https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2938-7782
![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Georg Kerschensteiner (1854–1932) was a world-renowned proponent of the work school concept (die Arbeitsschule). His educational philosophy was adopted not only in Europe but also in other parts of the world, both in the fields of primary school and vocational education. This study aims to analyse how Georg Kerschensteiner’s views on vocational education, civic education, work school, and teaching were interpreted and adopted by the Early Republican period Turkish pedagogical thinking. Moreover, it aims to scrutinise the impact of his pedagogy on educational practices. In the post-1908 period, in particular, concepts such as work-based education and applied education played an important role in the establishment of the idea of work education. With the proclamation of the Turkish Republic in 1923, Turkish administrators adopted such vocational school principles as the official pedagogical guidelines for its primary schools. During this period, Georg Kerschensteiner’s publications were translated into Turkish, and his work school gained an increasingly important place in Turkish pedagogy. Turkish educators such as Halil F. Kanad, İsmail H. Tonguç, and Hıfzırrahman R. Öymen played an important role in the adoption of his ideas. The Kerschensteinerian approach to education was more directly applied to teacher education in Türkiye, particularly between 1935 and 1954.
Acknowledgment
The author thanks the Scientific Research Projects of Balikesir University [BAP] for supporting this research.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1 Lawrence A. Cremin, The Transformation of the School: Progressivism in American Education: 1876–1957 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1961); and William J. Reese, “The Origins of Progressive Education,” History of Education Quarterly 41, no. 1 (2001): 2.
2 Ellen Key, The Century of the Child (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1909).
3 Osman Kafadar, Türk Eğitim Düşüncesinde Batılılaşma [The Westernisation of Turkish Educational Thought] (Ankara: Vadi Press, 1997).
4 Yahya Akyüz, Türk Eğitim Tarihi [Turkish Education History] (Ankara: Pegem Press, 2019).
5 Lawrence A. Cremin, American Education: The Metropolitan Experience 1876–1980 (New York: Harper and Row, 1988).
6 Sabri Cemil, “Çocuk Bahçeleri,” Yeni Fikir 16 (1913): 495–500.
7 İsmail Hakkı Tonguç, Canlandırılacak Köy [Village to be Revived] (İstanbul: Remzi Bookhouse, 1947).
8 Yeni Mektep [New School] (İstanbul: 1909).
9 Edmond Demolins, Yeni Mektepte [In New School] trans. Nafi Atuf (Edirne: 1913).
10 Mehmet Salih Erkek, Bir Meşrutiyet Aydını Ethem Nejat 1887–1921 [Ethem Nejat: A Constitutional Period Intellectual 1887–1921] (İstanbul: Kitap Publishing, 2012).
11 Ethem Nejat, “Yeni Mektepler,” Yeni Fikir 1, (1911): 4–9; Ethem Nejat, “Bedales Yeni Mektepleri,” Yeni Fikir 2, (1911): 23–8; Ethem Nejat, “Doktor Lietz’in Mektebi,” Yeni Fikir 5, (1913): 129–33.
12 Mustafa Ergün, II. Meşrutiyet Dönemi Eğitim Hareketleri 1908–1914 [Educational Movements in Second Constitution Era 1908–1914] (Ankara: Ocak Publishing, 1996).
13 Nur Betül Çelik, “Kemalizm: Hegemonik Bir Söylem,” in Modern Türkiye’de Siyasi Düşünce: Kemalizm, [The Political Thought in Modern Türkiye: Kemalism] ed. Ahmet İnsel (İstanbul: İletişim, 2009), 75–91.
14 Füsun Üstel, Makbul Vatandaşın Peşinde [In Search of the Acceptable Citizen] (İstanbul: İletişim Publications, 2005).
15 Yahya Akyüz, Türkiye’de Öğretmenlerin Toplumsal Değişmedeki Etkileri [The Effects of teachers on Social Change in Türkiye] (Ankara: Doğan Press, 1978); Rauf Inan (1905–1996) explains the strong motivation of teachers in the Early Republican period as follows: “The teachers of this period adopted all the ideals and revolutions of Mustafa Kemal Pasha with full consciousness and became the most idealistic teacher generation in the history of world education”: see Fikret Özgönenç, Bizim Sınıf: Türk Eğitim Tarihinden Önemli Bazı Yapraklar [Our Class: The Important Pages from Turkish Education History] (İstanbul, 1977), 91.
