{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02344768539238388, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007316456188826838, 'mean_word_length': 5.5218274111675125, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 2, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Views and the Effects of Materialist Philosophy and Socialist Ideology on Curriculums and Educational Administration

Materialist philosophy and socialist ideology are philosophical and ideological approaches that have deep influence and traces in public life practice. Along with the social, economic, and political fields, the field of education has been deeply influenced by materialist philosophy and socialist ideology in certain contexts. Main purpose of this study is to examine the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the curriculum, educational administration and economic-political dimensions. The study is a systematic review study based on the review of the literature. It is aimed to synthesize the views and effects on education management with educational programs by making a systematic compilation of works on materialist philosophy, socialist ideology and education. The data of the study have been analyzed using content analysis. As a result of the study; considering perspective of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on education, it is observed that theoretical humanistic values are generally advocated. However, many differences between theory and practice are observed in materialist philosophy and socialist ideology-related practices. In terms of curriculum dimension, materialist philosophy is important in terms of contributing to the creation of a new educational philosophy rather than being a direct educational philosophy. Considering social, political and economic dimensions; it can be stated that materialist philosophy and socialist ideology direct the liberal capitalist world towards social policies. In the research, it is suggested that researches should be conducted to examine the effects of different philosophies and ideologies on the curriculum and management of education.<br><br>


