Türkiye'de geomatik
harita mühendislik eğitim-öğretimi üzerine bir inceleme / A study on educational status in geomatic/surveying engineering in Turkey
Yazar: ÖZGÜR ELMAS
Danışman: PROF. DR. RAHMİ NURHAN ÇELİK
İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi / Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü / Geomatik Mühendisliği Ana Bilim Dalı / Geomatik Mühendisliği Bilim Dalı
Derece: Yüksek Lisans, 2020
Konu: Jeodezi ve Fotogrametri = Geodesy and Photogrammetry

Özet:
TÜRKİYE'DE GEOMATİK/HARİTA MÜHENDİSLİK EĞİTİM-ÖĞRETİMİ ÜZERİNE BİR İNCELEME 
ÖZET

Diğer mesleki alanlarda olduğu gibi, geomatik/harita mühendislik alanında da gelişmişlik düzeyi ve istihdam olanakları mesleki eğitim ile yakından ilişkilidir. Bu tez çalışmasında, geomatik/harita mühendislik öğrenci ve mezunlarının üniversite eğitim - öğretiminden beklentileri bir anket çalışmasıyla belirlenirken, üniversitelerin yeterlilik düzeyleri bilgi formları oluşturularak incelendi. Ayrıca, 2014-2018 yılları arasında 70 farklı mesleğe ait mezuniyet bilgileri ve çalışan bilgileri eşleştirilerek oluşturulan veri setleri kullanılarak, geomatik/harita mühendisliğinin istihdam olanakları ve diğer meslek grupları arasındaki durumu istatistiksel olarak değerlendirildi. 
Anket çalışmasında üniversite seçiminde önem taşıyan kriterler sorgulandığında; "kaliteli eğitim seçeneği" %93,7 oranla ilk sırada önemsenmiştir. Bunu, "üniversitenin sıralamada iyi bir yerde olması, prestijli marka değeri ve tanınmışlığın olması" seçeneği %85,7 sıklıkla ve "mezunlarının işe alınma oranın yüksek olması, işverenlerle bağlantısı olması" seçeneği %85,7 sıklıkla takip etmiştir. Diğer önemsenen seçenekler, "üniversitenin kütüphane, internet, spor salonu, vb. sosyal tesis ve imkanlarına sahip olması" seçeneği  %82,5 sıklıkla, "eğitim müfredatı ve laboratuvar kalitesi" seçeneği %71,4 sıklıkla takip etmiştir. Üniversiteye gitmede önem taşıyan kriterler sorgulandığında; "daha iyi şartlarda yaşamama katkı sağlayacağı" seçeneği %81 sıklıkla, "daha iyi bir iş bulmada önemli olması" %79,4 sıklıkla ön plana geçmiştir. Bir üniversitenin iyi bir eğitim-öğretim sağladığını gösteren kriterler sorgulandığında; "öğretim kadrosunun kalite ve sayısal bakımdan iyi olması seçeneği" %95,2 sıklıkla, "eğitim-öğretimde güncel teknolojinin kullanılması seçeneği" %92,1 sıklıkla ön sırada tercih edilmiştir. Geomatik/harita mühendislik lisans ve lisansüstü katalogları incelendiğinde; 26 üniversitede geomatik/harita mühendislik programının bulunduğu ve aktif eğitime devam ettiği, toplam kontenjan sayısının 1345 civarında olduğu belirlenmiştir. Az sayıda üniversitenin geomatik/harita mühendislik lisans eğitim programını akredite (ABET, MÜDEK veya EUR-ACE) ettiği belirlenmiştir. Üniversitelerin geomatik/harita mühendislik bölümü öğretim üyesi sayısı bakımından incelendiğinde, 30'un üstünde öğretim üyesi olan 2 üniversite, 10-19 arası öğretim üyesi olan 4 üniversite, 7 ile 9 arası öğretim üyesi olan 7 üniversite,  6'dan az öğretim üyesi olan 13 üniversite olduğu belirlenmiştir. Geomatik/harita mühendislik programlarında her öğretim üyesi başına düşen öğrenci sayısının 2 ile 41 arasında dengesiz bir dağılım gösterdiği belirlenmiştir. Geomatik/harita mühendislik bölümünün sahip olduğu anabilim dalı sayısı, laboratuvar imkanları,  öğrencilerin sosyal ve eğitim amaçlı faydalanabileceği sosyal medya imkanları bakımından da önemli derecede farklılıklar mevcuttur. Geomatik/harita mühendisliği ile diğer meslek grupları istihdam oranı, iş bulma süresi, ücret, nitelik uyuşmazlığı ve kamuda işe yerleşme oranı gibi değişkenlikler bakımından karşılaştırıldığında, harita mühendisliği lehine istatistiksel olarak anlamlı (p<0,05) sonuçlar elde edilmiştir.
