The academic title system in Turkey underwent a radical transformation with the Higher Education Law No. 2547 in 1981 and has seen significant, often debated, changes in 2018 and 2024.Below is the English translation and evaluation of these changes, highlighting the inconsistencies with global academic standards.

·

·

1. The 1981 Reform and the Abolition of “Ordinaryüs”

Before 1981, Turkey followed the German-style “Chair” (Kürsü) system. In this hierarchy, the Ordinaryüs Professor was the highest rank.

  • Ordinaryüs Professor: This title was reserved for professors who had served at least five years in their rank, gained international acclaim, and were elected to a specific “Chair.” It represented a “Professor of Professors.”
  • The Change: With the 1981 Law, the “Chair” system was replaced by the “Department” system to centralize the university structure. Consequently, the title of Ordinaryüs was abolished. While existing holders kept their titles, no new appointments were made.

2. Post-1981 and the 2018 Reform: The “Assistant Professor” Dilemma

The most controversial recent change occurred in 2018, when the title of “Yardımcı Doçent” (Assistant Professor) was abolished and replaced by “Doktor Öğretim Üyesi” (literally: Doctor Faculty Member).

The Global Inconsistency:

  • Terminology: In the global academic hierarchy (especially in the US and UK), the standard progression is Assistant Professor → Associate Professor → Full Professor.
  • The Problem: By removing the “Assistant Professor” title and adopting “Doctor Faculty Member,” the Turkish system created a naming conflict. In international circles, “Doctor Faculty Member” or “Lecturer” can be perceived as a non-tenure-track or temporary teaching position, whereas an “Assistant Professor” is recognized as a prestigious, independent researcher on a tenure track.

3. The “Associate Professorship” (Doçentlik) Paradox

One of the most significant inconsistencies between the Turkish system and the rest of the world is the separation of Title and Staff Position (Kadro).

  • Centralized Title: In Turkey, the title of “Associate Professor” (Doçent) is granted by a central state body (The Inter-University Council – ÜAK) based on a points-based dossier review.
  • The Inconsistency: In the West, “Associate Professor” is a job title. When a university hires or promotes you, you receive the title. In Turkey, you can earn the legal title of Associate Professor but remain in the office and salary of a “Doctor Faculty Member” if your university does not grant you a specific “Associate Professor staff position.” This creates the “Associate Professor without a post” phenomenon, which is virtually non-existent in global academia.

4. Comparison: Turkey vs. Global Academic Standards

FeatureTurkish System (Current)Global (Western) System
Entry LevelDoctor Faculty Member (Formerly Asst. Prof.)Assistant Professor (Tenure-Track)
Title AuthorityCentralized State Body (ÜAK)Individual Universities
Associate Prof.Earned as a central certificate/diploma.Earned as a specific job appointment.
CriteriaHeavy focus on numerical points and “Q” category journals.Focus on holistic impact, peer review, and institutional fit.
The “Ordinaryüs”Abolished (replaced by senior Professors).Exists as Distinguished or Regius Professor.

5. 2024 Criteria and “Quantitative” Academia

As of 2024, the criteria for becoming an Associate Professor have been made significantly more stringent, focusing heavily on specific publication metrics (Q1, Q2 journals).

  • The Criticism: While intended to increase quality, it has led to a “points-chase” culture. In global elite institutions, a scholar might be promoted based on one groundbreaking book or a few high-impact discoveries. In Turkey, the system forces scholars to produce a high volume of work to meet centralized point thresholds, which can sometimes prioritize quantity over depth.

Summary of Inconsistency

The primary “mismatch” today is that while the world moves toward institutional autonomy (where each university decides who is a professor based on their own standards), Turkey has moved toward a centralized, metric-heavy, and bureaucratic model. This makes the international mobility of Turkish academics difficult, as their titles do not always translate clearly into the job descriptions used by global universities.


Bir yanıt yazın

E-posta adresiniz yayınlanmayacak. Gerekli alanlar * ile işaretlenmişlerdir