Minister Tekin's statement on 'interviews' and 'registration fees': 'Let us do what is necessary'

Minister of National Education Yusuf Tekin made a statement regarding allegations of schools demanding registration fees during his appearance on Habertürk.

Minister Tekin stated the following:

“We have three levels of schools: primary, middle, and secondary education institutions, which are high schools. We have a centralized examination system, the high school entrance exam. Our students are placed in schools according to their scores. We also have high schools that do not accept students via exams. Children choose the school closest to their address. When enrolling students in primary and middle schools, it is again done based on the address; the parent does not need to do anything. We associate the child with the school closest to their home and complete the registration.

Given this, how can it be said that 'they are demanding registration fees'? There is a problem there. The statement that registration fees are being collected is a serious accusation that could cast suspicion on our teachers and administrators.

Because there is no mechanism for them to register at a school of their choice. Under these circumstances, saying that registration fees are being demanded is frankly absurd. I do not accept this. I consider this a discourse that undermines the reputation of our school administrators.

"LET THEM REACH OUT TO US, WE WILL DO WHAT IS NECESSARY"

When someone says, 'I want to register my child in a school I have chosen based on parameters other than proximity to my address,' they are not making a legally valid request. There, especially in primary and middle schools, there used to be pressure regarding the selection of primary school teachers when children started school, and the selection of branches in middle school. Things like, 'I want to register my child with this specific teacher.' Now, they say, 'The school principal asked me for money to enroll my child with that teacher.' Before schools opened this year, we sent out a circular. A 43-article circular.

We insistently used the phrases in our schools: 'No fees should be collected from parents for registration or similar purposes, and action should be taken against those who do.' The area most exploited here was the selection of teachers and branches. We stated that we do not leave the selection of branches and teachers to the school administration when children start school.

We have adopted certain principles by considering a balanced distribution of children in classrooms across many parameters. Let us not put a 64-month-old and an 84-month-old child in the same class in an electronic environment. This is one parameter. Gender is another parameter. The current process regarding registration, or the claim that registration fees are being charged or that money is being collected by force, does not reflect the facts. If there is anyone who still has a complaint about this, let them reach out to our ministry and we will do what is necessary.

STATEMENT ON 'INTERVIEWS'

I have said in every setting regarding the interviews, 'We want to conduct trial lessons in a fair manner that does not violate anyone's rights.' We declared that we would invite three times the number of candidates who took the KPSS to the interviews. For example, we told secondary school mathematics teachers, 'You will be interviewed on the 10th-grade mathematics curriculum on this date, and you will teach us a lesson.'

Not from all the mathematics courses they took throughout their undergraduate studies. Let's say there are 15 topics in the 10th-grade curriculum. We said, 'We will interview you on these 15 topics.' We stated that we would evaluate the answers given under 4 headings. We tell the candidate, 'We will ask you to teach any topic from 10th-grade mathematics; please pay attention to these points while teaching.' When our candidate friend goes into the room, their true identity is not known; it is hidden.

Let's say I am a jury member as a branch manager. The person appearing before me has no name or hometown. We have defined a code number. The candidate also does not know who the 3 people who will examine them are. The candidate comes in and presses a button on the computer screen there for a question.

After answering this question, there is no other dialogue with the jury members. The jury members evaluate based on 4 parameters and give their grades. Our candidate friend, just in case, makes a written record saying, 'I was asked this question and I said these things.' Additionally, there is audio and video recording. During this exam period, no names came to us from any politician, from any acquaintance, or through friends, and we did not share any names with the commissions. I said that even if it were my closest friend who engaged in such a thing, if they attempted it, I would do what is necessary. There is no injustice here. We said that as soon as the candidate leaves the room, the jury members will have given their grades and the screen will close. There is no chance for the jury members to intervene again. If someone comes to me and says, 'If you take this measure, I will feel at ease,' we will take that too. In this sense, a healthy interview process was carried out, and we held our exam.

“THERE IS CURRENTLY NO COUNCIL OF STATE DECISION”

After we completed the interview process, we made the legislative change in our regulation. While appointments were previously made with 100% interview scores, we defined it as 50%. Some politicians and unions made this a subject of litigation. If it is canceled, we will conduct it with 100% interviews. They tell us, 'The Council of State has announced its decision.' I say that we are the party to the lawsuits; if the Council of State makes a decision, it will send it to us first. The decision was that some friends' lawsuits were rejected due to lack of jurisdiction; this is not a ruling.

We will announce our decision once the Council of State's ruling reaches us. We announced the grades based on 50 percent interviews and made the appointments. Two months later, the Council of State issued its ruling and canceled it. Will this not cause irreparable damage? I am saying let us wait for this judicial process and make our appointments as a result. Currently, there is no Council of State ruling; the request for a stay of execution has been rejected. We are waiting for the decision on the merits regarding the lawsuit filed for the cancellation of the regulation.

Our lawyer and our General Director of Legal Services are following the process at the Council of State. Apart from this, we do not conduct these affairs based on social media or discussions in certain political environments. The accurate information is this: the request for a stay of execution was rejected, and the lawsuits of some individuals were dismissed. This is not a decision on the merits. I do not think it will take very long. We will make our teacher appointments on the day that decision arrives."