Introduction
Materialist philosophy and socialist ideology draw attention with their roots and influences on social, economic and political life. The effect of materialist philosophy, which dates back to the Ancient Greek civilization, on the social, economic and political universe has always been very controversial and vivid. An important difference of materialist philosophy from other philosophies is that it has been transformed into a paradigm that leads the socio-economic and political processes and into a manifesto by many political groups and taken as guide in practice by its followers. In the historical development process, the undeniable effect of dialectical materialism on the world's political life is obvious, as it is an intellectual source for socialist ideology (Heywood, 2019;Fulcher & Scott, 2011). In this context, it can be said that materialism has turned into a body of thought, theory and ideology which offers an alternative interpretation of almost every issue, problem and situation from sociology to education, from politics to economy. Accordingly, it is, for instance, the intellectual source of the confrontational approach in sociology and has played a guiding role in politics especially for left and socialist parties for many years. In the field of education, it has offered a ground for many approaches and practices such as polytechnics and radical critical pedagogy.
"Maddecilik" and "özdekçilik" are used to mean materialism in Turkish. However, in general, it is observed that the concept of materialist has other implications in Turkish society. It is possible to collect these alternative meanings in two main groups. Materialism, with its meaning in the first group, carries a philosophical value. With the second meaning, it is observed that it is generally used by conservative circles to refer people who attach importance to material things (Akarsu, 2010).
Materialist philosophy derives its theoretical support entirely from the materialist theory of knowledge considering its meaning in the first group. It is the world view that sees the essence and basis of all kinds of reality not only objective, but also spiritual reality, in matter and claims that matter is the only substance. Materialism is a system of philosophical theory which argues that nothing exists except matter and its movements and changes. Those who adopt this view are called "materialist," "maddeci" or "özdekçi" (Akarsu, 1988, p.144).
The second meaning, or the meaning in popular culture, implies to be materialistic rather than spiritualist. In a sense, it is used to mean to attach more importance to material beings and physical comfort than spiritual values. The view which asserts that only matter is real; nothing exists other than matter and changes of matter; and existence can only be manifested in terms of matter adopts the understanding of existence advocating that matter is the only or fundamental component of the universe (Cevizci, 2000, p. 629). According to this understanding, which generally originates from a conservative or belief-based worldview, it is impossible to explain the functioning of the universe with a purely materialist approach. This perspective, which is based on the opposition of materialism and positivism, is, in a sense, conservative view which has a negative attitude against these approaches (Aybek, 2020).
The view of the materialist philosophy on the relations of social structure can be summarized as follows: It is possible to analyze the materialist philosophy in the historical process in the forms of First Age (Ancient) Materialism, Mechanical Materialism and Dialectical Materialism. Thales, one of the ancient materialists, considers the archaea of the universe as "unchanging." On the other hand, according to Herakletious, another thinker of the First Age (Ancient) Materialism, being arises from "Fire" which is in the form of matter and the fire changes everything and the universe by burning and demolishing everything. Mechanical materialism, on the other hand, argues that the real being in the universe is formed by matter and material existence (Cücen, 2012, p. 230-231). The most mentioned type of materialism, which has gone through various stages in the historical development process, is Dialectical Materialist philosophy.
It is a fact that materialist philosophy has gained a place as a movement in the social, economic and political areas rather than a philosophy. Some characteristics of this approach, which is in the form of Marxist or confrontational approach in the sociology literature, can be listed as follows: Societies consist of classes that are formed based on ownership of the means of production. According to Marx, the main determinant of the social class phenomenon is the ownership of the means of production and accordingly, two classes exist in the society as those who have the means of production and those who do not (Khilav, 2021). For example, in the capitalist society after the industrial revolution, those who owned capital, that is, capitalists formed the ruling class while the proletariat became the lower socioeconomic stratum. According to Marx, capitalism is essentially a class order in which class relations are characterized by conflict (Giddens, 2006). According to Marks, while infrastructure is defined by economics-based concepts such as means of production, production forces, and relations of production; superstructure consists of cultural institutions such as religion, art, philosophy, science and morality (Kızılçelik, 1994). Marx is concerned with the economic domination of one class over another and emphasizes that workers are alienated from the products they produce because they cannot use them, and the work itself is reduced to a form of action merely for wages (Noddings, 2007). Marx defines the state as an instrument for class domination and considers political domination as a reflection of class conflict, arguing that the state will disappear as a classless society emerges (Wallace & Wolf, 2012). Some of the theses which have been introduced by Karl Marx and his followers have produced different results than envisioned. Marx argued that as industrialization progresses, the exploitation of surplus value would drag workers into misery, but the historical developments have proved this prediction wrong (Sönmez, 2007). Technological growth has not always led to the concentration of property in an increasingly limited number of hands, as Marx argued; joint stock companies which distribute property, stocks, cooperatives, precautions are taken against harmful monopolies, trade unionism which empowers workers to bargain collectively, and social security measures have negated the predictions of Marxism. The effects of the equal and universal voting principle have also not been adequately evaluated. In countries which are governed by a democratic regime, equal and universal voting right pushed the political power to deal with the problems of the broad masses (Doğan, 2004).
It is possible to summarize the features of materialist philosophy in the context of its general fields of study as follows. Ontologically, the materialist philosophy suggests that archaea are the constant movement caused by the relationship between contradiction in matter and matter (Sönmez, 2015, p.113). This philosophy also argues that the cause of social phenomena is matter and that change is an inevitable phenomenon. This change is led by a process consisting of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Materialism has a perspective of rebellious spirit and according to this understanding society is a system of powers that are held together based on the myth adopted about their legitimacy (Scruton, 2015).
Epistemologically, according to materialist philosophy, knowledge is created by the interaction between the dialectic of brain and the dialectic of nature. In materialist philosophy, it is matter that creates spirit and spiritual values, and the spirit without matter can never be observed. Matter exists outside of spirit. Unlike idealists, it is not our ideas that create 'things'; ideas are created from 'things' (Politzer, 2010, p.54).
According to the materialist philosophy, in the axiological context, values are in constant change. Values are the products of a reflection of the material world. Materialism, which regards visible and concrete elements as reality, contrasts with idealistic understanding and attitudes. As a matter of fact, it develops a negative attitude towards traditions based on revelation and superstitions and beliefs which are consecrated (Hilav, 2021).
In terms of world of thought, the most important contribution of the materialist philosophy is that it has introduced the dialectical way of thinking. It is possible to express the basic principles of dialectical materialist philosophy as follows: Everything in the universe is mutually interactive and interdependent. Everything changes and transforms. Quantitative accumulations cause qualitative changes over time. A constant struggle of opposites exists in the universe (Politzer, 2010, pp. 57 -117). It can be said that it is based on the same ground with the theory known as Reflection Theory, since Dialectical materialism considers information as a reflection of reality and thought as a reflection of matter (Hançerlioğlu, 2015). Dialectical materialist movement has enabled large masses to think of events, phenomena or processes differently from the idealistic way of thinking. In addition, it formed the intellectual basis of socialist theory and real socialist practices before and after the first and second world wars. By creating an anti-thesis against capitalism and liberalism in economic life and idealism in philosophy, it has enabled the formation of such conceptions and syntheses as new social democracy and social welfare state.
It has increased the effect of materialism that it has gained a place especially in the political context. Especially in the twentieth century, the discussions and conflicts between different blocs resulted in materialism taking place in their social, economic and political agendas. Theoretical debates between capitalism and socialism, class struggles, democracy and the development of mass media made it possible for materialism to reach larger audiences.
In the historical process, it is observed that materialism and socialist ideology have had different effects reflected on social life with its social, economic and political aspects. As a matter of fact, Marx and his fellows considered the history of changes in society as the history of class conflicts based on economy within the framework of the materialist understanding of history. Within this framework, Marx not only made an effort to explain the world, but also tried to change the world (Wallace and Wolf 2005). Thus, he proposed the classless society as a solution to capitalism and wanted to liberate people from the yoke of the capitalist system through his thoughts. According to him, the liberation of human beings would only be possible by annihilating all phenomena such as alienation, religion and ideology which prevent self-realization creating a false perception of reality (Yurdakul, 2018). Absolutization of the philosophical view is a mistake that is made about materialism. As a matter of fact, indifferent discussions Lefebvre (2006) emphasize the following views on Marx and dialectical materialism: Dialectical materialism is an open-ended method which constantly feeds on human practice rather than being dogmatic. This can be interpreted as materialism is open to new interpretations and improvement according to the concrete situation.
Materialism also draws attention in the context of its influence on social institutions and processes. In this context, it is possible to say that it has either direct or indirect effects in every field from economic functioning to family, from journalism to media, religion and education. At this point, certain approaches such as radical critical pedagogy, pedagogy of the oppressed, and polytechnic education are also reflections of the dialectical materialist approach in the field of education (İnal, 2020). From this point of view, the following inferences can be made regarding the interaction between polytechnic education and dialectical materialism: Polytechnic education is a trend of education and knowledge, whose history goes back to the ancient materialist philosophers and which understands materialism dialectically. Ancient philosophers Democritus and others, who interpreted the fundamental archaea of the universe, that is, the first or building blocks, as "matter" (atom, air, water, sun, fire, etc.) maintained a stance against idealism by arguing that human beings perceive the universe through senses and reason. Following this basic approach, post-feudal philosophers established relations between matter and motion and regarded natural causes, namely nature itself, as the main cause. The argument of modernism that the knowledge of nature can be obtained for man's well-being through scientific methods as human being is a part of material nature gained strength. Ultimately, Karl Marx formulated the polytechnic education at a historical point where people could socially participate in the production process and have the product of their labor (İnal, 2018).
In the historical process, materialism has changed substantially with the contribution by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Marx and his followers have argued that in order to reveal the rational essence of Hegel's dialectic hidden in the "idealist shell" as "turned upside down," it should be reconsidered on a purely materialist basis. Hegelian dialectics and materialism; It can be stated that Hegelian dialectics and materialism are based on the same ground with reflection theory as both consider information and thought as the reflections of reality and matter, respectively (Thalheimer, 2020). In the historical development process of materialist philosophy, dialectical materialism has emerged over time with the contributions and comments of Marx and Engels. In a theoretical context, a synthesist understanding has been developed by combining the transformational dimension of the dialectic and the materialist interpretation of materialism through dialectical materialism. Thus, dialectical materialism is enabled to function as a method and a theory (Suslakov, & Yakovleva, 2017).
In the historical development process; dialectical materialism has served as a guide to social, economic and political readings. In fact, the implications of dialectical materialism regarding both theory and practice have further been developed by Marx and Engels and turned into a manifesto for the development of societies. Dialectical and historical materialism formed the basis of the general theory and methodology of Marxism (Hilav, 2021).
Dialectical materialism has introduced certain basic principles while interpreting events, facts, and life as a whole. It is possible to explain these principles, which are also known as the basic principles of dialectical materialism or materialist philosophy in the field, as follows: The first is the principle that everything is interconnected. According to this, everything in the universe has a mutual effect and a universal connection and this is considered as a law. The second is the principle of change. According to this principle, everything and every situation are constantly changing. This is also called the law of universal change and uninterrupted development. It can be said that this principle is restatement of Heraclitus' famous saying "the only thing that does not change is change itself." Change is inevitable and it is caused by the struggle of classes, which is the product of the differentiation in production styles and relations (Altuntaş, 2015). The third principle is that quantitative changes cause qualitative changes in the universe. An example of this is the evaporation of the heated water when it reaches 100 degrees Celsius. Heated water is water, but it is vapor reaching one hundred degrees Celsius and its quality has changed. The fourth principle is the unity of opposites and the struggle of opposites. It refers to the coexistence of opposites such as life and death; good or bad in life. For example, it can be said that, in political life, democracy means democratic rights and freedoms for the bourgeoisie but authority for the workers. Likewise, according to socialist theory, socialism means democracy for the workers and authority for the former rulers and bourgeoisies (Politzer, 2010).
Socialist and Marxist theory grounds on interpreting social change according to production relations. At this point, social political systems are formed according to ownership of the means of production. Societies in the historical development process have experienced different society forms based on production relations and social and economic structures. In this context, societies left behind the stages of primitive communal society, slave society, feudal society and capitalist society. According to Marxism, following the capitalist society which has emerged after the industrial revolution, societies will reach the stages of classless society as communist society and socialist society. According to socialist theory, production is social, but property is individual in capitalism. In this context, the basic variable in the formation of societies is the ownership of the means of production which enable production to occur. Socialism will abolish the exploitation of public property and surplus value which the ruling classes acquire. It will achieve this through the working-class state, or in other words, the dictatorship of the proletariat (Heywood, 2019).
According to socialism, societies consist of classes and history is, in a sense, the history of struggle between classes. In societies where the ownership of the means of production is privately owned, capitalist production relations prevail. Conversely, if the means of production belong to the public, social relations of production are defined as socialist relations of production. In capitalist societies, the social class or stratum which owns the means of production exploit the surplus values created by others. The class which owns the means of production is at the same time the ruling, oppressive and exploitative class; the class which cannot own the means of production constitutes the ruled, oppressed and exploited class. The relations between these two classes determine the infrastructure of society (Rejai, 1995, p.90). The main contradiction in capitalist society is between the bourgeoisie, which owns the means of production, and the proletariat as the exploited class.

