Examination of Attitude Levels of Academic Personnel Towards Political Participation and Determination of Its Relationships with Organizational Commitment

The aim of this study was to determine the attitudes of academic personnel working in faculties of sports sciences in universities towards political participation; to examine whether there was a significant difference between the attitudes of academicians towards political participation according to demographic characteristics; to determine the relationships between academic personnel’s attitudes towards political participation and their organizational commitment. The study, which was designed in the correlational survey model of the general survey models, was carried out together with 204 academicians working in universities in Central Anatolia Region. The data of the study were collected by means of using the Political Participation Scale and Organizational Commitment Scale. Descriptive statistics, difference tests and Pearson correlation coefficient were used in the process of data analysis. At the result of the research, it was determined that the feelings of political activity and the feelings of alienation of academic personnel as well as their political perceptions arising from the institution were generally at a medium level. It was determined that there was a positive relationship between the feelings of political activity and the dimensions of organizational commitment of academicians.


Introduction
According to the majority of political scientists, politics is the science of state; and according to some of them, politics is the science of power (Eroğlu, 2015).If politics is always considered as an activity appealing to state, then it's clear that involvement in state government will have the same meaning with political participation.In contrast, if politics is regarded as a power relation regardless of its conceptual framework in which it forms itself, then the participation in state and government and political participation will inevitably have different meanings (Gülmez, 1995).According to the latter understanding, in each institution with a relationship between the commanding and submitting parties, that is, a syndicate, an association, school, religious organization, Professional establishment or even in a family and if there is a struggle for power, then political participation will include all these fields as well as the state (Eroğlu, 2015).Therefore, the concept of power might lay the basis for politics, however, it's the 'political government' which is mentioned in political participation not all types of power.In this sense, it is more realistic to consider political participation as getting involved in 'state', which is the umbrella of all institutions, government.
Undoubtedly, in a political system, individuals need to demonstrate certain processes in the political system so that they can play certain political roles, become a 'political person' equipped with certain values, beliefs and tendencies, or to win 'political self' (Dursun, 2004) and a neutral individual who exhibits indifferent or spectator behavior who does not participate in the political processes, has no political effect if he has no connection with the political environment and is not involved in any decision-making mechanism.Such individuals think that their actions do not have any political consequences.However, this ordinary, faint, asocial individual will also have a certain political effect in the particular conjuncture.In fact, these asocial and apolitical individuals play an important role in the formation of what is called public opinion to the extent that they are directed.Some individuals carry out a motive, repulsive function in the formation of public opinion, while others advocate their pre-formed views because everyone supports them and they do not have arguments or courage to defend the opposite (Çağla, 2015).In this context, in a political society, individuals need to be aware of the fact that the functioning of the political system will directly or indirectly affect their own situation in order to play political roles and act in political behaviors, and that the decisions taken by the political power and the rules that it will govern will have an impact on their future.If the roles they play and the behaviors and actions they put forward will have no effect on the political process and the functioning of the system, it is unthinkable for individuals to take various actions on the political system in this environment.
Given these explanations, this study considers that the basic approach is that individuals participate in the political process, even if they are at various levels, or act consciously, and take their attitudes and behaviors against the political system as participation activities.In this context, the aim of this study is to determine the attitudes of academic staff working in faculties of sports sciences in universities towards political participation; to examine whether there is a significant difference between the attitudes of academicians towards political participation according to demographic characteristics; to determine the relationships between academic staff's attitudes towards political participation and their organizational commitment.