Sonuç olarak; Eğitim-öğretim programları günün gereklerine uygun olarak oluşturulurken öğrenci ve mezunların geri bildirimleri belirleyici bir rol oynamaktadır. Üniversitelerin geomatik/harita mühendislik programlarında yer alan öğretim üyesi sayısı ve altyapı olanakları önemli düzeyde değişkenlikler göstermekte, bu durum eğitimi ve öğretim olumsuz yönde etkilemektedir. Ülke çapında standart bir eğitim - öğretim modeline kavuşmak için akreditasyon çalışmalarının hızla yaygınlaştırılması, öğrenci kontenjanlarının üniversite imkanları ve istihdam olanakları dikkate alınarak belirlenmesi önem taşımaktadır.

Abstract:
A STUDY ON EDUCATIONAL STATUS IN GEOMATIC/SURVEYING ENGINEERING IN TURKEY
SUMMARY

As in other professional fields, the level of development and employment opportunities in the field of Geomatic Engineering are closely related to vocational education. In this thesis, the expectations of university students and graduates from university education were determined by a questionnaire study, and the proficiency levels of universities were examined by creating information forms. In addition, the employment opportunities and the status of the Geomatic Engineering among other occupational groups were evaluated statistically, using data sets created by matching graduation and employee information from 70 different occupations between 2014 and 2018.
When the criteria that are important in selection of a university are questioned in the survey; "Quality education option" was given the first place with a rate of 93.7%. This was followed by the option of "the university being in a good place in the ranking, prestigious brand value and recognition" with 85.7% frequency and the option of "graduates having a high rate of recruitment, having connections with employers" with 85.7% frequency. Other important options are "university's social facilities like library, internet, gym, etc." with a frequency of 82.5%, and "education curriculum and laboratory quality" with a frequency of 71.4%.
When the criteria that are important for going to the university are questioned; the option "it will contribute to living in better conditions" has come to the fore with 81% frequency, and "being important in finding a better job" with 79.4% frequency. When the criteria showing that a university provides good education are questioned; the option of "teaching staff being good in terms of quality and quantity" was preferred in 95.2% frequency, and the option of "using current technology in education" was preferred in 92.1% frequency. When the geomatics undergraduate and graduate catalogs are examined; it has been determined that there are geomatics programs in 26 universities that continue their active education and the total number of quotas is around 1345. A small number of universities' geomatics undergraduate education programs have been found to be accredited (ABET, MÜDEK or EUR-ACE). When the geomatics section of the universities was examined in terms of the number of faculty members, it was determined that there were 2 universities with more than 30 faculty members, 4 universities with 10-19 faculty members, 7 universities with 7 to 9 faculty members, and 13 universities with less than 6 faculty members. It is determined that the number of students per academic staff in the geomatics programs shows an unbalanced distribution between 2 and 41.
There are also significant differences in terms of the number of departments of the geomatics section, laboratory facilities, and social media opportunities that students can use for social and educational purposes. When compared to other occupational groups, statistically significant (p <0.05) results were obtained in favor of geomatic engineering; in terms of employment rate, time to find a job after graduation, wages, qualification mismatch and rate of employment in public sector. 