16 Mustafa Necati made significant contributions to the personal rights of teachers, teacher education and the teaching profession to reach certain standards during his brief term as the Minister of Education. His letters about the importance of teaching profession, especially addressing newly graduated teachers, promising that he would not leave any unschooled children in the country, and signing and submitting John Dewey’s book, Democracy and Education, which was translated into Turkish, as a gift to young teachers, despite all their hardships and poverty, led to the development of a firm belief in the teaching profession: see Kemal Arı, “Mustafa Necati’nin Ölümü ve Ölümü Sonrasında Onun Eğitimci Yönüne Vurgular” (paper presented at the meeting for the Ölümünün 80. Yılında Mustafa Necati Sempozyumu, Ankara, Türkiye, September 20–24, 2010), 108–20.
17 Burhan Göksel, “Atatürk’ün Eğitim Hakkında Görüşleri ve Misak-ı Maarif,” Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi 1, no. 3 (1985): 921–58.
18 Savaş Karagöz, Cumhuriyet Dönemi Eğitimine Yön Veren Yerli ve Yabancı Uzman Raporları [Reports of Domestic and Foreign Experts Guiding the Education of the Republic Period] (Ankara: Pegem Akademi Publishing, 2021).
19 Thomas S. Popkewitz, “Globalization/Regionalism, Knowledge, and the Educational Practices: Some Notes on Comparative Strategies for Educational Research,” in Educational Knowledge: Changing Relationships between the State, Civil Society, and the Educational Community, ed. Thomas S. Popkewitz (Albany: SUNY Press, 2000), 10.
20 Niyazi Berkes, Türkiye’de Çağdaşlaşma [Modernisation in Türkiye] (İstanbul: YKY, 2003).
21 Adnan Şişman, Tanzimat Döneminde Fransa’ya Gonderilen Osmanlı Ögrencileri: 1839–1876 [Ottoman Students Sent to France in Tanzimat Era: 1839–1876] (Ankara: TTK, 2004).
22 Yoko Yamasaki, “The Impact of Western Progressive Educational Ideas in Japan: 1868–1940,” History of Education 39, no. 5 (2010): 575–88.
23 Thomas S.Popkewitz, “Inventing the Modern Self and John Dewey: Modernities and the Traveling of Pragmatism in Education – An Introduction,” in Inventing the Modern Self and John Dewey Modernities and the Travelling of Pragmatism in Education, ed. Thomas S. Popkewitz (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005), 3–36.
24 Turkish educators, especially the three educators examined in this study, contributed significantly to the translation of Kerschensteiner’s works into Turkish and to the dissemination of his articles and views among teachers. These educators developed new ideas and perspectives on school curriculum, school managament, and discipline.
25 Diane Simons, Georg Kerschensteiner: His Thought and Its Relevance Today (London: Methuen, 1966); and R.A. Wegner, “Dewey’s Ideas in Germany: The Intellectual Response, 1901–1933” (PhD diss., University of Wisconsin, 1978).
26 Georg Kerschensteiner, Education for Citizenship, trans. A.J. Pressland (Chicago: Rand, McNally & Co., 1911), 11.
27 Steve Hochstadt, “Migration and Industrialization in Germany, 1815–1977,” Social Science History 5, no. 4 (1981): 445–68; Peter Lundgreen, “Industrialization and the Educational Formation of Manpower in Germany,” Journal of Social History 9, no. 1 (1975): 64–80; and Ralf Koerrenz, Annika Blichmann and Sebastian Engelmann, Alternative Schooling and New Education: European Concepts and Theories (New York: Palgrave MacMillan 2018), 45. The industrial and technological progress of Germany at the beginning of the twentieth century did not escape the attention of American educators. For an early study examining the relationship between Germany’s industrial and technical development and the vocational education system, see Edwin G. Cooley, Vocational Education in Europe: Report to The Commerical Club of Chicago (Chicago: Commercial Club of Chicago, 1912).
28 Charles A. Bennett, History of Manual and Industrial Education: 1870 to 1917 (Peoria, IL: The Manual Art Press, 1937), 196; W.A. Wetzel, “Munich’s Industrial Classes,” The Journal of Education 70, no. 5 (August 12, 1909): 132–3; and “The Trade Continuation Schools of Munich,” The Journal of Education 74, no. 9 (September 7, 1911): 234.
29 Christopher Winch, “Georg Kerschensteiner: Founding the Dual System in Germany,” Oxford Review of Education 32, no. 3 (2006): 381–96.
