Using conjoint analysis to examine academic members course preferences for educational administration, supervision, planning and economics masters program

dc.creator	Koksal Banoglu
dc.date	2012-04-01T00:00:00Z
dc.date.accessioned	2015-07-20T22:09:14Z
dc.date.available	2015-07-20T22:09:14Z
dc.identifier	1305-9076
dc.identifier	1305-905X
dc.identifier	https://doaj.org/article/eba8365dc5f6462688462bc0f3573527
dc.identifier.uri	http://evidence.thinkportal.org/handle/123456789/12620
dc.description	In many countries, university-based educational administration programs proceed to establish standardized curriculumcontents for program approval in the international arena. An important influence on these efforts has been internationalbenchmarking and quality assurance works. To a lesser extent, however, they have attached a special emphasis on personalpreferences of “providers and clients”, i.e., academic members and students. In the current research, it was proposed todetermine if there is a connection between course preferences of academic members in the field of Educational Administration,Supervision, Planning and Economics (EASPE) and the current course lists of EASPE master’s programs provided by Turkishuniversities and academic institutions. The methodology employed in this research was three-level embedded mixed researchmethodology that included respectively descriptive document analysis of course lists of 34 EASPE master’s programs,quantitative conjoint analysis of course preferences of 13 academics from 13 universities and qualitative interview analysis. Theresearch showed that total quality management, educational law and statistics courses were under discussion in terms of theirpartial utility estimates and scholar reviews. Academic members drew attention to need for qualified scholars with knowledgeof statistics. Besides, there occurred the most reversals on the subject of interdisciplinry course theme. As a conclusion, articlediscussed the consequence that some course themes and titles taught in Turkish EASPE programs were inconsistent withacademics’ preferences.
dc.language	English
dc.language	Turskish
dc.publisher	World Education, Science, Research and Counseling Center
dc.relation	http://www.world-education-center.org/index.php/cjes/article/view/352/pdf_89
dc.relation	https://doaj.org/toc/1305-9076
dc.relation	https://doaj.org/toc/1305-905X
dc.rights	CC BY-NC
dc.source	Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences , Vol 7, Iss 2, Pp 111-128 (2012)
dc.subject	Academics’ perspective
dc.subject	master’s programs
dc.subject	major course themes
dc.subject	course titles
dc.subject	conjoint analysis
dc.subject	Education (General)
dc.subject	L7-991
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Education (General)
dc.subject	L7-991
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Education (General)
dc.subject	L7-991
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Education (General)
dc.subject	L7-991
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Education (General)
dc.subject	L7-991
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.title	Using conjoint analysis to examine academic members course preferences for educational administration, supervision, planning and economics masters program
dc.type	article