The average employment rate of Geomatic Engineering (56.00%) is higher than the average employment rate of 70 professions (48.9429%), and the difference has been found to be statistically significant (p <0.05). The average time to find a job in Geomatic Engineering (225.00) is lower than the average time to find a job of 70 professions (242.4286), and the difference has been found statistically significant (p = 0.026; p <0.005). The average wage distribution of Geomatic Engineering (2725.00) is lower than the average of 70 professions (2878,5000), and the difference is statistically significant (p = 0.030; p <0.005). The average qualification mismatch of Geomatic Engineering (0.47) is lower than the average of 70 professions (0.8117), and the difference is statistically significant (p <0.05). The average rate of employment in public sector  of Geomatic Engineering (8.00%) is lower than the average of 70 occupational groups (9,98579), and the difference is not statistically significant (p = 0.194; p> 0.0.05).
When evaluated according to the descriptive analysis results of 9 related professions (Geomatic Engineering, mining engineering, interior architecture, geological engineering, geophysical engineering, environmental engineering, archeology, civil engineering, architecture) and t test analysis results: Average employment rate of Geomatic Engineering (% 56,00) is higher than the average employment rate of 9 related professions (52.6667%), and the difference is not statistically significant (p = 0.088; p> 0.05). The average time to find a job in Geomatic Engineering (225.00) is higher than the average time to find a job of 9 related professions (198.67), and the difference is statistically significant (p = 0.023; p <0.05). The average wage distribution of Geomatic Engineering (2725.00 TL) is higher than the average of 9 related professions (2655.8889 TL), and the difference is not statistically significant (p = 0.440; p> 0.05). The average qualification mismatch of Geomatic Engineering (0.47) is lower than the average of 9 related professions (0.7233), and the difference has been found to be statistically significant (p = 0.073; p> 0.05). The rate of employment in public sector of Geomatic Engineering (8%) is higher than the average of 9 related professions (4.4444%), and the difference is statistically significant (p = 0.001; p <0.05).
While determining the strategies to increase the quality in Geomatic Engineering education, a system that can be updated, measured, should be established with the feedbacks. In our survey study, the most common reason for choosing a university was the option of offering high quality education and this was followed by the university's position in the ranking, prestigious brand value and reputation.Universities should decide their education and training policies in this way.
When quality education is examined; it is determined that the university's highly qualified teaching staff, and the university's willingness to solve student problems are important. When the information forms of universities are examined, it has been determined that there are serious differences between universities in terms of the number of faculty members and their assistants, laboratory and technological infrastructure facilities, library, internet and social facilities. A balanced education will be provided throughout the country with universities having a standard structure. Auto-control of this will be possible when universities complete the international accreditation process.
Another important approach that the participants pay attention in the survey study is that the university they will graduate from has a decisive role in finding a job, therefore, the university should be in contact with the employers and contribute to the job finding process. The unemployment problem in our country has become the nightmare of students and graduates. Opening new universities and new programs without considering employment opportunities and increasing student quotas day by day without taking into account the capacities of the universities deepen the existing problems. According to the results of statistical analysis of TCCBİKO's data for 70 occupations, it is seen that the field of Geomatic engineering is in a relatively good condition in terms of employment indicators such as employment time, wage, qualification mismatch and the rate of employment in the public. Considering that employment in our country is constantly decreasing and the number of graduates in the field is constantly increasing, it is important to adopt an education policy according to employment opportunities.
As a result; while the education programs are created in accordance with the requirements of the day, the feedback of students and graduates plays a decisive role. The number of faculty members and infrastructure facilities in the Geomatic Engineering programs of universities vary considerably, which negatively affects education and training. In order to reach a standard education model nationwide, it is important to rapidly expand accreditation studies and to determine student quotas considering university facilities and employment opportunities.