Socialist theory considers the phenomenon of class not only in terms of its formation but also its function.
The concept of class is considered and defined from two angles according to socialist ideology: First, the concept of class can be defined as social categories formed by individuals with common positions. In the second, classes point to a structure formed by cultural and political social actors. Based on these notions, class is defined as a social reality created by individuals who have common positions in production relations. Approaching the subject from this point of view, it is observed that social classes are perceived as both social actors and conflict groups. Members of classes have common interests and goals. These individuals, who also have class consciousness, act in solidarity in achieving their common class goals (Arslan, 2004).
Socialist theory highlights the economic relations of production although it approaches social and economic political events in a holistic manner. According to socialists, the production relations of societies are determined based on the ownership of the means of production. The functioning of social institutions such as family, religion, education, and politics are determined based on production relations (Engels, 2015). In this context, relations of production have a decisive role in family, politics, trade, law and other social relations.
According to socialist ideology, social institutions are not apolitical or supra-class. The state is ideological and the aim of the ideological state is to make the ideology work by making the people adopt and apply the ideology which it has adopted, even if the people are against it. In order to find supporters for its official ideology among the people, the ideological state wants to provide its own legitimacy by running a smear a campaign against previous ideologies and state orders (Althusser, 2016). Socialist alternatives to the negativities created by capitalist society and production relations are as follows: According to socialists, the way to eliminate exploitation and classes is public property and the working-class state. Socialists justify this view with the argument that socialism will provide real equality, freedom and justice through public property. According to socialism, the working class, in other words, the proletariat will come to power for the abolition of classes and exploitation. Socialism is the order in which the working class comes to power instead of the ruling capitalist class in the capitalist order, the means of production belong to public not private parties, underground and aboveground resources are expropriated, education, health, shelter, which are the most basic human needs, are met free of charge by the state. The general principle and aim of socialism are to receive labor from everyone according to their abilities and distribute value to everyone equally (Renault, Dumenil, & Löwy, 2012).