30 Philip Gonon, The Quest for Modern Vocational Education: Georg Kerschensteiner between Dewey, Weber and Simmel (Bern: Peter Lang, 2009), 89; and Hermann Röhrs, “Georg Kerschensteiner (1852–1932),” Prospects 23 (1993): 807–23.
31 Michael Knoll, “Georg Kerschensteiner (1852–1932),” in Encyclopaedia of Education, ed. James W. Guthrie. (New York: Macmillan, 2003), 1367–8; and Theodor Wilhelm, Die Pädagogik Kerschensteiners: Vermächtnis und Verhängnis (Stuttgart: J.B. Metzlersche, 1957).
32 Lucy L.W. Wilson, “Education in the Republic of Türkiye,” School and Society 28, no. 725 (1928): 601–10; William W. Brickman, “The Turkish Cultural and Educational Revolution: John Dewey’s Report of 1924,” Western European Education 16, no. 4 (1984): 3–18; Sabri Büyükdüvenci, “John Dewey’s impact on Turkish education,” Studies in Philosophy and Education 13, no. 3–4 (1994): ”393–340”; Andreas M. Kazamias, Education and the Quest for Modernisation in Türkiye (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966), 142; Selçuk Uygun, “The Impact of John Dewey on the Teacher Education System in Türkiye,” Asia‐Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 36, no. 4 (2008): 291–307; and Bahri Ata, “The Influence of an American Educator (John Dewey) on the Turkish Educational System,” The Turkish Yearbook 31 (2000): 119–30.
33 “Profesör John Dewey’in Raporu” [Prof. John Dewey’s Report], Maarif Vekâleti Mecmuası [Ministry of Education Journal] 1 (March 1, 1925): 1–8; “Profesör John Dewey’in İkinci Raporu,” [Second Report of Prof. John Dewey] Maarif Vekâleti Mecmuası 2 (May 1, 1925): 1–25.
34 Filiz Meşeci Giorgetti, “Reformpädagogik in türkischen Elementarschulen. Eine Untersuchung zum türkisch-deutschen Austausch über Erziehung und Unterricht in der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts,” in Türken- und Türkeibilder im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Pädagogik, Bildungspolitik, Kulturtransfer, ed. Ingrid Lohmann and Julika Böttcher (Bad Heilbrunn: Verlag Julius Klinkhardt, 2021), 167–94.
35 İlber Ortaylı, Osmanlı İmparatorluğunda Alman Nüfuzu [German Influence in the Ottoman Empire] (İstanbul: İletişim Publications, 2004).
36 Mustafa Ergün, “Türk Eğitiminin Batılılaşmasını Belirleyen Dinamikler,” Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi 6 (1990): 435–57; Mustafa Gencer, Jön Türk Modernizmi ve Alman Ruhu [Young Turk Modernism and the German Spirit] (İstanbul: İletişim Publications, 2003), 111; Fahri Türk, Türkiye ile Almanya Arasındaki Silah Ticareti 1871–1914 [Arms Trade between Türkiye and Germany 1871–1914] (İstanbul: IQ Kültür Sanat Publications, 2012), 58. On Turkish–German military relations and the increase in German military influence, see Jehuda Lotthar Wallach, Bir Askeri Yardımın Anatomisi: Türkiye’de Prusya-Almanya Askeri Heyetleri 1835–1919 [Anatomy of a Military Aid: Prussian-German Military Delegations in Türkiye 1835–1919] (Ankara: General Staff Press, 1985); Niles Stefan Illich, “German Imperialism in the Ottoman Empire: A Comparative Study” (PhD Diss., Texas A&M University, 2007); Gerhard Grüßhaber, The “German Spirit” in the Ottoman and Turkish Army, 1908–1938: A History of Military Knowledge Transfer (Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 2018); and Ayşe Gül Altınay, The Myth of the Military-Nation: Militarism, Gender and Education in Türkiye (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004).
37 Mehmet Salih Erkek, “II. Meşrutiyet Döneminde Avrupa’ya Gönderilen Osmanlı Talebeleri” (paper presented at the annual meeting for the Turkish History Association, Ankara, Türkiye, September 20–24 September 2010).
38 Taha Parla, Ziya Gökalp, Kemalizm, Türkiye’de Korporatizm [Ziya Gökalp, Kemalizm, Corporotism in Türkiye] (İstanbul: Deniz, 2009), 23.
