European Journal of Education Studies ISSN: 2501 - 1111 ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111 Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 doi: 10.5281/zenodo.268656 VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNINGi Ayfer Kocabasii Dokuz Eylul University, Buca Educational Faculty, Department of Primary Education, ‛uca, İzmir, Turkey Abstract: The aims of Village Institutes were to create modern Turkey and start development from the villages by presenting civilization and revolutions to Turkish villagers and to supply primary education in the villages at % percent. In ‚pril , Village Institutes were founded by Ministry of National Education Hasan ‚li Y(cel and his General Director of Primary Education İsmail Hakkı Tonguç. The most important principles of them were; education in work, education with work, education for work. The Village Institutes system allowed the students to participate actively into education with their own actions leading to educated, critical thinking and creative individuals being capable of using their rights in the right manner; moreover, leading the formation of a creative society. In this article, similar and common dimensions of the group works applied in the Village Institutes and Cooperative Learning have been presented. Also, being aware of this educational system in Turkey in the past is tried to be provided. As a result, the value of The Village Institutes system should be regiven to humanity by using its positive aspects in today s education systems. Keywords: village institutes, cooperative learning, primary education 1. Introduction The earliest date in bibliographies for the history of cooperative learning is known as 1898 (Johnson, Johnson & Holubec, 1994). The researches which compare the cooperative learning and the learning techniques which are based on competition and This article was presented in the conference Cooperative Learning Meeting the challenges of the Century, University College Lillebaelt, Odense-Denmark (1-3 October 2015). i Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. © 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group . 47 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING individualism date back to 1890s. The years that Kurt Levin (1890-1947), (1935) and (1920) Morton Deutch (1949) had started their researches which were based on the place of competition and cooperation in social psychology are the years when The Village Institutes were prepared for being opened and were tried to be closed. In 1935, there had been 12 years since the new founded Republic of Turkey was established. 80% of population was living in villages and literacy rate was too low. There were 15.000 teachers already, however 36.000 teachers were needed. It was necessary to solve the primary school problem and to make everyone be literate as immediate as possible. It was a must to create modern people who are loyal to the reforms of the Republic, reforms and principles of Atatürk; are supporters of enlightenment; adopt democracy; help to improve the country culturally and educationally and to boost the socioeconomic side of the country starting from villages. In 1940, in Village Institutes Law numbered With the decision of the Ministry of National Education, The Village Institutes are founded on cultivated lands to educate teachers who will become useful in villages. was written. When the law was enacted, İsmail Hakkı Tonguç was the General Director of Primary Education, and Hasan Ali Yücel was the Minister of National Education (Tonguç, 2007: 34-40). After the World War II, The Village Institutes entered in the process of being closed with the reasons like improving the political and economical affiliation with the USA quickly, avarseness of landlord members of the parliament against that the teachers graduated from the Village Institutes would educate the public and raise their awareness, failure of actualisation of land reform. In 1946, with the winning of Demokrat Parti on the election, Hasan Ali Yücel the Minister of National Education and İsmail Hakkı Tonguç the General Director of Primary Education who was the ideational father and practitioner of The Village Institutes were eased out. In 1950, mixed-sex education was terminated. In 1954, they were closed with the law numbered 6234 amalgamating with Primary Teacher Schools in T(rkoğlu, . Besides the regulation of The Village Institutes was well planned; 17.321 village teacher, 512 sanitarians and midwives, 8756 educators who were graduated from village institutes have contributed a lot to the society until the years we live in. They also contributed to basic education to raise the rate of literacy. Teachers graduated from these schools were not only educators but also sanitarians, carpenters, builders, blacksmiths, cooperative members and actualisers, shoemakers, musical instrument makers, electricians, fishers. Some of them have become artist, craftsman, scientist, politician, a member of parliament, pedagog as well. Teachers