Critical views on materialist philosophy and socialist ideology can be addressed as follows:
In addition to the criticisms made against socialism, criticisms of materialism and dialectical materialism as a philosophical approach draw attention. The most basic criticism of dialectical materialism is that its political aspect dominates over its philosophical approach. The second criticism addresses the law of unity of opposites. For example, it is criticized for not understanding democracy correctly as socialism exemplifies democracy from a materialist perspective as democracy for the bourgeoisie and an authoritarian regime for workers. However, it is stated by democrats and liberals that democracy, especially with its development in the twentieth century, gave important rights and freedoms to all social classes (Heywood, 2019).
The socialist classification of the developmental phases of societies has not worked in practice. Marx and his followers categorize the evolution of societies as primitive communal society, slave, feudal, capitalist and socialist societies, and classless community. Various lines take a critical view of this point. The categorization of the evolution of societies is similarly expressed by all sociologists excluding the stage of capitalist society. However, the categorization suggested by Marx is criticized because the post-capitalist socialist society and classless society prediction are considered wrong (Yayla, 2012).
It is criticized severely that the vision of socialist and classless society is utopian in practice. Socialist society, the fifth stage of the development of societies, did not develop in the direction Marx and Engels stated. The socialist system turned into an authoritarian one-party regime. It can be claimed that the communist society has remained a utopia that cannot find the possibility of realization. On the other hand, Marxists attribute the main reason for the problem to the deviation from Marx's views by socialist administrations (Holz, 2020). As a matter of fact, in the second international, Karl Kautsky and Eduard Bernstein, by criticizing the practices, turned towards democratic socialism or social democracy based on the revision of socialism through reformism. In the following period, the views suggesting reliance on the parliamentary regime and the revision of capitalism gained strength (Tosun, 2016).
Although it can be said that materialism-based studies in the field of education and administration are generally valid, these studies need to be supported with new ones. Undoubtedly, these studies, whose contributions are undeniable, mostly examine philosophical analysis or critical pedagogy and polytechnic education approaches. In general, it is necessary to address the effects of materialism-based polytechnic education and radical critical pedagogy on education originally.
The main purpose of the study is to examine the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the curriculum, educational administration and economic-political dimensions. Depending on this main purpose, answers to the following questions have been sought; 1. What are the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the purpose, content-subject, teaching and learning processes; assessment and evaluation dimensions, which are the elements of the curriculum, and how do they affect the curriculum? 2. What are the effects and reflections of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the management of education as a social institution? 3. What are the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on education, in the economicpolitical dimensions and what are their effects and reflections on education as a social institution?