39 The main reason for this keen interest in the German culture and education system was the formal education system established in Prussia at a very early period and the admiration for the effectiveness of this system. On the other hand, Prussia’s establishment of a successful primary and secondary education system that produced citizen soldiers was notable as an important example at that time. This was undoubtedly true for Ottoman intellectuals as well: see Walter J. Opello Jr., War, Armed Force and the People: State Formation and Transformation in Historical Perspective (London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016), 118.
40 Mustafa Ergün, “Die Deutsch-Türkischen Erziehungsbeziehungen Während des Ersten Weltkriegs,” Ankara Üniversitesi Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi 3 (1992): 193–210.
41 Albert Wellek, “In memoriam Georg Anschütz,” Die Musikforschung 7, no. 2 (1954): 199–201.
42 Ali Haydar Taner held high positions in the education bureaucracy of the Early Republican period and became the spokesperson of modern pedagogical ideas with his works. After 1908, he studied pedagogy and psychology at the University of Jena.
43 The most important assistant translator of Franz Schmidt in the ministry of education was Halil Fikret Kanad, who was among the important proponents of work pedagogy in the early republican period. He was discharged while serving his military service and was assigned as a translator. MF.MKT.1233, 44 H-27-06-1336.
44 Kemal Turan, Türk Alman Eğitim İlişkilerinin Tarihi Gelişimi [Historical Development of Turkish-German Educational Relations] (İstanbul: Ayışığı, 2000), 95–101.
45 Muslihiddin Adil, Alman Hayat-ı İrfanı [The German Cultural Life] (İstanbul: Matbaa-i Amire, 1917).
46 Twenty of these 25 teachers successfully completed their education in Germany. Some of the teachers in this group are Ömer Tarman, İsmail H. Tonguç, H. Raşit Öymen, Hayri Ardıç, Fuat Gündüzalp, Nizamettin Kırşan: Engin Tonguç, Bir Eğitim Devrimcisi: İsmail Hakkı Tonguç [An Educational Revolutionary: İsmail Hakkı Tonguç] (İzmir: YKKED, 2007), 32.
47 Tonguç, Bir Eğitim Devrimcisi.
48 Türk, Türkiye ile Almanya Arasındaki Silah Ticareti, 127; Grüßhaber, The “German Spirit”, 59–63.
49 Mustafa Rahmi, Gazi Paşa Hazretlerinin Maarif Umdesi ve Asri Terbiye ve Maarif [Gazi Pasha’s Principles of Education and Modern Education] (Ankara: Matbuat ve İstihbarat Press, 1923).
50 Herbert M. Kliebard, The Struggle for the American Curriculum 1893–1958 (Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986).
51 Hermann Röhrs, Die Reformpädagogik. Ursprung und Verlauf unter internationalem Aspekt (Stuttgart: UTB, 2001).
52 Mustafa Rahmi, Gazi Paşa Hazretlerinin Maarif Umdesi.
53 Üstel, Makbul Vatandaşın Peşinde.
54 Hilmi Ziya Ülken, Türkiye’de Çağdaş Düşünce Tarihi [The History of Modern Thought in Türkiye] (İstanbul: Ülken, 1999), 426.
55 During the preparations of the 1926 curriculum, the Italian primary school curriculum published at the same time was taken as an example and the practical aspect of the curriculum was handled in a similar manner to the Italian primary school curriculum. Mehmet Emin Erişirgil, Bildiklerim [What I Know] (Ankara: Mülkiyeliler Birliği Vakfı Publications No 33, 2010), 47.
56 İlk Mekteplerin Müfredat Programı [Primary Schools Curriculum] (İstanbul: Millî Press, 1926).
57 The two most important educators and bureaucrats regarding the 1926 curriculum were Avni Başman (1887–1965), who took part in the commission that prepared the curriculum, and Mehmet Emin Erişirgil (1891–1965), the chairman of the commission. While Avni Başman was known for his translations from John Dewey and his progressivist ideas, Erişirgil was an important proponent of pragmatist philosophy.
58 Maarif Vekâleti Mecmuası 9 (1926): 106–12. Oskar Frey was a reformist educator who specialises in polytechnics. Georg Stiehler’s speciality was painting and drawing. Oskar Frey then stated his views on this training he attended in Türkiye in a report dated 20 August 1926: Maarif Vekâleti Mecmuası 9, (1926): 45–9.
