Favouritism Behaviours of School Administrators: Teachers’ Perceptions of the Secondary Schools in Turkey
This study aims to determine favouritism behaviors of school administrators according to public secondary school teachers’ perceptions in terms of some variables. The sample of the study consisted of 22 schools selected randomly from the population and 376 teachers employed in these schools. “Favoritism in the School Management Scale" was used in this research. In the study, teachers stated that favouritism behaviors in their schools are at the "sometimes" level. According to perceptions of teachers, the highest three items in the favouritism scale are: "(1) In the preparation of teachers' weekly lesson plan ( =3,30; Sometimes)", "(2) In the planning of lesson distribution ( =3,12; Sometimes)", "(3) Taking into consideration the complaints of teachers ( =3,08; Sometimes)". The lowest three items in the favouritism scale are: (1) Among the teachers in their hometowns ( =2,14; Rarely); (2) Related to the branches of the teachers ( =2,38; Rarely) and (3) Related to the gender of the teachers ( =2,43; Rarely). No significant difference was detected with respect to the teachers' educational background, gender, marital status, professional experience, and union on the perceptions of favouritism behaviours. Nevertheless, a significant difference was found in all dimensions and throughout the whole scale of favouritism regarding to school size (the number of teachers) variable.
Argon, T. (2016). Favoritism behavior of administrators in primary schools according to teacher opinions. Kastamonu Education Journal, 24 (1), 233-250.
Avetisyan, M. & Khachatryan, V. (2014). Nepotism at schools in Armenia: A cultural perspective. Edmond J. Safra Working Papers, 51, 1-22. Retrieved from 19. 02. 2021 file:///C:/Users/Abidin/Downloads/SSRN-id2523541.pdf
Aydın, Y. (2015). Relationship of organizational silence to favoritism in school management and teachers' perception of self-efficacy (Unpublished Master's Thesis). Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
Aydoğan, İ. (2009). Favoritism in the Turkish educational system: Nepotism, cronyism and patronage. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 4(1), 19-35.
Biber, M. (2016). Public Ethical Impasse: Favoritism. Ankara: Adalet Publications.
Büte, M. (2009). Nepotism in family businesses: A research on the determination of nepotism in family companies operating in Trabzon province. 17th proceedings of the national congress of management and organization,737-741. Retrieved from 19. 02. 2019 (http://w3.balikesir.edu.tr/~seymen/yonetim.pdf).
Cesur, A. & Erol, E. (2020). The relationship between nepotism and organizational justice in school administration: The case of Afyonkarahisar Province. OPUS-International Journal of Community Studies, 15(25), 3467-3496.
Coco, G., & Lagravinese, R. (2014). Cronyism and education performance. Economic Modelling, 38, 443-450. Retrieved from 08.03. 2019. file:///C:/Users/Abidin/Downloads/1-s2.0-S0264999314000418-main.pdf
Çelik, K. & Erdem, A. R. (2012). Nepotism, according to administrative staff at the University. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Research, 6 (11), 23-30.
Çevikbaş, R. (2006). Ethics and corruption in management. Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 20 (1), 265-289.
Demaj, E. (2012). Nepotism, favoritism and cronyism and their effects on organizational trust and commitment: The case of the service sector in Albania (Unpublished master's thesis). Epoka University, Arnavutluk.
Demirtaş, H. & Demirbilek, N. (2019). Effect of nepotism behavior of school principals on teachers' perceptions of organizational justice and trust in the principal. Bingol University Journal of the Institute of Social Sciences, 9 (17), 111-142.
Erdem, R. (2010). Favoritism in terms of Management and Organization. İstanbul: Beta Publication.
Erdem, M. & Meric, E. (2012). Scale development study on favoritism in school administration. Journal of Educational Sciences Research, 2(2), 141-154.
Erdem, M., Aytaç, T. & Gönül. T. (2020). The Relationship between teachers’ perceptıon of organızational cynicism and school. European Journal of Education Studies, 7(6),1-21.
Gider, İ. (2020). The relationship between nepotism behaviors in school administration and the levels of alienation of teachers to work (Unpublished master's thesis). Siirt University Institute of Social Sciences, Siirt.
Gülay, S. S. & Kahveci, G. (2020). The relationship between teachers' perceptions of nepotism and organizational confidence levels. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Research, 14 (33), 494 -522.
Güner, N. (2019). Relationship between nepotism behavior of school administrators and life satisfaction of teachers (Example of Diyarbakır Province) (Unpublished Master's Thesis). Dicle University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Diyarbakir.
Hooft, E. A. & Stout, T. (2012). Nepotism and career choice, job search, and job choice. Nepotism in Organizations (Ed. Robert G. Jones). USA.
Jones, R.E. (1997). Teacher participation in decision making: Its relation ship to staff morale and students achievement. Education, 118 (1), 76-83.
