Trends in Multicultural Education Research : A Five-Year Content Analysis of Turkish and ERIC Databases

This study aims to determine trends in research on multicultural education in Turkish and Eric databases, to compare and to discuss them. Within the scope of the study, research on multicultural education in the International Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) and ULAKBİM TR Index (Turkey National Academic Network and Information Center) databases were included. In the study, 308 articles reached in ERIC database and 60 articles in ULAKBİM database were analyzed using content analysis. As a result of the analysis, it was determined that there has been an increase in multicultural education publications in ULAKBİM TR Index since 2015 and a decrease in the ERIC database. In Turkey, it is seen that there is a tendency to determine attitudes, perceptions and opinions towards multicultural education with larger sample groups; nevertheless, there is a tendency to multicultural education practices and experiences with smaller groups in the ERIC database.


INTRODUCTION
Multiculturality points to the existence of cultural groups that differ in the social structure. The concept can be used both to explain cultural diversity and to emphasize the fact that cultural diversity is richness (Türk, 2016). Multiculturality, defined as seeking equal rights and recognition for ethnic, racial, religious or sexually defined groups, is one of today's most widespread and controversial intellectual and political movements (Joppke, 1996, p.449). Multiculturality recognizes that different cultures can exist in a society and that all individuals are equal (Kelly, 2009). The content of the concept can vary according to countries with different cultural understandings. Multiculturality is used for the right of immigrants to express their ethnic identities without the fear of prejudice or discrimination in Canada, the sharing of powers among national communities in Europe and to meet the demands of the marginalized social groups in the United States (Sönmez-Selçuk, 2011).
There are number of racial, ethnic, linguistic, religious, belief-related and cultural diversity in countries around the world. However, the emergence of multicultural societies in Europe and North American continents has accelerated, especially with economic migrations beginning in the 1960s. This has led to the emergence of debates about the demands for recognition of cultural differences, citizenship rights and education. The discussion of multiculturality in the contemporary world started with the struggle of indigenous peoples in North America and intense immigration to Western Europe and the Americas after the Second World War. Both the possibilities offered by globalization and the closeness of nation-state policies to cultural diversity have made the concept controversial (Özensel, 2013). Multiculturality had emerged in the immigrant countries at first, the United States, Australia and Canada, furthermore, was adopted for the first time as a policy in Australia and Canada. The European states were also faced with multicultural debates, usually as a result of workers' migrations (Ceylan, 2016). Cultural diversity in Europe is mainly nourished from three sources. The first source, called "national minorities," is indigenous minorities whose history dates back to old times. The second source is the minorities of immigrant origin. These migrations took place rapidly towards the inner parts of Europe, especially after the Second World War. The other source is the free movements within the EU (Canatan, 2009). The movement particularly due to the mobility of workers' migrations has caused ethnic and religious diversities of European societies and initiated discussions. In England, for example, the languages and cultures of immigrants were regarded as inadequate and their linguistic and cultural differences were underestimated. Therefore, with the debate that began in the late 1960s, improving the legal status of migrants living in the Commonwealth of Nations became a priority issue and the struggle for multicultural education began in the 1970s (Nohl, 2014).
Multiculturality was first used in Switzerland in 1957 as a concept but became more widespread after it was used in Canada in the late 1960s. The concept has spread rapidly to other English-speaking countries as well. (Kallen, 1982 cited by Sengstock, 2009, p.239). Therefore, multiculturality in the modern sense is a concept emerged in North America. In the United States and Canada, people who speak a different language and live in the lands they thought belong to; have asked for the recognition of their cultural identity (Özensel, 2012). Although the United States has been diverse since its establishment, the ethnic fabric has become even more diverse after the Immigration Reform Act in 1965 (Banks, 2013). The proposals for multicultural curriculum reform, which developed in the USA after 1960 and spread from the centers such as Blacks, Women and Latin Studies in the 1990s, were trying to intertwine the aims of education and the political aims of democratizing society (Özkazanç, 2000). In the 1960s and 1970s, blacks, Latinos and other minority groups were fighting for their rights, which were virtually invisible in the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) curriculum that continued to shape American schools largely (Kahn, 2008). Canada's multiculturality approach, which supports a social structure in which its citizens can experience their cultural differences, differs from the United States. Cultural policies of the United States are defined as the melting pot, while Canada's are defined as the salad bowl. Here, it is emphasized that the individuals in the US society are transformed into a different cultural structure in a melting pot, and in Canada, each society can maintain its own culture, just like the varieties of salad (Özensel, 2012). However, multiculturality also takes the flak of some criticism. Some scholiasts pointed out that multiculturality includes a 'divide and rule' strategy on ethnic minorities. There are also criticisms of multiculturality that the protection of "culture" is over-emphasized and therefore less attention has been paid to socio-economic inequalities. However, despite these criticisms, multiculturality has been successfully disseminated in the public sphere in most places in the world (Vertovec, 2010).