graduated from Village Institutes founded Ege ‛ölgesi Köy 5ğretmenleri Derneği ‚egean Region Village Teachers ‚ssociation first, and then, Göller ‛ölgesi Köy 5ğretmenleri Derneği Lakes Region Village Teacher s ‚ssociation . ‚ll the associations founded Teachers European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 48 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING ‚ssociations National Federation of Turkey in and Teachers Union of Turkey in 1965. They are the pioneers of democratic teacher movement. They have always been the precursors and reformist ones in social, political, cultural, and economic alternation of Turk society. Teachers graduated from the village instıtutes are the ones who educated the generation of 1968. Today, they are 84-90 years old and lifelong learning and solidarity of them have been continued by their children and grand-children in Yeni Kuşak Köy Enstit(l(ler Derneği New Generation Village Institutes Supporters ‚ssociation . Yeni Kuşak Köy Enstit(l(ler Derneği New Generation Village Institutes Supporters ‚ssociation was founded in and it has released a lof of books and documentaries in which memories of those teachers were compiled. The most important features of Village Institutes are that T(rkoğlu, 5zgen, Kocabaş, 2003); 1) The places where The Village Institutes would be founded were planned considering the fact that it would include 3-4 cities according to the cultural texture, geographical position and living conditions to develop the country homogeneously and equally. In this way, equality of opportunity in education in the country was provided. 2) It was important that these schools were placed on 1000-6000 decares fields and near the railways (Özgen, 2002). 3) %50 of the programmes of The Village Institutes was arranged for theoretical courses while the other %50 of those programmes was arranged for agricultural and technical courses, and the courses were heading for productivity with the principle education in work, education with work, education for work, education for production and through group-work techniques. Table 1: Time Schedule for Five Years in the Village Institutions Köy Enstit(leri Programı Courses Culture lessons Theoretical and Practical Week Period 114 (22 hours in a week) 5060 58 (11 hours in a week) 638 58 (11 hours in a week) 638 Agriculture Courses Technical Courses and Practices 5-year perpetual vacations Total 30 260 weeks European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 6336 49 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING 4) The education and training principle education in work, education with work, education for work, education for production was being an actual link between theoretical and practical courses. 5) In each institute, the programmes which were flexible and locally administrated according to environment features were arranged weekly, monthly and yearly. 6) The common goal was to present intellectual teachers who were supposed to be a model for the people living in villages and were educated in crafts, in addition to teaching the people living in a village for the development of that village by themselves. 7) Students had responsibilities and authority in all the works and the management of the institutes. All works of the institutes were being done by all students in groups and sequence. Job training provided students to take an active role for production necessitated group works and organizing the leader of the group. Group was seen as a management unit. It was bringing students and teachers together and organizing them as a family. The leader of the group was like a parent, and was connecting with the other units of an institute. Kirby (1963:229) alleged that it was a more developed system than today s counseling system. Table 2: T(rkoğlu, 207) Division of Tasks in the Village Institutions Individual responsibility and common goal dependence were working with the help of this division of tasks Director Subject domain teachers and and head workmaster Chair student Hall Monitors/ Students on duty of units Principal/ Various branch teachers, Related branch Related Hall Monitors/ Deputy circulating capital and headships Students on duty Principal accounting Head of Head teachers of groups and all Head students of groups Students on duty/ Hall Education branch teachers Head of Agriculture educators and craft Head of Agriculture and Students on duty in Agriculture educators Heads of Cultivated Agriculture Monitors Area Head of Heads of atelier, structure-art Head of Structure – Art Students on duty in Structure – teachers, and craft educators and Heads of Atelier Atelier Head of Music teachers and craft Head of music, orchestra Students on duty in Music educators conductors, choir Music Art conductors European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 50 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING Head of Gym and folk dance teachers and Head of sport and Heads Sport craft teachers of dance Head of Nurse and sanitarian Head of