Democracy for Social Justice: An Inquiry into the Perceptions of Prospective Teachers
Author(s):
Gokhan Kilicoglu (presenting / submitting) İlknur Şentürk (presenting)
Conference:
ECER 2016
Format:
Paper

Session Information

10 SES 05 C, Becoming a Teacher

Paper Session

Time:
2016-08-24
13:30-15:00
Room:
NM-C214
Chair:

Contribution

Social justice has become a concept that is critically discussed in political, economic, social and legal areas in our global world. Educational organizations as being actors at the center of social and political changes are imminently influenced from social justice debates and practices (Birkenmaier, 2003). The concept of social justice has been a key concept in the discussion of the impacts of capitalism, neoliberalism and globalism since 20th century. Explaining the concepts democracy and pluralism is also benefited from social justice as well. Social justice expresses maintenance of public and social goods, capture of the common good, balanced distribution of economic, social and cultural capital forms between social classes. In fact, social justice aims to maintain balance of power in favor of the oppressed social classes, to reduce imbalances in income distribution and to raise living standards of people in the society. In terms of legal aspect, Miller (1999) describes social justice as maintenance of the rights, assurance of basic community needs and expectations, life safety, fair distribution of the resources, and accessibility. Specifically, fundamental principles of social justice are citizenship that does not compromise cultural, racial, ethnic, economic, linguistic, religious discrimination. On the other hand, it involves legal protection of the citizenship model, opportunities to equal access for all kind of resources, and fair distribution of resources (Miller, 1999). Social justice in education refers to the role of schools in equal distribution of resources with their institutional and democratic endeavors in recognition of the rights, freedom, demands, identity and culture (Apple & Beane, 2009; Bates, 2005).

Social justice in education is essential to be explained by existence of democracy. Social justice in schools is also a struggle for democracy. Indeed, democracy is the transformation of power areas in favor of society and the public benefit, ensuring participation in decision making, and the recognition of rights, freedom and autonomy. Democracy provides individuals the ability to solve problems about equality and justice in schools with creating an active citizenship model. Since social justice and democracy are related constructs, and social justice is associated with access to democratic rights, social rights and social justice are believed to strengthen democracy (Toens, 2007). Consequently, it is necessary to transform democratic attitudes and competencies, democratic society structure, hierarchical power and authorities in order to manage social justice. Therefore, it is essential to propose social justice and democracy components into teacher education agenda to give a political vision for teacher education programs (Hyten, 2015). It is also asserted that the content of teacher education is required to be designed with pluralistic perspective and academic development of prospective teachers needs to be proposed by democratic values within the framework of critical pedagogy (Gunzenhauser, 2015). Furthermore, it is believed that prospective teachers should experience democracy culture, social justice and multiculturalism principles in educational practices in order to develop a particular point of view (Juarez & Hayes, 2010; Ritchie, 2012; Warren, 2002). Therefore, main focus of today’s educational practices is to ensure prospective teachers to get social justice and democracy perceptions. In this context, the purpose of this study is to scrutinize social justice perceptions and democratic attitudes of prospective teachers. It is also aimed to determine the relationship between social justice and democratic attitudes from prospective teachers’ point of view.