Multicultural Education
The education system creates one of the most important reflections of multiculturality in the public area. Multicultural education has become the term often discussed by educators to define education for cultural pluralism involving cultural diversity (Açıkalın, 2010;Aydın, 2013;Grant & Sleeter, 2010). According to Banks (2010, p.3) multicultural education includes the idea that all students (regardless of gender, social class and ethnic, racial or cultural characteristics) should have equal learning opportunities at school. Başbay & Kağnıcı (2011) described multicultural education as the process of building the learning and teaching process in a structure to promote cultural pluralism. The important thing in this process is to show respect to different cultures and to create an environment that will ensure a common understanding. According to Gorski (2000), multicultural education is an approach that criticizes current deficiencies in education, failures and discriminatory practices and seeks to transform education in this context. It is based on social justice, equality of education and dedication to facilitate the educational experience that all students can access locally, nationally and globally.
Multicultural education helps students develop positive attitudes towards individuals from different cultural groups, reducing discriminatory attitudes and increasing the level of tolerance between groups. Thus, it provides students with opportunities and experiences to recognize their own culture as well as other cultures. In the education system based on a single cultural structure that denies the existing diversity in social structure, individuals may develop negative and marginalizing attitudes towards different cultural groups. Single culture education prevents the development of the ability to criticize, and it not only increases the tendency of rejecting, judging, finding worthless but also aggression, insensitivity, and racism for students who only look at the world from the narrow point of view of their own culture (Parekh, 2002, p.288). Because individuals who try to understand the world only from their own cultural perspectives are deprived of an important part of the human experience and limited from the cultural aspect (Banks, 2013). In this context, multicultural education offers important opportunities for the development of skills to recognize, accept, to be sensitive, respect, communicate effectively and live together with different cultural groups. If a high-quality life away from inter-group conflicts is desired, it is necessary to teach students how to develop relationships with individuals from different ethnic backgrounds, races, cultures, languages, and gender, including closer knowledge, value, performance, interest, and sharing of power, resources, and responsibilities (Gay, 2014). The result of not being able to raise individuals who respect cultural diversity can drag individuals or society to moral monism and this understanding can also constitute the basis of social conflicts (Başbay, 2014). People or ethnic groups, who have anxiety for not to reproduce their culture and not to transfer it to their children, will politicize their identity and formulate their demands through this identity (Çayır, 2016). Such a situation can have the potential to create a basis for inter-group conflicts by increasing isolation, threat perception, anxiety and concerns among different cultures. In this respect, it can be said that multicultural education is a policy that is sensitive to different cultures, which is opposed to educating a single type of individuals and to relying on a single culture and which respects the cultural diversity of individuals and provides an opportunity to develop on an equal scale (Polat & Kılıç, 2013). In societies embodying different cultural structures, both social cohesion and the interaction of the groups constituting this unity on the axis of recognition and acceptance are at the focal point of multicultural education.
Multicultural education is not an approach to specific cultural groups. For example, considering multicultural education as an issue only associated with ethnic problems constitutes the most important prejudice or lack of knowledge (Coşkun, 2012). Such lack of knowledge or prejudices leads to the development of fears or concerns about different cultural groups or educational demands of these groups. It is argued that the country can be divided by multicultural education practices, and therefore the unitary state structure can be disrupted (Cırık, 2008;Günay & Aydın, 2015). However, understanding of multicultural education, which is organized to unite a country divided rather than dividing, supports the idea "we are all one" (Banks, 2013). The elimination of such fears and anxieties, prejudices or lack of knowledge can be possible through multicultural education that will provide an environment for interaction and awareness. Multicultural education aims to reduce prejudices, identity conflicts and power struggles in societies with cultural differences in education, ethnicity, race, language, religion, gender etc. and to implement educational policies that address the expectations of society and support pluralism (Acar-Çiftçi & Aydın, 2014). One of the main aims of education for a multicultural society is to increase the awareness of young people about cultural differences and to help them see cultural differences as a natural part of life (Özgen & Köşker, 2019). Therefore, the necessity of education in order to gain the perception that differences enrich society and to ensure harmony and integration by increasing inter-cultural interactions is indisputable.