health health – Responsible Students Students on duty in Infirmary doctor T(rkoğlu -409), the writer graduated from The Village Institutes, deals with the Collective Work System and Group and Organizing the Leader of the Group which were implemented in the Village Institutes, The Authority and Responsibility to Students Principle, Coeducation and The Assessment and Evaluation activities detailedly in the chapter Demokratik Eğitim Patlaması Democratic Education ‛oom of her book. As Gelen said (1990:129), the fact that Prof. Dr. Gottfried Hausman from Hamburg University criticized The Village Institutes saying In these institutes, peer learning principle was applied. In school life, job and course education were given at the same time. Moreover, we can say that students learned from each other and worked together. may be seen as an important supporting idea for the cooperative learning principles. 2. Cooperative Learning Cooperative Learning is the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each other s learning. When compared with competitive and individualistic learning, cooperative learning includes higher achievement, greater productivity, long-term retention, intrinsic motivation, positive relationships among students and greater psychological healthy. But there are five basic elements of cooperative learning for fulfilling cooperation. They are,   positive interdependence;  face to face promotive interaction;  individual and group accountability;  interpersonal small group skills; group processing. According to Jonhson and Johnson (1994) it is organizational structure that will affect all aspects of classroom life (Jonhson, Johnson& Holubec, 1994). European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 51 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING Table 3: Cooperative School Organizational Structure (Johnson & Johnson, 1999: 51-58, Ed. Sharan, 1999) School Board Superintendent and Staff Teacher Collegiality Group Cooperative Learning Group Cooperative Learning Group Teacher Collegiality Group Cooperative Learning Group Cooperative Learning Group Teacher Collegiality Group Cooperative Learning Group Cooperative Learning Group Cooperative Learning Group Teacher Collegiality Group Principal Collegiality Group Cooperative Learning Group Principle Collegiality Group There are great similarities between (Table 2) division of tasks in the Village Institutions and (Table 3) cooperative school organizational structure. 3. The Aim and importance of the research The aim of this research was to reveal the similarities and differences in group works implemented in The Village Institutes in terms of principles of cooperative learning. That group works used in The Village Institutes have been researched and revealed depending on the principles of cooperative learning has importance in the fact that; 1) It s the best method to reach the achievement in short-term if Turkey implement the principles of cooperative learning well as in the Village Institutes example (The Village Institutes had given education for 10 years, 1936-1946), 2) The reasons of long-term positive effects of The Village Institutes on forming a democratic society in Turkey is comprehended better, European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 52 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING 3) The history of cooperative learning may be contributed by The Village Institutes system of Turkey 4) In Turkish Education History, in a system -like The Village Institutes system- by which a lot of versatile teachers have been educated, that these principles were implemented has created awareness at an international level, 5) The Village Institutes are a model for versatile programmes that developing countries can use in their education system. 3.1 Problem sentence The problem of this research was formed in the question What are the similarities and dissimilarities of group works used in The Village Institutes according to the principles of Cooperative Learning? 3.2 Sub-problem sentences Research question has been distributed to seven sub-questions; 3.2.1 How was positive interdependence in group works used in The Village Institutes provided? 3.2.2 How did individual accountability and personal responsibility perform in group works in the Village Institutes? 3.3.3 How was face-to-face interaction provided in group works in the Village Institutes? 3.3.4 What were the functions of programme of the Village Institute on developing interpersonal and small-group skills? 3.3.5 Which methods were used to evaluate in group and individually in group works in the Village Institutes? 3.3.6 Were group productions formed in group works in the Village Institutes? 3.3.7 What are the differences between the groupworks in the Village Institutes and cooperative learning? 