Menu Expand

Girls’ Education in Turkey: A Provincial Analysis of Private Funding Campaigns

  1. Journals
  2. Economics, Finance, Business & Management
  3. Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch
  4. Vol. 139, Issue 1
  5. pp. 29–72

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE

Style
Ozkok, Z. Girls’ Education in Turkey: A Provincial Analysis of Private Funding Campaigns. Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, 139(1), 29-72. https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.139.1.29
Ozkok, Zeynep "Girls’ Education in Turkey: A Provincial Analysis of Private Funding Campaigns" Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch 139.1, , 29-72. https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.139.1.29
Ozkok, Zeynep: Girls’ Education in Turkey: A Provincial Analysis of Private Funding Campaigns, in: Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, vol. 139, iss. 1, 29-72, [online] https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.139.1.29
Format
Download

Girls’ Education in Turkey: A Provincial Analysis of Private Funding Campaigns

Ozkok, Zeynep

Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 139 (2019), Iss. 1 : pp. 29–72

Read Now Download (PDF)

Additional Information

Article Details

Publisher Name
Duncker & Humblot
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.139.1.29
Language
English
Pages
43
Keywords

Author Details

Ozkok, Zeynep, Department of Economics, St. Francis Xavier University, PO Box 5000, Antigonish, Nova Scotia, Canada, B2G 2W5.