Method

The study was conducted as a correlational design in order to determine relationship between democratic attitude of prospective teachers and their social justice perceptions. Population of the research comprised prospective teachers studying at the faculty of education at a university in Central Anatolia, Turkey. Cluster sampling was utilized as a sampling method in the study. Overall sample of the study was provided by 315 prospective teachers from 5 different departments. 89 of the teachers were from guidance and psychological counseling, 105 of them were from special education, 42 of them were from computer education, 6 of them were from science education, and 73 of them were from classroom teaching. Respondent teachers ranged in age from 18 to 38 years (X̅=20.31, SD=2.12). Majority of the sample (%55.2) was female while others were male (%44.8). As a data collection instrument, Learning to Teach for Social Justice Beliefs (LTSJB) developed by Boston College (BC) Evidence Team (2008) was used for representing beliefs and perspectives of prospective teachers about social justice in classroom and school atmosphere (Ludlow, Enterline & Cochran-Smith, 2008a; Ludlow et al., 2008b). LTSJB is a five-point (1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree) Likert scale comprising one dimension with 12 items. After adaptation of the LTSJB into Turkish language, confirmatory factor analysis and Cronbach alpha was utilized to examine construct validity and internal consistency of the scale. As a result of confirmatory factor analysis and reliability analysis, goodness of fit indices (χ2=137.65, df=51, χ2/df=2.69, RMSEA=.07, AGFI=.90, GFI=.93, SRMR=0.06) and internal consistency coefficient (α= .72) showed that LTSJB has acceptable goodness of fit statistics (Hu & Bentler, 1998; Jöreskog & Sörbom, 2001) Furthermore, Teacher Opinionaire on Democracy Scale developed by Published for the Attitude Research Laboratory was utilized to measure prospective teachers’ democratic attitudes. Reliability and validity of the scale and its adaptation into Turkish language was carried out by Gozutok (1995). The scale consisted of 50 items, 32 of them are positive while the rest involve negative statements. The scale were completed as 1 (agree) for positive responds and 0 (disagree) for negative responds. Thus, a maximum of 50 points can be taken from the scale. As result of confirmatory factor analysis in this study, goodness of fit indices revealed that the scale has acceptable values (χ2=2418.70, df=1.168, χ2/df=2.07, RMSEA=.05, AGFI=.74, GFI=.76, SRMR=0.07). Besides, internal consistency coefficient provided an acceptable value (α = .77) in reliability analysis.

Expected Outcomes

To examine social justice beliefs and democratic attitudes of prospective teachers, descriptive statistics were used at first. The results revealed that prospective teachers show moderate level of social justice beliefs (X̅=3.62, SD=.55). Likewise, they showed moderate level of democratic attitudes (X̅=32.48, SD=5.87). In order to determine whether democratic attitudes of prospective teachers are associated with their social justice beliefs, correlation analysis was utilized. The results of the analysis indicated that democratic attitudes of prospective teachers significantly correlated with their social justice beliefs in a positive way (r=.59). To investigate whether democratic attitudes of prospective teachers are the predictors of their social justice beliefs, multiple linear regression was used as a data analysis method. The results of the analysis revealed that democratic attitudes of prospective teachers significantly predict their social justice beliefs in a positive way. More specifically, %35 change in social justice beliefs of prospective teachers is explained by their democratic attitudes (R=.592, R2=.350, F=112.721, p<.01).

References

Apple, M. W. & Beane, J. A. (2009). Democratic schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Bates, R. (2005). Educational administration and social justice. Paper presented at Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Australia. Birkenmaier, J. (2003). On becoming a social justice practitioner. Journal of Religion & Spirituality in Social Work, 22(2-3), 41-54. Gozutok, D. (1995). Ögretmenlerin demokratik tutumları. Ankara: Türk Demokrasi Vakfı Yayınları. Gunzenhauser, M. G. (2015). Enacting social justice ethically: Individual and communal habits. A response to ethics in teaching for democracy and social justice. Democracy & Education, 23(2), 1-7. Hu, I., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424-453. Hytten, K. (2015). Ethics in teaching for democracy and social justice. Democracy & Education, 23(2), 1-11. Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (2001). LISREL 8.51. Mooresvile: Scientific Software. Juárez B. G. & Hayes, C. (2010). Social justice is not spoken here: Considering the nexus of knowledge, power and the education of future teachers in the United States. Power and Education, 2(3), 233-252. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130-149. Miller, D. (1999). Principles of social justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Ludlow, L., Pedulla, J., Enterline, S., Cochran-Smith, M., Loftus, F., Salomon-Fernandez, Y., & Mitescu, E. (2008b). From students to teachers: Using surveys to build a culture of evidence and inquiry. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(4), 1-19. Ludlow, L.H., Enterline, S., & Cochran-Smith, M. (2008a). Learning to teach for social justice-beliefs scale: An application of Rasch measurement principles. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 20, 194-214. Ritchie, S. (2012). Incubating and sustaining: How teacher networks enable and support social justice education. Journal of Teacher Education, 63(2), 120-131. Toens, K. (2007). The dilemma of regress social justice and democracy in recent critical theory. European Journal of Political Theory, 6(2), 160-179. Warren, K. (2002). Preparing the next generation: Social justice in outdoor leadership education and training. The Journal of Experiential Education, 25(1), 231-238.

Author Information

Gokhan Kilicoglu (presenting / submitting)
Eskisehir Osmangazi University
Eskisehir
İlknur Şentürk (presenting)
Eskişehir Osmangazi University
Educational Sciences
Eskişehir

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.