4. Methodology In this part, some topics like research design, the sample group of the study, data collecting and data analysis processes are clarified one by one. 4.1 Research design This is a qualitative research designed as one of the qualitative research methods, Case Study , in the model of descriptive research. Scanning case study models are survey European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 53 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING regulations whose goal is to make a judgment about a definite unit in the universe (such as individual, family, school, hospital, association etc.) by defining the relations between the unit and the environment around it and the relation between the unit and itself (Karasar, 2005: 86). Case study is defined as the method in which one or more than one incident, environment, programme, social group or other systems which are tied with each other are investigated intimately according to the quotes transferred from McMillan (2000) by Büyüköztürk and others (2010). This research has the characteristics of case study as a study in which groupworks in the Village Institutes are defined and specialized depending on time and location. 4.2 Data collecting methods and measurement of instrument Data were obtained by the way of document investigation in the study. Document Investigation contains analysis of written materials including information about phenomena or incidents aimed to be investigated. 4.3 Written materials: Views of teachers graduated from the Village Institutes in documents, and the books and sources explaining groupworks implemented in the Village Institutes are considered as document in this research. With the aim of collecting necessary data, the sources including information about groupworks in the Village Institutes were reached using one of the qualitative data collecting methods, Document ‚nalyzing . 4.4 Universe and sample of the research The universe of the documents used in the research is formed by 20 books in which the teachers graduated from the Villlage Institutes views, memories related to education and training process were compiled, and which were published by Yeni Kuşak Köy Enstitüleri Derneği New Generation Village Institutes Supporters Association) between the years of 2001-2015. Three of those 20 books constitute the sample of documents. These are that three books tell us about the three Village Institutes in the West, Middle and South of Turkey Kızılçullu Köy Enstit(l( Yıllar The Years in Kızılçullu Village Institute , D(ziçi Köy Enstit(l( Yıllar The Years in D(ziçi Village Institute and Gönen Köy Enstit(s( Işığı The Enlightment of Gönen Village Institute). While determining the documents if they should be taken to the sample or not, criterion sampling of the methods of nonrandom sampling is used because education processes are told in interviews and the research mentions about groupworks in education process. In a research, the observation units may be formed with people, incidents, objects, or situations that have significant qualities. As a result, the units meeting the determined criteria (subjects, events) are taken to sample (Büyüköztürk and the others, 2000). European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 54 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING Table 4: Distribution of the sample according to graduated teachers views in the books Name of the books n % Kızılçullu VI 82 49.10 Gönen VI 43 25.74 Düziçi VI 42 25.14 167 100 Total number of the teacher 4.5 Analyzing data In this research, documents have been analysed according to their content and categorical aggregation has been used in data analysis. Content analysis is that oral or written data are summarized and categorized according to a significant problem or purpose, and that some significant variables or concepts are assessed and categorized by scanning to make a conclusion on the basis of them (Fox, 1969; transferred by Tavşancıl and ‚slan, . Whether group works, which took place in the books used as the documents which helped us in this research followed the principles of cooperative learning or not, how often it followed and what the differences were tried to be revealed through frequency analysis of content analysis. Frequency analysis simply reveals the frequency of the units in terms of percentage and rate. This type of analysis provides the comprehension of the importance and frequency of any unit Tavşancıl and ‚slan, . According to this type of analysis, first the data are conceptualized and regulated in a logical way, then themes are formed in content analysis Yıldırım and Şimşek, 2011). In content analysis, three types of decoding are used in decoding process; decoding which has been done according to the concepts determined before , decoding which has been done according to concepts concluded from the data , and decoding which has been done depend on a general framework . The first one decoding which has been done according to the concepts determined before was used in this research Yıldırım and Şimşek, . Accordingly, each question was considered as a category in this research generally. Sentences and sometimes words have been determined as the analysis units, themes and