References

  1. Alat, Z. and K. Alat. 2011. “A Qualitative Study of Parental Resistance to Girls’ Schooling.” Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice 11 (3): 1369 – 73.  Google Scholar
  2. Altinok, N. and A. Aydemir. 2015. “The Unfolding of Gender Gap in Education.” Institute for Research in the Sociology and Economics of Education Working Paper 01204805. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01204805/document.  Google Scholar
  3. Assaad, R., D. Levison, and N. Ziban. 2010. “The Effect of Domestic Work on Girls’ Schooling: Evidence from Egypt.” Feminist Economics 16 (1): 79 – 128.  Google Scholar
  4. Attanasio, O. P., E. Fitzsimmons, and A. Gomez. 2005. “The Impact of a Conditional Education Subsidy on School Enrollment in Colombia.” Centre for the Evaluation of Development Policies. The Institute for Fiscal Studies Report Summary. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://www.ifs.org.uk/edepo/rs_fam01.pdf.  Google Scholar
  5. Aydagul, B. 2006. “Education: An Overarching ‘acquis’ for Turkey.” Turkish Policy Quarterly 5 (1): 93 – 103.  Google Scholar
  6. Aydagul, B. 2007. “Turkey: Country Case Study.” Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2008. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001555/155505e.pdf.  Google Scholar
  7. Aydagul, B. 2008. “No Shared Vision for Achieving Education for All: Turkey at Risk.” Prospects 38 (3): 401 – 07.  Google Scholar
  8. Baird, S., F. H. G. Ferreira, B. Ozler, and M. Woolcock. 2013. “Relative Effectiveness of Conditional and Unconditional Cash Transfers for Schooling Outcomes in Developing Countries: A Systematic Review.” Campbell Systematic Reviews 8.  Google Scholar
  9. BBOG. 2015. “2005 – 2015 10. Yilinda Baba Beni Okula Gonder Seferberligi. Okuyan Kizlar Aydinlik Yarinlar.” Aydin Dogan Vakfi. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://www.bbog.org/content/10-yil-kitabi.pdf.  Google Scholar
  10. BBOG. 2016. “Baba Beni Okula Gonder (Dad, Send Me to School).” Accessed March 10, 2020. http://www.bbog.org/.  Google Scholar
  11. Behrman, J. and A. Deolalikar. 19139. “Health and Nutrition.” In Handbook of Development Economics, Vol.1, edited by J. Behrman and T. N. Srinivasan, 631 – 711. Amsterdam, New York, and Oxford: Elsevier.  Google Scholar
  12. Behrman, J. R., P. Sengupta, and P. E. Todd. 2005. “Progressing through PROGRESA: An Impact Assessment of a School Subsidy Experiment in Mexico.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 54 (1): 237 – 75.  Google Scholar
  13. Behrman, J. R. and B. L. Wolfe. 1984. “The Socioeconomic Impact of Schooling in a Developing Country.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 66 (2): 296 – 303.  Google Scholar
  14. Buyukozturk, S. 2005. “Kiz Cocuklarinin Ilkogretimde Okullulasma Durumu: Nicel Degerlendirme Sonuc Raporu (Girls’ Enrollment in Primary Education: Final Report of Quantitative Assessment).” Unpublished Report in Cooperation of MoNE and UNICEF: Ankara, Turkey.  Google Scholar
  15. Cameli, T. 2007. “Girls’ Access to Primary Education, Best Practices from Turkey.” Sabanci University. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://www.acev.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/10_girls_access_to_primary_education_best_practices_from_turkey_june_2008.pdf.  Google Scholar
  16. Caner, A., C. Guven, C. Okten, and S. O. Sakalli. 2016. “Gender Roles and the Education Gender Gap in Turkey.” Social Indicators Research 129: 1231 – 54.  Google Scholar
  17. Cardoso, E. and A. Portela Souza. 2004. “The Impact of Cash Transfers on Child Labor and School Attendance in Brazil.” Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 04-W07. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://www.accessecon.com/pubs/VUECON/vu04-w07.pdf.  Google Scholar
  18. Chaudhury, N. and D. Parajuli. 2010. “Conditional Cash Transfers and Female Schooling: The Impact of the Female School Stipend Programme on Public School Enrolments in Punjab, Pakistan.” Applied Economics 42 (28): 3565 – 83.  Google Scholar
  19. Cooray, A. and N. Potrafke. 2010. “Gender Inequality in Education: Political Institutions or Culture and Religion?” European Journal of Political Economy 27 (2): 268 – 80.  Google Scholar
  20. CYDD. 2015. “Baba Beni Okula Gonder Projesi Hakkinda Duyuru.” Accessed March 8, 2020. https://www.cydd.org.tr/haber/baba-beni-okula-gonder-projesi-hakkinda-duyuru-178.  Google Scholar
  21. CYDD. 2016. “Cagdas Yasami Destekleme Dernegi, Projeler, Ilkogretim – Lise.” Accessed March 10, 2020. http://www.cydd.org.tr/sayfa/ilkogretim-lise-103.  Google Scholar
  22. Dayıoglu, M., M. G. Kirdar, and A. Tansel. 2009. “Impact of Sibship Size, Birth Order and Sex Composition on School Enrolment in Urban Turkey.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 71 (3): 303 – 452.  Google Scholar
  23. Dollar, D. and R. Gatti. 1999. “Gender Inequality, Income and Growth: Are Good Times Good for Women?” Policy Research Report on Gender and Development Working Paper Series No. 1. Accessed March 10, 2020.http://darp.lse.ac.uk/frankweb/courses/EC501/DG.pdf.  Google Scholar
  24. Dulger, I. 2004. “Turkey: Rapid Coverage for Compulsory Education: The 1997 Basic Education Program.” Scaling Up Poverty Reduction: A Global Learning Process and Conference. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTTURKEY/Resources/361616-1142415001082/Compulsory_Education_by_Dulger.pdf.  Google Scholar
