**11. Conclusion**

reached high achievement levels. Using PISA 2003 data, Çifçi [71] found that school type, school district, gender, and geographical region influenced students' achievement rates in Turkey. Yılmaz [75] investigated the variables related to the science literacy of Turkish stu‐ dents using PISA 2006 data and found that most of the students' variation in science literacy scores originated from the differences between schools. Using PISA 2006 data, Dinçer and Uysal Kolasin [73] found that a student studying in Anatolian High School received 66–79 points higher than a student in general high school. However, a student who is studying in general high school had 22–27 points higher than a student who is studying in vocational high school. In a study that used student questionnaires and cognitive skill tests obtained from PISA 2003, 2006, and 2009 PISA tests, Yalçın [74] exposed the ongoing qualitative difference between high schools. Science schools were the most successful school type in these three PISA exams. The Anatolian High Schools were one of the most effective schools in the 2009 and 2006 PISA exams. They also had a successful score in the 2003 PISA exam, although it was

In Turkey, individuals who graduate from the same level of education can develop themselves at different levels after entering higher education as a result of the differentiation of the qual‐ ity of their education [76]. For these reasons, demand for "elite" high schools is high. Because graduates of these schools are more successful at university entrance exams, students find themselves in high‐quality, "respected" universities with high demands [61]. Higher education statistics and surveys reveal that access to these schools in Turkey is more dependent on socio‐ economic factors. For example, 51% of the students in Science High School in 2013 and 42% of the students in Anatolian High School come from families with the highest socioeconomic level. On the other hand, 23% of the students in the vocational high school and 30% of the students in the other secondary education institutions have the lowest socioeconomic rate of 20% [7].

Children of socioeconomically better families are more likely to have access to selective schools, as well as to receive more qualified training when they have access to these more sophisticated school types. Ultimately, their academic achievements are at a higher level than

Aedo et al. [78] argue that the stratification of schools in secondary education in Turkey and the central examination system applied to secondary education in transition to secondary education make large differences between the achievements of students attending these schools. Likewise, the ERG [65] report emphasizes that the reasons for schools being so sep‐ arated according to socioeconomic status in Turkey are the division of schools into types in secondary education, the differences in quality among schools, and the central examina‐ tion system. As pupils are placed in schools in accordance with the competitive examination systems, student achievement and quality differences between school types and schools are intensified. As the qualitative differences become more intense, the competition in examina‐ tions increases, and thus, the differences created by socioeconomic background increase as well. Over the years, these processes have become interconnected, and at school level, there

Objective and subjective evaluations of the quality of secondary education show that this teaching process has serious problems in terms of quality and does not provide sufficient

has been a breakdown according to socioeconomic roots.

not as high as 2009 and 2006 results.

164 Global Voices in Higher Education

their peers [77].

Higher education participation is important because of opportunities for the individual's life. Higher education has an important role in terms of collective distribution of equality and social justice within a society. Higher education also contributes to social justice for the major‐ ity of people not directly involved. Such a view takes higher education beyond the limits of individual achievement to a broader contribution it makes to the society [4].

The increase in the number of students and institutions in Turkey suggests that higher educa‐ tion is in a trend of massification [42]. However, the massification of higher education and democratization is not synonymous concepts. The massification of higher education is a nec‐ essary but inadequate condition for democratization. For the democratization of higher edu‐ cation, it is necessary that the benefit of higher education does not depend on the individual's socioeconomic background and that the university student profile reflects the general popu‐ lation structure of the society in a proportional manner [57]. Access to higher education is concerned with ensuring that those who wish to benefit from it can pursue education with‐ out constraints other than their personal efforts and abilities. Expansion and participation in higher education are also expected to serve this purpose [1, 79].

The main determinant of access to higher education in Turkey is socioeconomic status. Socioeconomic status characteristics affect not only the educational opportunities provided, but also the ways in which students perceive themselves and their education. In this sense, the students do not decide how much they meet the requirements of the application field with their higher education decisions and at the same time decide how suitable these choices are in terms of socioeconomic characteristics [1]. In other words, students' social and economic backgrounds determine their educational preferences [80].

The socioeconomic characteristics of the students' families still have a conclusive influence in benefiting from higher education, as the current education system is inadequate to remove the disadvantages created by the socioeconomic status of the family on student achievement and orientation. For this reason, in order to limit the effect of socioeconomic characteristics on access to higher education and to enable competence‐based student selection, establishing the distribution of similar opportunities before higher education should be one of the priorities of the educational policies [1]. Socioeconomic status features are so pivotal in education that components such as learning and teaching processes cannot diminish the role of socioeco‐ nomic status in education. Hence, social inequalities are not eliminated through education; they are even produced by it. However, education is an important tool of social mobilization. Education should be used at the highest level of potential to reduce social inequalities. This is also an important requirement of a democratic and pluralistic society order [65].

Higher education is an educational right and a milestone. Every secondary school gradu‐ ate should benefit from it in accordance with his/her abilities and interest. In a social order that is built upon democratic, egalitarian and fair decisions, the conditions to benefit from higher education should be constructed [35]. The only condition for eliminating the problems encountered during transition to higher education is to prevent the education from creating social injustices. Thus, education can play a part in removing social inequalities and stop the reproduction of these inequalities [45]. It is not possible for the necessary remedies to be limited solely to those mentioned here. For this reason, in order for all individuals and com‐ munity members to benefit from equal rights to higher education, it is necessary to inform and direct the individuals about higher education and to remove obstacles in front of them starting from primary education [17]. In particular, for Turkey, it is still important to focus on and investigate the inequalities experienced in the education levels experienced before higher education.