59 Tonguç, Bir Eğitim Devrimcisi, 79.
60 İsmail Hakkı Tonguç, İlköğretim Kavramı [The Concept of Primary Education] (İstanbul: Ahmet Sait Press, 1946), 229.
61 Thomas Deissinger and Philipp Gonon, “The Development and Cultural Foundations of Dual Apprenticeships: A Comparison of Germany and Switzerland,” Journal of Vocational Education & Training 73, no. 2 (2021): 197–216.
62 Georg Kerschensteiner, “Beruferziehung im Jugendalter,” in Handbuch für das Berufs- und Fachschulwesen, ed. A. Kühne (Leipzig: Quelle & Meyer, 1929).
63 Maarif Vekâleti Mecmuası 12 (Ağustos 1927): 1–17.
64 Halil Fikret [Kanad], “Pestalozzis Stellung zum öffentlichen Schulwesen bis zum Jahre 1809” (PhD diss., Universtität Leipzig, 1917).
65 Cavit Binbaşıoğlu, “Dr. Halil Fikret Kanad ve Türkiye’de Eğitim Bilimlerinin Gelişmesine Katkısı,” in Reform Pedagojisi, Eğitim Bilimleri, Okul Reformu, Öğretmen Eğitimi (Modern Pedagoji Açısından Türk Alman İlişkileri-1900ʹden Günümüze) ve Dr. Halil Fikret Kanad Erziehungswissenschaft, Schulreform, Lehrerbildung-Deutsch Turkische Beziehungen in der Erziehungwissenschaft-1900 bis heute-und Dr. Halil Fikret Kanad, ed. Berka Özdoğan, Helga Schwenk, Selçuk Uygun (Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Publishing, 2002), 33–5.
66 Berka Özdoğan, Helga Schwenk, Selçuk Uygun, Reform Pedagojisi, Eğitim Bilimleri, Okul Reformu, Öğretmen Eğitimi (Modern Pedagoji Açısından Türk Alman İlişkileri-1900ʹden Günümüze) ve Dr. Halil Fikret Kanad Reformpadagogik, Erziehungwissenschaft, Schulreform, Lehrerbildung-Deutsch Turkische Beziehungen in der Erziehungwissenschaft-1900 bis heute-und Dr. Halil Fikret Kanad (Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Publishing, 2002).
67 Heinz Elmar Tenorth, “Erziehungswissenschaft in Leipzig-Disziplin zwischen Universität, Staat und Autonomer Profession,” in Reform Pedagojisi, Eğitim Bilimleri, Okul Reformu, Öğretmen Eğitimi (Modern Pedagoji Açısından Türk Alman İlişkileri-1900ʹ den Günümüze) ve Dr. Halil Fikret Kanad, 172–3.
68 Marjorie Lamberti, “Radical Schoolteachers and the Origins of the Progressive Education Movement in Germany 1900–1914,” History of Education Quarterly 40, no. 1 (2000): 22–48.
69 The most important evidence of Kerschensteiner and Spranger’s friendship is the letters they wrote to each other. Ludwig Englert, Georg Kerschensteiner, Eduard Spranger Briefwechsel 1912–1931 (Stuttgart: B.G. Teubner, 1966).
70 The clearest indication of this is Kanad’s book, History of Education and Education, published in 1926. The structure and perspective of the work were similar to the work of his teacher, Paul Barth, Die Geschichte der Erziehung in soziologischer und geistesgeschichtlicher Beleuchtung (Leipzig: ORReisland, 1911).
71 Kafadar, Türk Eğitim Düşüncesinde Batılılaşma, 272–5.
72 Georg Kerschensteiner, Karakter Kavramı ve Terbiyesi, [The Concept and Upbringing of Character] trans. Halil Fikret Kanad (Ankara: Örnek Press, 1954), 16.
73 Halil Fikret Kanad, Milliyet İdeali ve Topyekûn Milli Terbiye [National Ideal and Total National Education] (Ankara: Çankaya Press, 1942), 186–91.
74 Ibid., 165–84.
75 Halil Fikret Kanad, Pedagoji II [Pedagogy II] (Ankara: Çankaya Press, 1938), 140–80.
76 Tonguç defined this school as the Leipzig Handicrafts School in his preface to his work, see İsmail Hakkı [Tonguç,] El İşleri Rehberi [Handicrafts Directory] (İstanbul: Devlet Press, 1927), 2.