  25. Duman, A. 2012. “Conditional Cash Transfers in Turkey: Advantages and Disadvantages.” In Education Policy and Equal Education Opportunities, edited by G. Badescu and D. Pop, 267 – 86. New York: Open Society Foundations.  Google Scholar
  26. Ergun, S. 2012. “UNICEF and Ministry of Education Girls’ Education Project in Turkey: ‘Haydi Kizlar Okula!’ Did It Work? What is the Aftermath?” Thesis manuscript. Georgia Institute of Technology. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://smartech.gatech.edu/bitstream/handle/1853/47518/ergun_saliha_201205_mast.pdf.  Google Scholar
  27. Erturk, Y. and M. Dayioglu. 2004. Gender, Education and Child Labor in Turkey. Geneva: ILO.  Google Scholar
  28. Filmer, D. and N. Schady. 2008. “Getting Girls into School: Evidence from a Scholarship Program in Cambodia.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 56 (3): 581 – 617.  Google Scholar
  29. Filmer, D. and N. Schady. 2011. “Does More Cash in Conditional Cash Transfer Programs Always Lead to Larger Impacts on School Attendance?” Journal of Development Economics 96 (1): 150 – 57.  Google Scholar
  30. Fiszbein, A., N. Schady, F. H. G. Ferreira, M. Grosh, N. Kelleher, P. Olinto, and E. Skoufias. 2009. Conditional Cash Transfers. Reducing Present and Future Poverty. Washington, DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCCT/Resources/5757608-1234228266004/PRR-CCT_web_noembargo.pdf.  Google Scholar
  31. Galor, O. and D. Weil. 1996. “The Gender Gap, Fertility, and Growth.” American Economic Review 86 (3): 374 – 87.  Google Scholar
  32. Glewwe, P. and P. Olinto. 2004. “Evaluating the Impact of Conditional Cash Transfers on Schooling: An Experimental Analysis of Honduras’ PRAF Program.” Unpublished manuscript, Department of Economics, University of Minnesota. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTLACREGTOPPOVANA/Resources/GlewweOlintoimpactofconditionalcashtransfersonschooling.pdf.  Google Scholar
  33. Glick, P. 2008. “What Policies will Reduce Gender Schooling Gaps in Developing Countries: Evidence and Interpretation.” World Development 36 (9): 1623 – 46.  Google Scholar
  34. Goksel, I. 2008. “Determinants of School Attainment in Turkey and the Impact of the Extension of Compulsory Education.” Accessed: March 10, 2020. http://www.ucw-project.org/attachment/Goksel.pdf.  Google Scholar
  35. Gumus, S. and E. Gumus. 2013. “Achieving Gender Parity in Primary School Education in Turkey via the Campaign Called ‘Haydi Kızlar Okula’ (Girls, Let’s Go to School).” Education and Science 38 (167): 17 – 26.  Google Scholar
  36. Hill, M. A. and E. King. 1995. “Women’s Education and Economic Well-being.” Feminist Economics 1 (2): 21 – 46.  Google Scholar
  37. Kanci, T. 2005. “Egitimde Toplumsal Cinsiyet Esitliginin Saglanmasi: Turkiye’de Proje, Kampanya ve Girisimler.” Report prepared for ERG and ACEV.  Google Scholar
  38. Khandker, S., M. Pitt, and N. Fuwa. 2003. “Subsidy to Promote Girls’ Secondary Education: The Female Stipend Program in Bangladesh.” MPRA Paper No. 236139. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/236139/1/MPRA_paper_236139.pdf.  Google Scholar
  39. Kilic, D. 2012. Empirical Analysis of Health and Educational Attainment in Turkey. Thesis manuscript. University of Sheffield. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/2437/1/Kilic,_Dilek.pdf.  Google Scholar
  40. King, E. M. and M. A. Hill. 1993. Women’s Education in Developing Countries. Barriers, Benefits and Policies. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.  Google Scholar
  41. King, E., S. Klasen, and M. Porter. 2008. “Gender and Development Challenge Paper.” Paper prepared for 2008 round of Copenhagen Consensus Project. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/sites/default/files/CP_Women_and_Development_-_King.pdf.  Google Scholar
  42. Kirdar, M. G., M. Dayioglu, and I. Koc. 2015. “Does Longer Compulsory Education Equalize Schooling by Gender and Rural/Urban Residence?” The World Bank Economic Review 30 (3): 549 – 79.  Google Scholar
  43. Klasen, S. 2000. “Does Gender Inequality Reduce Growth and Development? Evidence from Cross-country Regressions.” Sonderforschungsbereich 386: Analyse Diskreter Strukturen Discussion Paper No 212. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/1602/1/paper_212.pdf.  Google Scholar
  44. Klasen, S. 2002. “Low Schooling for Girls, Slower Growth for All? Cross-country Evidence on the Effect of Gender Inequality in Education on Economic Development.” The World Bank Economic Review 16 (3): 345 – 73.  Google Scholar
  45. Klasen, S. 2006. “Gender and Pro-Poor Growth.” In Pro-Poor Growth: Policy and Evidence, Vol. 314, edited by L. Menkhoff, 151 – 71. Berlin: Duncker and Humblot.  Google Scholar
  46. Klasen, S. and F. Lamanna. 2009. “The Impact of Gender Inequality in Education and Employment on Economic Growth: New Evidence for a Panel of Countries.” Feminist Economics 15 (3): 91 – 132.  Google Scholar
  47. Lagerlof, N.-P. 2003. “Gender Equality and Long-Run Growth.” Journal of Economic Growth 8: 403 – 26.  Google Scholar