Political Participation, Political Activity and Alienation from Political Process
In systems where participation mechanisms work well, politics is not an action for individuals, but an action taken by them.Acting is its greatest virtue, and interest, commitment, obligation and service, common negotiation, joint decision and collaborative work are distinctive features (Barber, 1995).As it is known, it is difficult to say that a form of government where the individual feels himself worthless and powerless, and is not a perpetrator, intersects with democracy.In this sense, the most important guarantee of democracy is individuals.The strong democracy in the form of a participant paves the way for the formation of a political society that can turn dependent individuals into free citizens and private interests into public interests in the process of creating their own laws (Barber, 1995).
A democratic system based on participatory society or intense participation is built on the concept of citizenship.The building blocks of a democratic society are individuals who perceive politics as a way of life and who do not see politics as an act of politicians.Therefore, participation is not a problem with the political system, but rather a problem with the individual.The individual is as good or qualified to the extent that he/she participates in these processes.Participation is also an important criterion and indicator of being a citizen.Participatory behavior is an action that explains the relationship between the individual and the political system.Therefore, the content of participation varies according to the size of the relationship between the individual and the political system.This situation was used as a criterion in the history of democracy in all democracy, as a criterion showing the link between the individual and the political system.One dimension of democratic system is related to values and institutions.Robert Dahl divides the dimensions of political participation into four as "paying attention", "caring", "getting informed" and "taking action" (Dahl, 1963).The most advanced dimension of participation is to act.However, since participation in certain systems is limited to elections, effective participation is not widely available.In this respect, making the political system open to an active, continuous and dynamic participation will provide a situation that encourages individuals in terms of political participation.
These features are a realization of a change in the consciousness of the individuals required for real participation; they need to see themselves actively, and try to increase and develop their capacities.Therefore, the individual can only act in a way that he/she feels free and develops himself/herself in the real sense (Sarıbay, 2000).This participation may simply be as an individual or may be in a group with that group.The discussions on this issue are basically on two issues; the value of political participation for the individual and the political system and the reasons for participating or not participating (Çağla, 2015).It is closely related to the functionality of the mechanisms that will enable individuals to participate effectively in all the decisions that affect them and that this participation takes place at a very high rate in all sectors of the society (Olsen, 1982).To be able to talk about participation in the real sense, all individuals should have the opportunity to participate in the collective decision-making to the extent that they desire to take all collective decisions, and participation in collective decision-making should not be limited to voting, but should also cover a wide range of activities (Huntington & Dominguez, 1986).In addition, the responsibility for collective decision-making must be broadly distributed, should not be limited solely to officials and/or experts, include all persons affected by these decisions, and in particular to participate in collective decisions in non-political areas, to teach individuals political skills and norms, and to encourage them to participate in broader political issues (Sarıbay, 2000).
The differences in the society in which individuals are born are signs of political participation.In addition, the individual's interest in politics and personality structure, the approach to social, political and economic problems, the structure of the political system-democratic or totalitarianism, social culture-tradition, religion, ideology, morality and socio-economic-level-development, underdevelopment-characteristics that influence political participation and differ from one society to another.Naturally, it is wrong to reduce political attitudes to political participation only when the individual affects society or society is shaping the individual; individuals take a role in political society and institutions deliberately and their attitudes towards political problems are shaped within the homogenous social mixture, and one of the various aspects of this mix may prevail.
Undoubtedly, every political system wants to instill knowledge, thought, rule, belief and value in order to adapt its members to their values and principles.Individuals respond to this demand, either positively or negatively (Dahl & Stinebrickener, 2003).The power that holds the political system; through ideological, structural, and personal resources, individuals feed their consent to their power (Eckstein, 1988).It utilizes ideological tools such as propaganda, education and economic relations; structural tools such as law, bureaucracy; personal traits like heroism and leadership thus seeking "widespread support" for the emergence of individuals who faithfully adhere to the board order using personal tools (Erickson & Romero, 1990).The executive power nourishes the people's choice and demand areas with these resources in order to nourish their self-directed social support.This relationship is the reciprocal feeding relationship, which can be based on this demand and support relationship.
As long as the organizational commitment of the individual are promoted depending on ideological, legal and economic factors towards the political system and institutions, the institutional supports of the system become stronger and a harmonious correlation process is launched between the individual and the system/institution.The individual finds his/her role in the institution and in the political system.Political and institutional structure also prepares the individual for that role.The individual functions in the role of both the environmental siege and the ideological siege of the political system.In this way, the continuation of the political and institutional system in unchanged constant basic principles is guaranteed (Evans, 2004).In this context, the main object of the individual to be politicized to accept his role, the system to support the individual to play this role.Through these mutual supports, the continuity of the legitimacy of the political and institutional system will be ensured.However, the individual, social and political changes of the political, institutional and organizational structure and the fact that the individual ignores the demand for role other than the given roles directed at him/herself is an important problem.This situation may cause the emergence of a feeling of alienation in individuals (Friedrich, 1998).The individual does not want to abide by the organizational and institutional structure established by the influence of the socio-economic class, the social status group, the ethnic and religious structure, and the ideological environment.With the contribution of these interactive elements, it can follow a confrontational attitude against different formations or try to stay away from the system.In fact, they can develop behavior towards them by not adopting the values and principles of the established order (Gassett, 1991).
As a result, the sense of activity that an individual carries in political participation as an action and behavior is generally one of the variables that affect the participation in a stimulating way, while the sense of alienation is one that affects the attenuating and decreasing participation.The sense of activity is a belief and attitude that an individual can change his/her environment through his/her own actions and behaviors, and that he/she can influence, control the environment and organize his future with his/her behaviors.
The individual with such a belief and attitude will be able to participate more easily in political life, as well as being interested in all kinds of developments and not hesitating to participate in political processes.On the other hand, the sense of alienation may reveal feelings of experience or experiential loss that the individual is unable to control the existing organizational structures from the values, rules, expectations and relations, and that the possibility of controlling these processes from the individual perspective disappears.It is a situation in which the system or institutional organization does not make sense for the individual and does not respond to the real needs and prevents the individual from realizing himself/herself, which is the situation of the individual breaking away from the system (Çetin, 2012;Kubat & Şentürk, 2018).Hence, the sense of alienation hinders political participation as a negative factor that pushes the individual out of the system and breaks the whole relationship.
The main purpose of this study was to investigate the attitudes of academicians working in the Faculties of Sport Sciences according to various variables and to determine the relation between them and organizational commitment.Political participation and alienation, with a concentration in Turkey subject areas covered in the private sector working level, much has not been studied in universities.In this sense, the specificity and importance of the study is increasing.