Method
The study is a systematic review based on field study. Field studies are the analysis and synthesis of the subjects based on the documents and the presentation of the results with a critical perspective (Galvan, 2006;Merriam, 1988). The literature reviews provide the integration of knowledge in the field based on analysis and synthesis. In such studies, also known as systematic reviews, it is aimed to synthesize findings, results and evaluations by analyzing two or more studies (Burns & Grove, 2009). Although some weaknesses can be mentioned in the context of scientific research, review studies have a wealth of theoretical debate and intellectual value in order to define general trends and to make broad general inferences (Kaşık, 2015).
In the study, it is aimed to examine the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the curriculum, educational administration and economic-political dimensions. For this purpose, a systematic review of the studies which address the views and effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on education has been made. Systematic review studies have five main phases a) description of the research subject; b) scanning key information sources; c) use of primary resources; d) use of secondary resources; e) synthesis of the studies (Gal, Gal, & Borg, 2007).
In the study, the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology have been discussed in terms of a) curriculum b) management of education; c) effects in the economic-political dimension. The detailing of the study subject and the phase of pattern creating are summarized in Table 1: Definition -Explanation -Question 1) The effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on education in the curriculum dimension What are the effects of materialism on education in the dimensions of the curriculum elements (purpose, content-subject, teaching and learning processes, and assessment and evaluation)? Polytechnic education 2) The views and effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on education in the dimension of educational administration management What are the effects of materialism on educational administration? Local administration instead of centralization, Struggle for learner and parent to participate in management, selfmanagement Anti-deregulation, advocating unionization and occupational organization Academic and administrative autonomy 3)The effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on education in the economicpolitical dimension Opposition to privatization in education, Advocacy of public education, Free education, Marketization of education, Weakening of the externality arguments of education Examining the table, it is observed that the sub-dimensions of purpose, content-subject, teaching and learning processes, measurement and evaluation and polytechnic education are the study subjects. Decentralization, participation in management, organization and autonomy in the dimension of education management; public education, anti-marketization and externality arguments in the economic-political dimension are among the subdimensions discussed in the study.
In the second phase, document scanning has been carried out depending on the purpose of the research. During the scanning of the documents, the works were initially themed under the titles of "Materialism or Materialist Philosophy," "Socialism or Socialist Ideology" and "Education." In this context, English and Turkish books, book chapters and articles with these titles or content were scanned using the keywords "Materialism and Education, Socialism and Education, Socialist Ideology and Education, Materialist Philosophy and Education, Polytechnic Education". The tags of the scanned works were removed and as a result, the studies which are accordant with the purposes of the study were handled within the scope of the study.
The data of the study have been analyzed using content analysis, one of the qualitative data analysis methods. In content analysis, it is aimed to reach concepts and relationships which can explain the collected data, rather than directly transferring the data (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011, p.223). Creating categories and subcategories in content analysis is critical in terms of correct interpretation and analysis of the content (Kuckartz, 2014). In the study, five educational management, educational philosophy and management field experts independently formed descriptive index in order to determine how the study questions were answered in the selected works. After the experts marked the appropriate theme for each purpose in the coding key based on the descriptive indexes which they created, the comparison of the coding and the reliability study phase started. In the comparison of the coding and reliability phase, the numbers of "agreement" and "disagreement" among the researcher and expert markings were revealed. Research reliability was calculated using the formula of Reliability = agreement / agreement + disagreement, (Miles & Huberman, 1994). According to this calculation, the reliability was found to be 0.84. In the literature, a reliability value of 0.70 and above is considered adequate for the research (Miles & Huberman, 1994).