  48. Levison, D. and K. Moe. 1998. “Household Work as a Deterrent to Schooling: An Analysis of Adolescent Girls in Peru.” Journal of Developing Areas 32 (3): 339 – 56.  Google Scholar
  49. Maluccio, J. A. and R. Flores. 2005. “Impact Evaluation of a Conditional Cash Transfer Program: The Nicaraguan Red de Proteccion Social.” International Food Policy Research Institute Research Report 141.  Google Scholar
  50. MEB. 2019. “Ilkogretim ve Egitim Kanunu.” MEB Mevzuat. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.4.222.pdf.  Google Scholar
  51. Moheyuddin, G. 2005. “Gender Inequality in Education: Impact on Income, Growth and Development.” MPRA Paper 685. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/685/1/MPRA_paper_685.pdf.  Google Scholar
  52. O’Dwyer, J. N. Aksit, and M. Sands. 2010. “Expanding Educational Access in Eastern Turkey: A New Initiative.” International Journal of Educational Development 30 (2): 193 – 203.  Google Scholar
  53. OECD Country Note. 2019. “Education at a Glance 2019.” Accessed March 10, 2020. https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance/EAG2019_CN_TUR.pdf.  Google Scholar
  54. OECD Education GPS. 2018. “Turkey Overview of the Education System.” Accessed March 10, 2020. http://gpseducation.oecd.org/CountryProfile?primaryCountry=TUR&treshold=10&topic=EO.  Google Scholar
  55. Ombati, V and M. Ombati. 2012. “Gender Inequality in Education in Sub-Saharan Africa.” Journal of Women’s Entrepreneurship and Education 3 – 4: 114 – 36.  Google Scholar
  56. Patrinos, H. A. 2007. “Demand-side Financing in Education.” UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning International Academy of Education. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.486.4906&rep=rep1&type=pdf.  Google Scholar
  57. Rankin, B. H. and I. A. Aytac. 2006. “Gender Inequality in Schooling: The Case of Turkey.” Sociology of Education 79 (1): 25 – 43.  Google Scholar
  58. Sasmaz, A., B. Keles, E. Ilhan, I. Tuzun, M. A. Dincer, and N. K. Blancy. 2015. “Transition from Primary to Secondary Education: Policy Analysis and Recommendations.” Education Reform Initiative Report. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://www.egitimreformugirisimi.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ERG_Transition-From-PRimary-to-Secondary-Education.pdf.  Google Scholar
  59. Schultz, T. P. 2004. “School Subsidies for the Poor: Evaluating the Mexican Progresa Poverty Program.” Journal of Development Economics 74: 199 – 250.  Google Scholar
  60. Smits, J. and A. Gunduz-Hosgor. 2006. “Effects of Family Background Characteristics on Educational Participation in Turkey.” International Journal of Education Development 26 (5): 545 – 60.  Google Scholar
  61. Soylu, S. 2011. “Gender Inequality in Turkish Education System and the Causes.” Thesis manuscript. Temple University. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://digital.library.temple.edu/digital/collection/p245801coll10/id/162017/.  Google Scholar
  62. Sperling, G. B., R. Winthrop, and C. Kwauk. 2016. What Works in Girls’ Education. Evidence for the World’s Best Investment. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/What-Works-in-Girls-Educationlowres.pdf.  Google Scholar
  63. Stimpfle, A. and D. Stadelmann. 2016. “Marriage Age Affects Educational Gender Inequality: International Evidence.” Center for Research in Economics, Management and Arts Working Paper No. 2016 – 02. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://www.crema-research.ch/papers/2016-02.pdf.  Google Scholar
  64. Stromquist N. P. 1990. “Women and Illiteracy: The Interplay of Gender Subordination and Poverty.” Special Issue: Adult Literacy 34 (1): 95 – 111.  Google Scholar
  65. Tek Girisim. 2017. “Baba Beni Okula Gonder.” Accessed March 10, 2020. http://www.tekgirisimltd.com/Proje/bababeniokulagonder.  Google Scholar
  66. Turkcell. 2007. “Snowdrops.” IPRA Golden World Awards 2007 Competition. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://d.turkcell.com.tr/docs/ic/TURKCELL_SNOWDROPS.pdf.  Google Scholar
  67. Turkcell. 2016. “Snowdrops.” Accessed August 28, 2019. http://www.turkcell.com.tr/en/aboutus/corporate-social-responsibility/education/snowdrops.  Google Scholar
  68. Turkish Statistical Institute Transportation Statistics. 2019. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/bolgeselistatistik/anaSayfa.do?dil=en.  Google Scholar
  69. Ucan, E. 2013. “Increasing Girls’ Secondary Education Attainment in Turkey.” Harvard University Graduate School of Education Global Education Leadership Opportunities Conference.  Google Scholar
  70. UNESCO Institute for Statistics. 2018. “One in Five Children, Adolescents and Youth is Out of School.” Fact Sheet No. 48 Accessed August 27, 2019. http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/fs48-one-five-children-adolescents-youth-out-school-2018-en.pdf.  Google Scholar
  71. World Bank. 2004. “Case Study on Turkey: Rapid Coverage for Compulsory Education Program.” Scaling Up Poverty Reduction: A Global Learning Process and Conference. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTTURKEY/Resources/Compulsory_Education.pdf.  Google Scholar
  72. Yazan, B. 2014. “Come on Girls, Let’s Go to School: An Effort Towards Gender Educational Equity in Turkey.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 18 (8): 836 – 56.  Google Scholar