sub-themes concluded from these categories have been tried to be revealed. The decoding has been done through manifest content in general. In addition to data analysis, the formula of reliability developed by Miles and Huberman (Reliability: Aggrement/Agreement+Divergence) was used to provide the reliability of this analysis. According to their formula, three different branch experts analyse the data by decoding them in the direction of the themes determined before. As the result of these decoding processes sub-themes were formed. Thus and so, the sub-themes providing agreement between two experts and the sub-themes causing divergence may be figured out, and European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 55 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING the harmony rate between the opinions of two experts may be understood thanks to the reliability formula. 4.6 Decoding process In this research, the principles of cooperative learning in the books in which teachers sayings about the education process and which were investigated as a document through concept analysis have been tried to be revealed. 1. So, the principles of cooperative learning that Johnson & Johnson and Holubec (1994) indicate were determined as mutual categories before the data analysis. The concepts, sentences and paragraphs which may be put in all categories have been listed in the key table and gathered in appropriate titles. The concepts, sentences and paragraphs used in decoding both come from the literature related to cooperative learning and from the sayings related to implementations in the Village Institutes. Besides the concepts, pre-decided, new-revealed concepts that have been figured out in the general framework related to the Village Institutes have been included to decoding. The concepts and states describing the cooperative learning process in the best way have taken place in decoding. 2. The concepts, sentences and paragraphs that are similar to each other and have mutual meanings have been gathered and tried to be put together under the mutual categories and themes below. These categories are determined as: 2.1 Positive interdependence; 2.2 Individual accountability and personal responsibility to achieve the mutual goals of the group; 2.3 Face-to-face interaction; 2.4 Interpersonal and small-group skills; 2.5 Assessment of group process; 2.6 Group production. The concepts, sentence and paragraphs that form a meaningful wholeness in regard to the principles of cooperative learning in the education process in the Village Institutes were coded according to page numbers in documents. To provide the reliability, three researchers specializing in their fields made decodings again, and the similarity and dissimilarities were compared and a significant reliability percentage was tried to be reached. Reliability Formula (Reliability: Aggrement/Agreement+Divergence) by Miles and Huberman (quoted by Akay and Ültanır, was used for reliability. The researcher has determined categories in regard to the principle of cooperative learning. Afterwards, the second and third experts have determined the concepts, sentences and paragraphs which are included by these 6 categories. Then, the three experts have met and determined the points they European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 56 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING have agreement or disagreement about the categories. The reliability analysis towards the internal consistency was made to determine whether the statements under these categories formed a meaningful wholeness internally or not. At the end of the analysis, the value of reliability has been given in Table 5. According to these results, it may be said that the value of reliability of the categories were at good level. Besides, each category has been considered as a theme by taking into account the external consistency related to the fact that all have formed a meaningful wholeness related to cooperative learning. In this stage, the obtained data have been digitalized and shown in the form of frequency and percentages. Besides provide opportunity for interpreting the relations, similarity and dissimilarities between the categories, another purpose of digitalizing is to provide a chance to test the results with more extensive researches for providing the reliability. Table 5: MH Reliability values relation to categories (Reliability formula developed by Miles ve Huberman, 1994. Reliability Coefficient: Agreement/ Agreement+Disagreement.100) MH Reliability Formula and Categories Reliability Coefficient: 1. Positive interdependence MH: 1500/( 1500+301) = 0. 