77 Engin Tonguç, Bir Eğitim Devrimcisi.
78 Ibid.
79 İsmail Hakkı [Tonguç], Kerschensteiner (İstanbul: Ahmet H. Press, 1933).
80 İsmail Hakkı [Tonguç], İş ve Meslek Terbiyesi [Work and Vocational Education] (Ankara: Kitap Yazanlar Kooperatifi, 1933).
81 İsmail Hakkı [Tonguç], Köyde Eğitim [Education in Village] (İstanbul: Devlet Press, 1938).
82 İsmail Hakkı [Tonguç], “Avrupa Meslek Mekteplerine Dair [On European Vocational Schools],” Maarif Vekâleti Mecmuası 5, (1 Kasım 1925): 46–54.
83 İsmail Hakkı [Tonguç], Canlandırılacak Köy [The Village to Revive] (İstanbul: Remzi Press, 1939).
84 Şevket Gedikoğlu, Evreleri, Getirdikleri ve Yankılarıyla Köy Enstitüleri [Village Institutes with Phases, Brings and Echoes] (Ankara: İş Press, 1971); Feridun Bayram, Eğitmenler: Öğrenmeyi Öğretme Ustaları [Educators: Masters of Teaching and Learning] (Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı, 1999).
85 Niyazi Altunya, Köy Enstitüsü Sistemine Toplu Bir Bakış [An Overview of the Village Institute System] (İstanbul: Kelebek Press, 2005).
86 Pakize Türkoğlu, Tonguç ve Enstitüleri [Tonguç and His Institutes] (İstanbul: İş Bankası Press, 2020).
87 Kafadar, Türk Eğitim Düşüncesinde Batılılaşma.
88 Although Tonguç’s main reason for turning to a different perspective from Kerschensteiner’s work education was to avoid being associated with the socialist work school, the main reason here was actually that the country’s economic downturn left no other way out. On the other hand, the village school and peasant approach applied from the end of the nineteenth century in Bulgaria and Romania, where Tonguç spent his childhood and youth, had a solid place in his mind. Erişirgil, with whom he was a colleague for many years, also emphasised the same point: see ”Mehmet E. Erişirgil, 23.”
89 Altan Öymen, Bir Dönem Bir Çocuk [A Child for a Period] (İstanbul: Doğan Book Publishing, 2002).
90 Uğur Ünal and T. Seçkin Birbudak, İstanbul Darülmuallimini: 1848–1924 [İstanbul Teacher College] (İstanbul: Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi, 2013).
91 Birsen Gündüz, “Hıfzırrahman Raşit Öymen’in Hayatı ve Kişiliği” [Hıfzırrahman Raşit Öymen: His Life and Personality] (Master’s thesis, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, 2000).
92 Georg Kerschensteiner, “Die Schule der Zukunft eine Arbeitsschule” Kunst und Jugend 7, (1908): 61–70. .
93 Booker T. Washington, İş Terbiyesi [Work Education] trans. H. Raşit [Öymen], (İstanbul: İktisat Press, 1929).
94 H. Raşit [Öymen], Yeni Mektebe Doğru [To New School] (İstanbul: Kanaat Press, 1931).
95 Georg. Kerschensteiner, Vatandaşlık Terbiyesi [Education for Citizenship], trans. H. Raşit [Öymen] (İstanbul: Kanaat Press, 1931).
96 Richard Rothe, Hayat Bilgisinin Resimle Tedrisi: Sonbahar [Teaching Life Sciences with Pictures: Autumn], trans. H. Raşit [Öymen] (İstanbul: Muallim Ahmet Halit Press, 1931).
97 Theodore Göhl, İş Mektebinden Ders Misalleri [Examples of Lessons from the Work School], trans. H. Raşit [Öymen] (İstanbul: Ülkü Press, 1934).
98 Hıfzırrahman Raşit Öymen, Yeni Mektebe Doğru [To New School] (İstanbul: Kanaat Pubblishing, 1931), 71–107, 109.
99 “Pedagoji Anketine Hıfzırrahman Raşit Öymen’in Cevabı,” Eğitim Hareketleri 23, no. 286 (1980): 69.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Sümer Aktan
Sümer Aktan is Associate Professor of Curriculum & Instruction at Balıkesir University, Department of Educational Studies, Türkiye. His research interests include curriculum theory, history of pedagogy and teacher education. His book Curriculum Studies in Turkey: A Historical Perspective, in which he examines the intellectual foundations of curriculum thought in Türkiye, was published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2018.