Multiculturality and Multicultural Education in Turkey
Anatolia is a place which has been nurtured with the richness of life practices of different cultures throughout the human history. Turkey, the heir to this cultural heritage, has a rich social structure that includes various cultural differences, ethnic, belief-related and religious. Turkey is a multiethnic and multicultural country that hosts fifty Muslim and/or non-Muslim ethnic groups, including Turks, Kurds, Circassians, Lazs Armenians, Georgians, Jews, Greeks, Arabs, Assyrians, Alawis and Sunnis (Kaya, 2014). Besides, the existence of intertwined sub-definitions in Turkey can be mentioned. In this context, sub-definitions can be made such as those with the same ethnic origin but different languages, those with the different ethnic origins but same beliefs, those with different religious and ethnic origin with the same language and sectarian differences (Polat & Kılıç, 2013). However, despite the multicultural social structure that exists in Turkey, the founding philosophy of the Republic is based on the creation of a homogenous society in which different cultural structures are expressed with a single identity in line with the nation-state understanding (Arslan, 2016;Kaya, 2005;Kaya & Aydın, 2014). In this context, the construction of a homogenous society on the basis of "Turkishness" rather than a multicultural foundation constituted the basis of educational policies (Çapar, 2004; Öztan, 2011; Üstel, 2014). The new nation was aimed to be a nation of single-language, single-religion with a single ethnic structure on the basis of national culture and in line with this goal, education is considered as the most important factor in providing national unity and togetherness, and curriculums are prepared in this direction (Çayır, 2003). In this respect, the main purpose of national education, which was the way to transform the Turkish people into a nation, was to melt or assimilate the "foreign cultures", thus building the uniform Turkish nation (Kaplan, 2008). This circumstance presented itself in the textbooks of the period.
For example, in the geography textbook of 1929, where the human characteristics of the country's population were expressed, nomadic peoples were counted one by one, the tribal structures of Yoruks, Turkmens, and Kurds and the names of their settlements and even the names and sub-branches of the Kurdish tribes were included, in short, all human characteristics of Anatolia have been elaborated (Özgen, 2011). However, then, a "taboo model" was observed dominated by a concept of unmanned geography, far from multicultural and multi-perspective approach, which ignores all the differences in the country (Kahyaoğlu, 2003). The education in the early years of the Republic based on the understanding of ethno-cultural citizenship showed a transition towards the understanding of political citizenship in the 1950s, since the second half of the 1980s, with the reflection of military coup in education, Islam has been regarded as an important component of citizenship and in addition to the "language and race", religious elements have been added to the material elements that made up the nation (Üstel, 2014). In 1999, with the European Union's promise of candidacy to Turkey, mutual harmonization agreements were signed for the understanding of international social and cultural phenomena in depth (Günay & Aydın, 2015). Within the framework of the European Union harmonization laws, Turkey had to consider the language, culture and religious characteristics of various groups in Anatolia in the field of education (Cırık, 2008). Multicultural ascensions have started since 2004 and various languages and dialects (Kurdish, Zaza, Laz, Adyghe, Abaza, Georgian) were introduced in the 2012-2013 academic year as elective courses in the secondary and high school curriculum, with the aim of learning different languages and dialects in the name of "living languages and dialects" (Aktürk, 2018;Erdoğmuş & Orkin, 2018). However, the current historical narrative and collective identity in the textbooks is still only created through Turkishness and Turkish language (Çayır, 2016). Therefore, education in Turkey still has a single culture-based quality. However, the current multicultural structure stemming from the historical structure of Turkey is increasingly diversified with increasing migration and refugee populations in recent years. According to the data of the General Directorate of Migration Administration (GDMA, 2018), the increase in the number of irregular migrant arrivals and apprehensions to Turkey from Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq since 2016 leads to the diversification of cultural groups. This situation has led to different repercussions in the education system as in many areas. Therefore, policies on new concepts, projects, programs, school organization types, teacher training models, development of education and teaching materials need to be developed in the field of education (Coşkun, 2006).