83 2. Individual accountability and personal responsibility MH: 420/(420+58)=0.88 3. Face-to-face interaction MH: 457/(457+70)=0.87 4. Interpersonal and small-group skills MH: 582/(582+116)=0.83 5. Assessment of group processing MH: 31/(31+42)=0.74 6. Group production MH: 507/(507+118)=0.81 5. Findings and Interpretations Themes which have been revealed as a result of categorical regulating in this chapter have been interpreted with the rates of frequency levels given in the tables. Table 6: Frequency, percentages and expression models of themes and sub-themes towards how positive interdependence was provided in group works in the Village Institutes Theme and sub-themes Frequency (f) Percentage (%) 1. Positive interdependence 541 0.35 1.1. Celebrating-Reward Interdependence 321 0.21 1.2. Task Interdependence 218 0.14 1.3. Role Interdependence 115 0.07 1.4. Environmental Interdependence 109 0.07 1.5. Positive Interdependence Against Foreign Forces 86 0.05 1.6. Imaginative Interdependence 82 0.05 European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 57 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING 1.7. Identity Interdependence 46 0.03 1.8. Source Interdependence 19 0.012 1537 100 Total The frequency levels and percentages of themes and sub-themes towards (Common Goal Dependence) positive interdependence in groupworks applied in the Village Institutes have been reached at the end of data analysis. With the data analysis, that the percentage of Positive interdependence (f=541) which is one of the principles of collaborative learning has happened very frequently with the rate of %35 has been revealed. Celebrating - reward dependence which is one of the sub-themes has followed common goal dependence (f=321) with its frequency level at the rate of %21. The frequency level of duty/task dependence (f=115) is at the rate of %14. Role dependence and environmental dependence have followed duty dependence with the frequency level at the rate of %7. The frequency level of positive dependence against foreign forces (f=86) is % and imagination dependence f= ) is %5. While the frequency level of positive identity dependence (f=46) is at the rate of %3, the lowest frequency level has been seen as positive source dependence (f=19) with the rate of %1. Table 7: Some of example expressions of sub–themes in relation to Positive Interdependence Theme and sub-themes Example explanations 1. Positive «The goals of the institutes were to extend the education in rural areas, to interdependence provide the structural transformation of the rural areas of Turkey through education besides educating children born and raised in villages to have them be teachers» 1.2. Celebrating-Reward «Teams which were sent to any other institutes, after they had worked for Interdependence 1-2 months, were being rewarded with nationwide tour. In Saturdays, entertainments were being organized» 1.2.Task Interdependence «Students were aware of their responsibilities with the help of studentcentered learning. Tonguç sent a report about including students in administration» 1.3. Role Interdependence «Giving individual responsibilities, giving the responsibilities of dining hall, dormitory, ateliers, classrooms, garden, agriculture, technical ateliers, student-student interaction learning, having students be on duty» 1.4.Environmental «Imagination of a developed Turkey, a democratic country, developing the Interdependence reforms of Ataturk, development of rural areas, sharing everything, a fair order, developing opportunities» 1.5. Positive «Protecting the country against exploitation, supporting and explaining the Interdependence Against reforms of Atatürk» Foreign Forces 1.6. Imaginative «Imagination of a developed Turkey, a democratic country, developing the European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 58 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING Interdependence reforms of Ataturk, development of rural areas, sharing everything, a fair order, developing opportunities» 1.7. Identity «Ziraat Marşı Tilth ‚nthem , singing the ‚nthem of The Village Institutes Interdependence in everywhere and the start of any work, founding association, founding teacher associations in certion regions, badge-pinning, backing up each other, interdependence, foregrounding the fact that she/he is from a Village Institute» Using same tools, books, materials sharing same buildings, ateliers, 1.8. Source Interdependence campus and agricultural lands. The society in institute was the real owner of the institution» These findings revealed that the groupworks applied in the Village Institutes formed an identification in a positive environment and source dependence with the aim of not only educating teachers but also training them to be useful for both themselves and the improvement of villages. The students studying in the Village Institutes fulfilled all their responsibilities and duties, and they compounded all of their effort with the light of the common goal dependence principle of Cooperative Learning. It has been figured out that they founded teacher associations, so they got their positive efforts together to save the country from the politics that would set the country back and from both foreign forces and the reactionaries living in the country who did not want Turkey to be changed in this way, with the dream of More Democratic Country . Table 8: Frequency, percentages levels of themes towards sub problems how cooperative learning was provided in the Village Institutes Themes Frequency (f) 1. Positive interdependence Percentage (%) 1537 0.35 2. Group production 227 0.32 3. Interpersonal and small-group skills 194 0.27 4. Individual accountability and personal responsibility 162 0.23 5. Face-to-face interaction 98 0.14 6. Assessment of group processing 34 0.05 Total 2252-1537, Others:715 Table 9: The differences between the groupworks in Cooperative Learning and Village Institutes Cooperative Learning Village Institutes Small groups: 2-6 students Range of the group : 2 to 20-40 students Mostly 20 people in one group Today developed more constructed Not constructed as today , not based on the research in 1940 based on researches Many techniques More similar with Learning Together Technique European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 59 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING Academic, emotional and social Academic, emotional , social and skill based (psyhcmotor) objectives objectives are well to the fore were well to the fore Applying based on the preferences Applied in all the Village Institutes around Turkey with a law of the schools and teachers Group productions were limited in Group productions were not limited in the time and location, the time and location outputs were various and permanence in the long term Stakeholders limited generally All of the students, teachers, administrator, workmaster, villager, with students and teachers other institutes were stakeholders as contributing parties to the group production 6. Conclusions 1. The group works implemented in the Village Institutes between 1937-1946/1954 formed an identification in a positive environment and source interdependence with the aim of not only educating teachers but also training them to be useful for both themselves and the improvement of villages as workmaster. 2. The groupworks implemented in the Village Institutes had Common Goal Interdependence from one of the basic principles of Cooperative Learning included, positive environment, celebrating-reward, task, positive interdependence against foreign forces, imagination, positive identity, positive source, role interdependence types. Groupworks applied in the Village Institutes had group production, interpersonal and small-group skills, individual accountability and personal responsibility, face to face interaction, assessment of group processing. The noticeably differences were today Cooperative Learning techniques are considerably constructed. But in the years of 1940, The Village Institutes group works were not constructed. It can be said that the groupworks implemented in the Village Institutes might be early cooperative learning implications. But in terms of group production, effectiveness on the Turkish Society and suggesting to developing country the Village Institutes were still contemporary and not to be surpassed for Turkey. 7. Discussion The most important characteristic as a group works called in Turkish «İmece Yöntemi» (working together for the community or one of its members) was applied with principles of cooperative Learning in the Village Institutes. T(rkoğlu graduated from ‚ksu Village Institutes great author talked about from İmece Yöntemi in the section of «Democratic Education Explosion» in her books (2007:335-409) how the group works were implemented in the Village Institutes and European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 60 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING the others Kaplan, , Kocabaş . ‚s Gelen said , the fact that Prof. Dr. Gottfried Hausman from Hamburg University about The Village Institutes saying In these institutes, peer learning principle was applied. In school life, job and course education were given at the same time. Moreover, we can say that students learned from each other and worked together.” may be seen as an important supporting idea for the cooperative learning principles. Research having done by Kocabaş found that teachers who were graduated from the Village Institutes had more highest means in mathematical, musical, interpersonal, ındividual, natural multiple intelligence from the primary school teachers and candidates of primary school teachers. There are great similarities between Cooperative School Organizational Structure (Johnson & Johnson, 1999: 51-58) and division of tasks in the Village Institutions T(rkoğlu, . Each figure has present common and similar cooperative school structure. In Cooperative Institutes cooperation had begun from the building of the classroom, dormitory, dining hall, garden, farmhouse, ateliers etc. They had shared all of naturel and educational, social environment and produced a value for themselves. We can benefit from the positive outcomes of the Village Institutions in Turkish Educational System and it can be a model for developing country. For more democracy, every child should be educated being aware of their responsibilities and task divisions in the school and home. Cooperative Learning as an instructional and class room organization method might be play an important role realizing democracy in the country and the world and as behind of the great success. 