Results
Dimensions, sub-dimensions and the relationships regarding the research are shown in Figure 1: The findings of the study are discussed under three themes as the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the elements of curriculum, educational administration, and economy-politics. The effects of the first of these themes on the elements of curriculum consist of the sub-dimensions of objectives, content-subject, learning-teaching process and measurement-evaluation. The effects on educational administration which is the second theme have been studied in the sub-dimensions of the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on its own system practice and liberal-capitalist practice.

Findings Regarding the Effects of the Elements of the Curriculum
The effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the elements of the curriculum have been studied under the headings of purpose, subject-content, learning-teaching process and assessment and evaluation.
3.1.1 Purpose The first sub-problem of the study is expressed by the question of "What are the effects of materialism and socialist ideology on the purpose, content-subject, teaching and learning processes and assessment and evaluation dimensions which are the elements of the curriculum and how does it affect the curriculum?" Within the context of the aforesaid question, the dimension of purpose has been examined by dividing into two subdimensions: The first dimension is the matter of the purposes of materialist philosophy and materialism-based polytechnic education. The question of how materialist philosophy and socialist ideology generally interpret the functions of purposes in education constitutes the second sub-dimension of the dimension of the elements of the curriculum. It is possible to make the following inferences about the purposes of materialist philosophy and materialismbased polytechnic education: In the context of curriculums, the intended meaning of purpose is that the focus on behaviors that are aimed for students to gain is essential. In this context, looking at the aims of polytechnic education in general, it can be said that polytechnic education is, in essence, the product of the perspective of education for work within production. The purposes of polytechnic education can be listed as to raise productive individuals, to ensure the unity of theory and practice, to grasp dialectical materialist principles, to ensure production-oriented education processes, to grasp the functioning and principles of the socialist system, to enable education to work as an industrial institution, to know the theories of socialist ideology, to develop behaviors in accordance with the theory-practical integrity, production improving their relationships, acquiring socialist discipline and morality (Sönmez, 2015).

Subject-content
The perspective which is taken as basis in the subject-content dimension of the curriculum of polytechnic schools is production-oriented courses. In this context, the most distinctive feature is that education is considered for production purposes. Contents of the curriculum should serve to application in the subject-content dimension, improve production processes and increase production. Laws of physics, chemistry and biology should be dominant in relation to the basic principles of technology (Aslan & Topçu, 2010). For example, economics, politics, philosophy, physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, history, art and physical education and particularly technical courses should be taken as a basis.

Learning-teaching process
The materialist understanding of education approaches education in teaching and learning processes with its class essence and aims to ground education on the principles of scientific socialism. Curriculums should be based on the following principles: theory-practice integrity should be included in educational activities. In materialist education, depending on the principle of "education is for production," the school should also be an industrial institution. Collective consciousness should be created in individuals and the habit of working towards production should be developed. Character education should be included in the education environment. Dialectical reasoning should be taught and used by students (Sönmez, 2015, pp. 118-119). Scientific teaching activities should be synthesized. Teaching and learning methods in general education courses should be parallel to technology and production methods (Szaniawski, 1980).

Assessment and evaluation
It can be observed that in materialist education, following approaches are included in the measurement and evaluation dimension: First of all, whether the habit of working for production is acquired and the dialectical materialist way of thinking is understood or not is tested (Sönmez, 2015, p.120). Polytechnic education is a series of productive endeavors which have been revised and edited from a psychological, teaching and educational point of view. It is an approach that goes beyond the assessment of what is taught in textbooks (Small, 2005).