One of the most important ways of integrating different cultures into society and ensuring social cohesion is education. Studies in the field of education stem from social needs and their findings play a decisive role in educational policies. In order to make education systems effective, international research and research in developing countries constitute two important sources of information (Karip & Köksal, 1996). Therefore, these two sources of information are important in establishing an effective multicultural education policy. The first of these is international research which is done as both theoretical and practical in the field of multicultural education. These studies present valuable findings in terms of national studies and practices. The second important source is the national studies that present the current situation and needs. Academic research in multicultural education has a guiding function on presenting the current situation, development, and needs and in the development of educational content, practices and training policies. In this context, it can be said that multicultural education studies in national and international fields will provide versatile and alternative perspectives in line with their theoretical and practical contributions and will create opportunities for international cooperation. Thus, it was targeted in this research to identify trends in research on multicultural education, to put forward their point of view, to determine, compare and discuss loaded meaning to multicultural education in Turkish and Eric database scale.
Research on multiculturalism has gained a prominent place in the literature. Although these studies are carried out with many different research patterns, the scarcity of content analysis studies is remarkable. When the international literature is examined, it was reached studies as follows; gender orientations in multicultural education textbooks (Jennings & Macgillivray, 2011), 20-year content analysis of multicultural guidance competence (Worthington, Soth-McNett & Moreno, 2007), representation of differences in picture books (Koss, 2015), examination of teacher training course contents in terms of multiculturalism (Gorski, 2009), 10 years of journal content analysis for multicultural guidance (Arredondo, Rosen, Rice, Perez & Tovar-Gamero, 2005), ethnicity investigation in high school history textbooks (Woyshner & Schocker, 2015), 17-year content analysis for multiculturalism, diversity and social advocacy, including guidance training and supervision (Smith, Ng, Brinson & Mityagin, 2008), and content analysis for multicultural counseling course content (Priester et al., 2008;Pieterse, Evans, Risner-Butner, Collins & Mason, 2009) and representation of disabled people in textbooks (Johnson & Nieto, 2007). It is seen that the content analysis researches toward multicultural education in Turkish literature are even more limited. In this context, only a content analysis study was conducted by Günay and Aydın (2015) which examined the multicultural studies in Turkish literature between the years 2005-2014. In spite of all these researches, we could not encounter the study that examines multicultural education researches comparatively.
This study aims to determine the trends by comparing multicultural education research in ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) and Turkish ULAKBİM TR (National Academic Network and Information Center) databases. For this purpose, look for answer the following research questions: RQ1: What is the distribution of the studies in the field of multicultural education between the years 2014-2018? RQ2: What is the distribution of the studies in the field of multicultural education between the years 2014-2018 according to research methods? RQ3: What is the distribution of the studies in the field of multicultural education between the years 2014-2018 according to data collection tools and data analysis methods? RQ4: What is the distribution of the studies in the field of multicultural education between the years 2014-2018 according to sampling method, sampling size and sampling level? RQ5: What is the distribution of the studies in the field of multicultural education between the years 2014-2018 according to research topics?

Research Design
This study that aims to examine multicultural educational research in ERIC and ULAKBIM databases is a descriptive comparative research. Within the scope of the research, it was aimed to make various conclusions by focusing on articles related to multicultural education through content analysis method. Although content analysis is a method first used in mass media and public speech, it is also used in educational research to contribute to the summarizing and reporting of written materials (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007, p.475). According to Krippendorff (2004, p.18), content analysis is a research technique that can be renewed from a variety of texts and used to make valid conclusions in accordance with the field of usage. On the basis of content analysis, there are large sets of data which are analyzed according to various characteristics. For this reason, content analysis is described as the process of discovering the meaning and consistency of products by making qualitative products a focal point (Patton, 2014, p.453).