8. Suggestions 1. The Village Institutes system and group works should be deeply researched by using different quantitative and qualitative research methods. 2. The group works implemented in the Village Institutes showed the principals of cooperative learning thus the education system of the Village Institutes should be considered in the cooperative learning history. 3. For more peace and democracy around the world Cooperative Learning, techniques should be used worldwide. 4. We should benefit outputs of the Village Institutes especially for developing countries as an alternative educational system. References 1. ‚ntel, C. . Maarifimiz ve Meseleleri, İstanbul, Remzi Kitabevi European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 61 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING 2. ‚ky(z, Y. .T(rk Eğitim Tarihi, ‚nkara, ‚nkara Üniversitesi Eğitim ‛ilimleri Fak(ltesi Yayınları No 3. ‚kay, C., Ültanır, E. . . ‚ndragojik Temellere Dayalı Kolaylaştırılmış Okuma-Yazma Eğitimi KOYE S(recine Yönelik KOYE Eğiticilerinin Gör(şleri. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fak(ltesi Dergisi, 4. ‛alcı, ‚. , -88 . Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler. ‚nkara Pegema Yayıncılık 5. ‛(y(közt(rk, Ş., Kılıç, Ç. E., ‚kg(n, 5. E., Karadeniz, Ş., Demirel, F. . Bilimsel ‚raştırma Yöntemleri. ‚nkara Pegem Yayıncılık. 6. Gelen, ‚. . Eğit-Der Yayınları, Kuruluşunun . Yılında Köy Enstit(leri, ‚nkara, 5zkan Matbaacılık 7. Jacobs, G. M., Lee, C, & Ng, M. (1997). Co-Operative Learning In The Thinking Classroom. Paper presented at the International Conference on Thinking, Singapore. 8. Johnson D. W., Johnson, R. T. ve Holubec, J. E. (1994). Nuts&Bolts Of Cooperative Learning. Minnesota: Interaction. 9. Johnson D. W., Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning Together and Alone, Cooperative Competetive and Individualistic Learning, Fifth Edition, Massachusetts, Allyn and Bacon A Viacom Company 10. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. ve Stanne, M. B. (2000). Cooperative Learning Methods: A Meta-Analysis. Minnesota: University of Minnesota 11. Roger T. And David W. Johnson. (1994). An Overwiev of Cooperative Learning, Originally published in: J. Thousand, A. Villa and A. Nevin (Eds), Creativity and Collaborative Learning; Brookes Press, Baltimore, 1994. 12. Kocabaş, ‚. ‚ralık, Sayı ,ss 13. Kocabaş, K. . Çoklu Zeka Kuramı ve Köy Enstit(leri, Yeniden İmece, -27 . Kızılçullu Köy Enstit(l( Yıllar, İzmir, Yeni Kuşak Köy Enstit(l(ler Derneği Yayınları 14. Kagan, S. (1994). Cooperative Learning. California: Kagan Publishing. 15. Karasar, N. (1991). ‛ilimsel ‚raştırma Yöntemi, ‚nkara, Sanem yayıncılık 16. Kocabaş, ‚. . İşbirlikli ve Geleneksel 5ğrenme Yöntemlerinin M(ziğe İlişkin Tutumlar Üzerindeki Etkisi, TED Eğitim ve ‛ilim Dergisi, 17. Kocabaş, ‚. , -40. . M(zik 5ğretiminin Temelleri, İzmir, Kanyılmaz Matbaası 18. Kocabaş, ‚., ‚şık, ‚., Karaşahin, İ., Erbil, D. G., Erdoğan, F. . T(rkiye de İşbirlikli 5ğrenme Yönteminin Uygulandığı Tezlerin İçerik ‚nalizi. VII. International Congress of Educational Research: 28- Mayıs – Muğla Abstract (s. 175). Ankara, Pegemnces European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 62 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING 19. Kocabaş, ‚. . İkinci Ulusal sınıf 5ğretmenliği Çalıştay Kitabı, Marmara Üniversitesi ‚tat(rk Eğitim Fak(ltesi, İstanbul, 20. 5zgen, ‛. ‚ralık . Çağdaş Eğitim ve Köy Enstit(leri, İzmir, Final Matbaacılık 21. Slavin, R.E. (1988). Small Group methods, The Intenational Encyclopedia of Teaching and Teacher Education. Editör.M.J. Dunkin, Oxford: Pergamon Press 22. Sallan G(l, S. . Gönen Köy Enstit(s( Işığı, İzmir, Yeni Kuşak Köy Enstit(leri Derneği Yayınları 23. Tonguç, E.(2007). ‛ir Eğitim Devrimcisi İsmail Hakkı Tonguç, İzmir, Uşşak Matbaası 24. Tonguç, İ.H. (1974). İş ve Meslek Eğitimi, T5‛-DER Yayınları, ‚nkara. 25. Kurtuluş, Y. . Köy Enstit(lerinde Sanat Eğitimi ve Tonguç, ‚nkara, G(ldikeni Yayınları 26. T(rkoğlu, P. . Tonguç ve Enstit(leri, İstanbul, İş ‛ankası Yayınları 27. Tavşancıl, E. & Aslan, E.A. . Sözel, yazılı ve diğer materyaller için içerik analizi ve uygulama örnekleri. ‚nkara Epsilon Yayınları 28. Yıldırım, ‚. ve Şimşek, H. . Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. ‚nkara Seçkin Yayınevi European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 63 Ayfer Kocabas VILLAGE INSTITUTES IN TURKEY AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING Creative Commons licensing terms Author(s) will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Education Studies shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflicts of interest, copyright violatio ns and inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated into the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 3 │ 2017 64