Abstract

With large disparities in enrollment and completion rates, girls’ education is a topic of concern in Turkey. Private funding campaigns have played an important role in combating gender inequality in education. This paper examines the impact of two major private funding campaigns on girls’ schooling rates using Turkish provincial level data for 2013 and 2014. Controlling for regional and socio-demographic characteristics our findings show that “Dad, Send Me to School” and “Snowdrops” campaigns have positively influenced girls’ schooling rates in primary and lower secondary education across Turkish provinces. The effect is less conclusive for upper secondary education.

Table of Contents

Section Title Page Action Price
Zeynep Ozkok: Girls’ Education in Turkey: A Provincial Analysis of Private Funding Campaigns 1
Abstract 1
1. Introduction 1
2. Projects on Girls’ Educationin Turkey and the Two Campaigns 4
2.1 Review of Educational Policies and Projects in Turkey 4
2.2 “Dad, Send Me to School” and “Snowdrops” Campaigns 6
3. Data 7
3.1 Girls’ Enrollment 8
3.2 The Two Private Campaigns for Funding Girls’ Education 8
3.3 Other Control Variables 8
4. Empirical Specification 1
5. Empirical Results and Robustness Checks 1
5.1 The Effect of the Two Projects on Net Schooling Ratesand Enrollment Levels 1
5.2 Classroom Effects 2
5.3 Other Robustness Checks 2
6. Discussion 3
7. Concluding Remarks 3
References 3

Contact

Duncker & Humblot GmbH Carl-Heinrich-Becker-Weg 9 12165 Berlin, Deutschland T: +49 30 790006-0

Quick Navigation

2024 Duncker & Humblot GmbH

Powered by CloudPublish

We use cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our website. Learn more about how we use cookies.