Findings Regarding the Effects on the Dimensions of Educational Administration
The second sub-problem of the study is designed based on the questions of "What are the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the educational administration as a social institution and how does it affect education as a social institution, how are their reflections?" In this problem dimension, the findings regarding the effects of materialism on educational administration are examined under two sub-headings. First dimension is the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on educational administration in its own system practice, and the second dimension as the effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the liberal capitalist world.
Materialist philosophy and socialist ideology in its system practice of educational administration aim at the adoption of the institutional socialist discipline, socialist democracy or socialist administration style by new generations. In this dimension, severe criticism is directed against the conflict between the theoretical view of materialism and world practice. Polytechnic education is ultimately educational set-ups which aim the production-oriented work of the school within the production process (Blonski, 2003).
The effects of materialist philosophy on the liberal capitalist world can be expressed as follows: Materialists and socialist ideology are of the opinion that education has class characteristics and all members of society should be provided with equal opportunities in the access of education as a public right. Materialists and socialist ideology argue that capitalism creates different social classes as a result of the law of unequal development. In this context, considering the opportunities to benefit from it, education is a means of constantly reproducing the system to the disadvantage of the lower social strata and to the advantage of the upper social strata. This is expressed as education reproduces class positions (Ünlü & Somel, 2020). As a matter of fact, Karl Marx expresses that education reproduces social values and structures which are governed according to the interests of the ruling classes, rather than assuming a transformative role in capitalist societies. According to Marx, education is one of the basic systems in the reproduction of an unequal society. According to him; It is against the basic principles of the system that child of a working family, whom he defines as the proletariat, moves up to the upper class through education (Newman, 2013). Critical and radical views, representing an important tradition of research and debate in the social and human sciences, which are the continuation of Marxist theory, underline a similar argument. They claim that changing and transforming roles of education is desirable, education has such a potential, but in capitalist societies, education and school systems cannot fulfill these changing and transforming functions which are expected from them (Yıldırım, 2010).

Findings Regarding the Effects on the Economy-Political Dimensions
Materialist philosophy and socialist ideology education describe education as a superstructure institution whose functioning is determined by the economic infrastructure. This perspective is, in a sense, the classic and stereotypical understanding of socialist ideology. According to this approach, production relations, which are the interaction of productive forces and production structure, form the infrastructure. Furthermore, education affects institutions and their activities and production processes. All institutions except economics are superstructure institutions and they function according to economic production relations (Politzer, 2010). However, functionalists are opposed to this view. According to the functionalists, all social institutions have their own functions and each of the social institutions is a critical component (Fulcher & Scott, 2011). Thus, a two-way interaction between economic and education processes can be mentioned as determining and affecting (Topses, 2006, p. 40).
Materialist philosophy and socialist ideology advocate public education. Socialists argue that capitalism restricts access to education due to privatization and social differences. They point to the law of private property and unequal development as the root cause of this negativity. Therefore, they especially defend the thesis that education should be free and public (Council, 2012). It is assumed that lower social strata will benefit from the equality of opportunity thanks to free and public education.
Materialist philosophy and socialist ideology have the opinion that local administration is more effective than central administration. In particular, considering the political arguments in everyday life, it is observed that socialists mostly advocate local government policies. At this point, considering socialist practices in the Soviets, China, Cuba and similar countries and the socialist, communist or democratic socialist party programs in the capitalist system, it is observed that various perspectives exist. In real socialist countries, a single party domination with the understanding of central administration prevails. On the other hand, in the party constitutions of communist, socialist and democratic socialist parties, the understanding of local administration and decentralization is dominant in general (Esen, 2020;Arslan, 2019). Materialist philosophy and socialist ideology suggest that learners and parents participate in the administration with the perspective of institutional democracy. In this context, they intend to strengthen the struggle with active democratic demands such as self-government. Considering educational practice, they want socialist parties and non-governmental organizations to participate in school administration (Sabuncu, 1985). Another issue which socialists emphasize and frequently underline is university autonomy. At this point, ensuring university autonomy in terms of administrative, financial and academic autonomy is a necessary condition (Bingöl, 2012).
Materialists and socialist ideology advocate anti-deregulation, unionism and professional organization.
Especially after the collapse of the Soviets and real socialism, the tendency to employ workers without any regulation has constantly increased in the economic and business life. At this point, socialists are constantly fighting against unlawful and uninsured workforce empğloyement in the fields of work. Socialists also stand by the permanent union organization and professional organization. Considering the first trade union organizations in the field of education in Turkey, it is observed that left, democratic socialist and Marxist groups are dominant (Işıklı, 2005).
One of the effects of materialism and socialist ideology on education in the economic-political dimension is opposition to privatization and marketization of education. In the period after glasnost and perestroika, an intense privatization process was experienced in public services such as education and health, especially in capitalist societies. In this context, especially in the 1990s, capitalism, which was almost alone in the unipolar world, seemed to dominate the whole world with neo-liberal policies (Ercan, 1998). According to socialists, privatization in the fields of education and health has gone against the poor masses of people. Materialism and socialist ideology are against the marketization of education. Socialists are essentially opposed to marketization. For this reason, various institutions and organizations with socialist references are constantly opposed to privatization in education. Educational unions, which take the socialist ideology as reference, are constantly in the struggle against privatization in education (Gök, 2004).