Kahraman, Ü. (2020). Favaoritism behaviors of school principals. Uşak University Journal of Educational Research, 6(3), 90-106.
Karasar, N. (2006). Scientific Research Methods. Ankara: Nobel Publications.
Karacaoğlu, K. & Yörük, D. (2012). Employees' perceptions of nepotism and organizational justice: a family business practice in central anatolia. Journal of Business, Power Industrial Relations and Human Resources, 14(3), 43-64.
Karademir, M. (2016). Examination of the relationship between favoritism perceptions and organizational cynicism in school management of secondary school teachers: the case of pendik district of ıstanbul (Unpublished master's thesis). İstanbul Aydın University, İstanbul
Karakaş, M. & Çak, M. (2007). The role of international organizations in the fight against corruption. Journal of Finance, (153), 74-101.
Kartal, N. & Demirhan, Y. (2009). Neutrality in Turkish public administration. Journal of Turkish Administration, (462), 169-177.
Khatri, N.,Tsang, E. W. & Begley, T. M. (2006). Cronyism: A cross-culturalanalysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(1), 61-75.
Kolukırık, L. (2019). Teacher perceptions of favoritism behavior of school administrators (Example of altindag district of Ankara province) (Unpublished master's thesis). Gazi University. Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
Longman, L. (2004). Longman Dictionary of English Idioms. London: Longman.
Meriç, E. (2012). Favoritism in School Management According to Perceptions of Teachers Employed in Primary Schools. (Unpublished Master's Thesis) Yüzüncü Yıl University Institute of Social Sciences, Van.
Meriç, E. & Erdem, M. (2013). Favoritism in School Management According to the perceptions of teachers working in primary schools. Education Management in Theory and Practice, 19(3), 467-498.
Nabiryo, S. K. (2016). Nepotism and school performance: A case study of Kasenge Greenhill secondary school in Kampala district, Uganda. Thesis (Masters). Islamic Universityi in Uganda. Retrieved from 21.03.2021. http://www.ir.iuiu.ac.ug/bitstream/handle/20.500.12309/309/NABIRYO%20SHAMIRAH%20KASAULI.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Nadler, J. &Schulman, M. (2006). Favoritism, cronyism, and nepotism. Retrieved from 19. 02. 2019 https://www.scu.edu/government-ethics/resources/what-is-government-ethics/favoritism-cronyism-and-nepotism/.
Özkanan, A. & Erdem, R. (2014). Favoritism practices n management: a conceptual framework. Suleyman Demirel University Journal of Social Sciences, 2(20),179-206.
Özsemerci, K. (2003). Corruption In Turkish public administratiion, its causes, damages and solution proposals. T.C Court of Accounts/ Research / Review / Translation Sequence: 27. Retrieved from 19.02.2018. (https://www.sayistay.gov.tr/tr/Upload/95906369/files/yayinlar/TurkKamuYonetiminde_Yolsuzluklar.pdf).
Polat, S. & Kazak, E. (2014). The relationship between nepotistic attitutes and behaviors of school administrators and teachers' perceptions of organizational justice. Education Managementi in Theory and Practice, 20 (1), 71-92.
Pounder, D. G. & Blase, J. J. (1988). Principal favoritism: Explanations, effects, andimplications for practice. University of Central Arkanasas Interlibrary Loan. Retrieved from 19. 03. 2020 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265851199_Principal_favoritism_Explanations_effects_and_implications_for_practice
Ramachander, A. (2011). Dealing with favoritism at the workplace. Retrieved from 19. 02. 2019 http://www.deccanherald.com/content/173905/dealing-favouritism-workplace.html
Sheridan, M. K. (2007). Just because it's sex doesn't mean it's because of sex: The need for new legislation to target sexual favoritism. Retrieved from 19. 02. 2019. (https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/collsp40&id=391&men_tab=srchresults).
Tabancalı, E. (2018). Nepotism in primary schools. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 10(2), 162-175.
Tarhan, R. B., Gençkaya, Ö. F., Ergül, E., Özsemerci, K. & Özbaran, H. (2006). Anti-Corruption-parliamentary report. Corruption as a phenomenon: Causes, effects and solutions. Retrieved from 21.02.2018 https://www.tepav.org.tr/upload/files/13134754134.Bir_Olgu_Olarak_Yolsuzluk_Nedenler__Etkiler__Cozum_Onerileri.pdf
Turgut, K. (2007). Impact of political corruption on human behavior. Retrieved from on 24.02. 2017. https://sites.google.com/site/grandustadakademi/politik-yozlasmanin-insan- uezerindeki-etkisi
Yıldırım, M. (2013). The ancient paradox of public administration: Nepotism and meritocracy. Celal Bayar University Journal of Social Sciences, 11(2), 353-380.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work