Research Model
In this study, it was aimed to determine the attitudes of academic staff working in the faculty of sports sciences   When the information in Table 2 was examined, the average of the scores of political activity of the academic staff whose opinions were taken within the scope of the research was 20.93, the average of the points of political alienation was 12.79, and the political perception scores originating from the institution; the average was calculated as 33.44.
As the number of items in the scale of attitudes towards political participation is different, the average score from each subscale is divided by the number of items and the results are shown in Table 3.It was determined that the academic perceptions of the academic staff who participated in the research were above the medium level and their attitudes towards alienation dimension were below the medium level.When the scale sub-dimensions were evaluated within itself, it was seen that the highest score of the academic staff belongs to the sense of political activity and the least score to the feeling of alienation.

Are the Attitudes of Academic Staff Towards Political Participation Differ Significantly According to Their Demographic Characteristics?
It was analyzed whether the attitudes of the academic staff according to their age and marital status showed a significant difference.As can be seen in Table 4, the sense of political activity in academic staff participating in the research does not indicate a significant difference at (F(2.203)=0.507;p>0.05), sense of alienation at (F(2.203)=0.708;p>0.05) and political perception arising from the institution at (F(2.203)=0.314;p>0.05).Given the data in Table 5, the sense of political activity of the academic staff (t(202)=1.268;p>0.05), the sense of alienation (t(202)=0.389;p>0.05) and the political perception originating from the institution (t(202)=1.602;p>0.05) did not show a significant change according to their marital status.

What Is the Relationship Between the Attitudes of Academic Staff Towards Political Participation and Their Organizational Commitment?
It was analyzed whether the attitudes of the academic staff according to their age and marital status showed a significant difference.Given the data indicated in Table 6, there was a negative but minor level of correlation between the academic effectiveness and emotional commitment of the teaching staff participating the research (r=0.862;p<0.01), the continuity of commitment (r=0.798;p<0.05), normative commitment (r=0.717;p<0.01) and organizational commitment (r=0.804;p<0.01), emotional commitment (r=-0.253;p<0.01), continuity of commitment (r=-0.242;p<0.01), normative commitment and (r=-0,268; p<0,01) academic alienation and organizational commitment.In addition, there was a correlation (r=0.269) between participants' political perceptions and emotional commitment to the institution (r=0.269; p<0.01), commitment (r=0.211; p<0.01), normative commitment (r=0.224; p<0.01) and organizational commitment.
When the relationship between the sub-dimensions of the scales was examined; a negative and moderate relationship was found between the emotions of political activity and alienation (r=-0.315;p<0.01).

