aside from that, success is not the only variant between schools. Environmental factors such as security in the school’s neighborhood, the socio-cultural structure of the area surrounding the school and typologies of people living in the neighborhood are all important criteria for parents along with the school’s teaching and administrative staff. Therefore, if placements will be based on place of residence, parents must be presented a certain degree of flexibility in order to ease their worries.

A system with several alternatives will relieve both parents and students in this sense. However, a set of distinct criteria must be laid down for the students who wish to enroll in a high school outside of their neighborhood in order to avoid exceeding student quotas and confusions – GPA again plays a major role at this point. Likewise, the quotas of schools that will admit students from other neighborhoods must be determined accordingly, and specific quotas must be allocated to these students. Of course, all these steps are required to maintain transparent.

Another contention regarding this option is the issue of trust in school GPAs, which stirred serious public discussions for some valid reasons. This situation worries both parents and students considering the parents who press on teachers for their children’s grades and the teachers who cannot endure this pressure. Such doubts especially revolve around private schools. However, it is not right to bring all the teachers under suspicion. Teachers receive assessment and evaluation formation and are authorized within this scope, so therefore we have to trust them in principle. The teachers who do not or cannot give fair grades constitute an exception. To resolve this problem, the new system must not be shaped through exceptions, and the MEB is required to implement control mechanisms that would erase doubts and establish trust. Also, any kind of misconduct must be penalized.

In this sense, the MEB is under a heavy burden and is required and expected to develop a new system in line with this responsibility. No preliminary works have evidently been conducted in this respect given the timing of TEOG’s removal. Therefore, this year is likely to become a transition period, where setbacks ought to be expected. Consequently, it is significant for experts, pedagogues, teachers, and other agents within the education system to pay regard to justice and equality and support the MEB in introducing the best system possible.

[1] Initially not being an official abbreviation, TEOG entered the literature due to its common use in public.