Sampling
In the determination of the articles to be included in the research, firstly ERIC and ULAKBIM databases were accessed and the search was conducted with the keyword "multicultural education" (Figure 1). Since it is aimed to reach current publications, a time limit has been applied for 5 years between 2014 and 2018. After that, the full text and refereed articles within the scope of multicultural education Figure 1. Article determination process (ME) databases are stored in a computer environment by the researchers. The final check was carried out by removing irrelevant publications. Publications in journals scanned in both ERIC and ULAKBIM databases were evaluated only under ULAKBIM. In this context, 308 articles in ERIC database and 60 articles in ULAKBIM database were subjected to content analysis.

Data Collection Tool
The research data were collected through the article analysis form, originally developed by Sözbilir, Kutu and Yaşar (2012) and revised by the researchers in accordance with the research scope. Within the scope of the research, it is aimed to reach the findings related to the distribution of multicultural education studies, method preferences, target audience and scope within a five-year period, article analysis form consists of eight categories (research year, research method, data collection tool, data analysis method, sampling method, sampling size and level, and research topic) for the analysis of articles.

Data Analysis
Firstly, 308 articles from ERIC database and 60 articles from ULAKBIM database were ranked and were analyzed through eight categories (research year, research method, data collection tool, data analysis method, sampling method, sampling size and sampling level and research topic) determined by the article analysis form. Then, an analysis form was created for each article and content analysis was applied to the listed forms. Content analysis consists of five basic phases: meeting with data, generating codes, defining themes, creating thematic networks, integrating and interpreting (Robson, 2015). In the data analysis process, the data set was first examined by adhering to the phases, coding was performed in accordance with the data collection tool, theme names were made explicit, data set was integrated, visualized and interpreted with tables and charts. In order to ensure the validity and reliability of the research, expert opinion was taken for the articles. Thus, two experts working in the field of multicultural education were reviewed the articles for suitability. In addition, the article evaluation form revised by the researchers was presented to same experts, then the analysis process was initiated. In the analysis process, the data sets were encoded by the researchers individually, the themes were determined by applying constant comparative process and the coding was collected under themes by consensus. Thus, a more objective and coherent process was aimed to carry out. Table 1 is examined, it is seen that publications for Multicultural Education (ME) in the journals indexed by ULAKBIM in Turkey have increased since 2016. In this context, when the journals indexed by ERIC, an international index, are examined, it is also noted that multicultural education publications show a large increase (50%) compared with 2015 to the previous year, and that there is a tendency to decrease in the number of publications after 2015.

When
When the findings in Table 2 are examined, it is observed that the quantitative methods have a usage rate of 46.66% in ME related publications in the journals in ULAKBIM index. In ERIC index, on the other hand, it was found that qualitative research was preferred by 42.86%. This indicates that there is a tendency towards quantitative research in Turkey and qualitative research in the international arena. In addition, it was found that in the studies in ULAKBIM database, qualitative research was preferred 38.33%, literature research 8.33% and mixed method research 6.7% were preferred. ERIC database, on the other hand, includes quantitative research approach with a rate of 28.57%, mixed method research 4.55%, and literature research 24.02%. It is observed that literature studies are preferred more frequently in the international arena than in Turkey. The results of detailed analysis of the methods used are presented in Table 3.
As can be seen in Table 3, survey research design of the quantitative methods (33.33%) and the phenomenology research design (15%) were frequently used in the studies related to ME in the ULAKBİM database. In the mixed research method, it was determined that the convergent parallel (quantitative-qualitative) research design (3.66%) was used the most. When looked at ERIC database findings, it was found that the descriptive research design was more preferred (10.72%) in quantitative research, case study design (19.15%) was more preferred in qualitative research, exploratory design (3.24%) was more preferred in the mixed approach.
As shown in Figure 2, there is an increase in the use of quantitative research methods in the ULAKBIM database since 2014. The use of qualitative research methods was seen to be more in 2016, but it was observed that there was a tendency to decline from this date. Again, mixed research methods were not used in 2016 and 2017. It is observed that  In line with the findings in Table 4, it was determined that the scale aimed at generating attitudes, perceptions and opinions in the ULAKBIM database was used more as a data collection tool (37.68%). The other data collection tools that were frequently preferred after the scales were interview (26.08%) and document (18.84%). It was seen that questionnaires (8.69%), and observation (8.69%) were the least preferred methods. When data collection tool trends were examined in articles in ERIC database, it was found that documents (28.26%), followed by interviews (23.43%), alternative tools (16.67%), questionnaires (11.25%), observation (8.94%) and achievement test (0.24%) were preferred the most.