Discussion
It is possible to theme the inferences in two dimensions with their positive and negative qualities based on the findings of the study. In this context, the results regarding materialist philosophy and socialist ideology are evaluated in terms of curriculum and educational administration, as well as social-economic and political dimensions (See Figure 2).

Figure 2: Reflections of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology
Considering the perspectives and reflections of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the elements of the curriculum and educational administration; the weakness of spiritual education, ideological absolutist / monist approach, and one-sidedness can be listed among the generally criticized negative qualities. As a matter of fact, the main arguments of materialism are that no reality exists other than matter and the changes in it, and metaphysics has no value even morally. On the other hand, issues such as theory-practice integrity, productioneducation-application relationship, scientificness, collective consciousness and character education can be considered as strengths in theory and practice.
In the social-economic and political context; totalitarianism, lack of alternative and the very formal organizational structure are described as the weaknesses or negativities of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology. However, issues such as public education, union organization, anti-deregulation and marketization, participation in management and self-management, decentralization and equality of opportunity are considered positive aspects. It is possible to gather the results obtained from the findings under three main sub-headings: First; these are the results of theoretically expressed materialist philosophy and dominant practices of socialist ideology. Second group includes the results related to the curriculum, that is, pedagogical dimension. The third one is the results of the social, political and economic effects of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on the educational administration in the capitalist world.
Firstly, considering perspective of materialist philosophy and socialist ideology on education, it is observed that theoretical humanistic values are generally advocated. However, profound differences between theory and practice are observed in materialist philosophy and socialist ideology-related practices. While, theoretically, materialist philosophy and socialist ideology envision participation, equality, public education, equality of opportunity, which are generally regarded positive, it is a reality that they have led to different results in practice. As a matter of fact, Laçiner (2007) stated that the international socialist movement had a severe depression period during the 1970s, the polarization between the Soviet Union and China, the socialist revolutions realized through the military coup as in Afghanistan, the forms of sanctions imposed on the opponents and the negative examples in the field of application of unquestioned real socialism can be given as negative examples. Secondly; the following results have been reached in terms of the curriculum dimension: first of all, materialist philosophy is important in terms of contributing to the creation of a new educational philosophy rather than being a direct educational philosophy. It can be said that polytechnic education, which is put into practice especially in socialist countries, is a reflection of materialist philosophy in the field of education. In this context, educational processes have a social, economic and political focus and a class nature. On the basis of the materialist philosophy's perspective on education, the dominant view is that education has its class and material essence and that it is related to the economy as a infrastructure institution. This perspective is in harmony with "Material processes and economic processes are the main determinants of education, which is the suprastructural institution, and education transforms into matter, at a certain stage, as consciousness turns into matter" which is suggested by Canbaz (1998, pp. 11-12).
In the third dimension, considering social, political and economic dimensions; it can be stated that materialist philosophy and socialist ideology direct the liberal capitalist world towards social policies. As a matter of fact, many social-dimensional gains and practices such as participation in management, public and free education, and union organization in the liberal capitalist world can be interpreted as the effects of the socialist bloc. According to many intellectuals such as Turşucu (2008), Cem (2010), Güriz (2011), Tosun (2016, social policies function as "insurance" against real socialism for liberalism.

Suggestions
In the study, the effects of dialectical materialism and socialist ideology on the curriculum and administration have been investigated. The effects of different philosophies and ideologies on the curriculum and administration can be investigated. The study has been designed as a document analysis. Other studies can be conducted to determine the views of academicians, experts and teachers on the effects of dialectical materialism and socialist ideology on the curriculum and administration.
In the study, the opposition of materialism and socialist ideology to privatization and the demand for public education have been found. Quantitative and qualitative studies can be conducted on the reasons for opposition to privatization and public education demands. In addition, studies on privatization in education and the reflection of public education on society and its functioning in practice are suggested.