Every new regulation on education in Turkey comes with the claim of “improvement”. New curriculum, new model, new exam system... But a simple question is often not asked: Where are the teachers when these decisions are being made?
From primary school to high school, it is the teacher who knows best what works and what fails in the classroom. He or she sees every day at which point the student breaks down, which subject he or she does not understand, which explanation does not resonate. Despite this, the teacher is not at the center of the process when making basic decisions about education.
The official structure clearly shows this. Curricula are prepared by the Ministry of National Education and the Board of Education. Bureaucrats and academics sit on these boards. Teachers, who are active in the classroom, are not present in these structures as elected, permanent and binding representatives. Teachers are consulted from time to time, but it is not disclosed whether their opinions have changed the decision or not. In other words, teachers seem to be present at the table, but they do not have a say.
The recently announced Turkish Century Education Model did not change this picture. Headings such as skill-based learning, simplification and emphasis on values were highlighted. On paper, this does not sound negative. However, whether these goals are actually realized in the classroom is not measured together with the teacher. The curriculum changes, concepts are renewed, but what is missing in the classroom, which learning outcome is not working, is not brought up to the top.
This disconnect is most clearly seen in the field of assessment and evaluation. While it is said that the aim is for students to think, interpret and solve problems, the exams are still dominated by questions that measure memorization, speed and test technique. In the classroom, the teacher sees how the student thinks and where he/she gets stuck; the system only looks at whether he/she marks the correct answer. When what is taught in the classroom and what is asked in the exam are different, measurement cannot be done properly.
Examination systems change, but the logic remains the same. SBS went, TEOG came, LGS came. YGS-LYS, then YKS. The teacher is not in the design of these exams. The teacher is the one who has to manage the results in the classroom. The determinant here is not the needs of education, but the administrative imperatives of the system.
All this points to a single truth: The system does not learn lessons. Practices that do not work are not eliminated and corrected in the process; instead, new systems are introduced every time. Change is thought to be the solution. However, the problem is not in the content, but in the method.
Education happens in the classroom, not at a desk. The curriculum does not teach; the teacher does. Any plan that pushes the teacher out of the decision, no matter how well-intentioned, is incomplete.
The conclusion is simple but clear:
Education cannot be planned without teachers.
Unless the teacher's mind is involved in the decision-making process, every curriculum will sooner or later have to be changed again.