Discussion
The aim of this study was to investigate the attitudes of academic staff working in the Faculties of Sports Sciences towards political participation and to determine the relationships between their organizational commitment and their organizational commitment.
First of all, descriptive statistics about the attitudes of academic staff towards political participation were calculated.It was determined that the academic perceptions of the academic staff who participated in the research were above the medium level and their attitudes towards alienation dimension were below the medium level.In terms of scale sub-dimensions, it was found that the political activity dimension was more dominant and the lowest score belonged to the alienation dimension (Table 2).
Based on these results, it can be stated that academicians have a different attitude and attitudes about their own actions, behaviors and knowledge that they can change their environment and influence the political course.
Moreover, the fact that the political alienation dimension is slightly below the middle level indicates that the academic system and the functioning of academics do not make sense for themselves and that these processes are subject to detachment from the political system due to lack of opportunity to influence such processes (Çetin, 2012).This result is very thought-provoking in the sample of academicians who are in the position of leading the society or providing alternative hypotheses.
According to the age and marital status of the academic staff included in the study, it was determined that there was no significant difference in political activity, political perceptions of the institution and political alienation sub-dimensions.In other words, age and marital status have no effect on political participation (Table 4-5).
According to the results of the correlation between the attitudes of academic staff towards political participation and their organizational commitment; it was observed that there was a positive and high-level relationship between the sense of political activity and the organizational commitment of the participants (Table 6).While the political system of the organizations presents the resources and values from the top down in a commanding manner, the demands/expectations within the organization, on the other hand, are conveyed within these mandatory limits from the bottom up, within the procedures and the specified processes.Hence, participation is a mechanism that enables both individuals to integrate with organizational gains and values, and to affect individuals' organizations (Uysal, 1984).In this sense, as the attitudes of academicians towards political participation increase, the emotional, continuity and normative commitment of the institution tends to increase.Because political socialization shapes political behavior in the context of political events.In this respect, political participation is a process explaining the similarity and integration of the individuals with the political society.The nature, prevalence and direction of political participation is a situation which is expected to promote the organizational commitment as an impressive political participation considering that the institution they work in is limited by the boundaries drawn by the political system (Yolcu, 2017).
In addition, it was determined that there was a positively low-level relationship between the political perceptions of the academic staff participating in the study and their organizational commitment and their negative and low-level political perceptions and their organizational commitment.
When the attitudes of the Academicians towards Political Participation Scale with their sub-dimensions are examined; it was found that there was a negative and moderate relationship between the emotions of political activity and the feelings of alienation.In other words, as political alienation increases, participation in political activities decreases (Table 6).Undoubtedly, political behavior cannot be expected from a person who is severed from the system because this situation will appear as a lack of interest in the political phenomenon and will remove it from political behavior (Turan, 1991).As an action and behavior, the individual's sense of activity and assertiveness in political participation generally affects the stimulus in a stimulating way, whereas the sense of alienation is an effect of reducing and attenuating participation (Caprara et al., 2007).The sense of activity is specifically important in political participation behavior.The sense that an individual can change and affect his/her environment through his/her own behaviors, enables the individual to exhibit more active behaviors in political life.It can be argued that individuals who do not refrain from taking part in the initiative are more likely to participate in political life (Dursun, 2004).
As a result, modern political democracy is a management system in which the rulers are held accountable by citizens for their actions in state affairs and the elected representatives act indirectly through competition and cooperation between them.In this respect, democracy is the dominant political doctrine of the contemporary world.By the same token, almost every country argues that its political regime is democratic (Kuzu, 1992).However, within the political history period, there has been a transformation from a limited democratic system based simply on voting from election to election towards a participatory democracy, which is defined as based on principles such as political participation, taking part in decision-making mechanisms, accountability in the process of implementation of policies and persuading people.Thus, with the increasing visibility of these social movements, boycotts, rallies or similar activities, which we call non-traditional participation, the interest of citizens in matters such as education, health and local services that affect them in daily life has increased and the tendency to participate in these activities.In this process, a new understanding, which accepts individuals as a partner of the public (stakeholder citizen) while not overlooking the citizenship bond of the individuals, has begun to gain ground gradually (Toksöz, 2008).
In this context, the transition to a participatory democracy, which is defined as political the "self-governance of the people", from a political regime that allows only the lowest level of political voting and participation in the elections, can be achieved through the high political participation and political socialization of individuals.
Based on this information, the right to political participation as a concession in public officials in Turkey and legal arrangements which holds the frame academicians' political participation, attitudes towards democracy, as well as their insights and reflections on relationships in their daily lives is of great importance in creating their own unique political culture of higher education institutions.
Are the Attitudes of Academic Staff Towards Political Participation?

Table 2 .
Descriptive statistics of academic staff about attitudes towards political participation

Table 3 .
Descriptive statistics calculated by item

Table 4 .
T test results of unrelated measurements calculated regarding attitudes of academic staff towards political participation according to their age

Table 5 .
T test results in unrelated measurements calculated for attitudes towards political participation based on the marital status of academic staff

Table 6 .
Results of Pearson correlation coefficient calculated for the relationship between academic staff's attitudes towards political participation and their organizational commitment