In Figures 3 and 4, there are findings of quantitative and qualitative data analysis of the articles published on ME in journals indexed by ULAKBIM and ERIC. When the findings are examined, it is observed that quantitative predictive analysis methods (f=63) are mostly preferred in ULAKBIM database. When the findings regarding qualitative data analysis were evaluated in Figure 4, it was determined that the content analysis was used more (f=17). In the articles in ERIC database, it is observed that descriptive analysis methods (f=98) in quantitative dimension and content analysis methods (f=167) in qualitative dimension are preferred the most. The findings related to the data analysis methods used in the articles are detailed in Table 5.
The results of the sample group selection of articles published on ME in the journals indexed by ERIC and ULAKBIM were presented in Figure 5.
In the articles in ULAKBIM database, it is observed that non-random sampling selection (f=28) is frequently preferred. In line with the results obtained, it is determined that the authors did not give a statement on the sample selection in 23.91% of the articles. Again, it is determined that there was no explanation for the sample selection method   in 73.05% of the articles in ERIC database. In the articles that explain the sampling selection, on the other hand, it was determined that non-random sampling (f=51) methods were most frequently used ( Figure 5). As can be seen in Table 6, in the articles related to ME in ULAKBIM database, purposeful and convenience, and in the articles in ERIC database, purposeful sampling methods are observed to be preferred frequently. Notably, many studies in the ERIC database do not have sampling methods.
When Table 7 is examined, it is observed that the articles in ULAKBIM index are frequently carried out with the sample group in the range of 301-1000 (32.6%). After this     range, the range of 101-300 (26%) was preferred the most. In qualitative studies, the range of 11-30 (15.2%) was preferred frequently. The preference rate of sample groups with more than 1000 people is the lowest (2.2%). When looked at the articles in ERIC index, it is seen that the sample size in the range of 1-10 (31.51%) was preferred more frequently because of the preference of qualitative research method. Then it was found that 11-30 (21.46%) and 31-100 sample range (20.55%) were preferred. This finding can be interpreted as more in-depth research conducted with smaller sample groups in ERIC database. In Table 8, the results of the sample level distribution of articles published on ME in the journals indexed by ULAKBIM and ERIC were presented. When the findings in ULAKBIM database are examined, it is observed that students who continue their undergraduate studies (42.8%) and teachers (30.3%) are frequently preferred in the studies. These two groups are followed by the sample group of high school students (12.5%). In the articles in ULAKBIM database, 75% of the undergraduate sample group (f= 18) consists of students of education faculties. It was determined that the students at pre-school were not selected as sample groups in the studies related to multicultural education. Another important finding is that there are no researches on multiculturality and multicultural education on parents who have a direct impact on the life of the individual. In the ERIC database, a sample group (37.01%) was selected prominently at the undergraduate level. Besides, 39.47% of the studies at undergraduate level are consist of education faculty students (f=45). The undergraduate group is followed by teachers (15.58%) and academics (8.12%). As a remarkable finding, "pre-school students, parents and adults" sample levels are not found in the articles in ULAKBIM database, but included in the articles in ERIC database.
When the Table 9 is examined, it is observed in the articles in ULAKBIM database that the researchers conducted studies mainly on attitudes (21.7%), views (16.7%) and perception (15%). These studies are followed by studies on self-efficacy (13.3%) and ME tools (curriculum and textbooks) (10%). A more limited number of studies for ME practices (3.3%) and ME implementation in Turkey (3.3%) have been conducted. Studies in ERIC database show that studies focusing on ME practices (23.7%) and experiences (15.27%) are predominant. These studies are followed by studies general situation assessment related to ME (9.74%), determination of perception (7.79%) and attitudes (7.14%) and analysis of ME tools (7.14%). There are fewer studies conducted on self-efficacy (5.84%), awareness (4.55%) and personal qualifications (2.6%) and determination of views (2.27%).

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
This study set out to better understand the dispositions of multicultural education research in international (ERIC Index) and national (ULAKBİM TR Index) scale comparatively. This is the first research compare ULAKBİM TR and ERIC indexes in terms of multicultural education research. Therefore, the results of the research provide important  implications for the multicultural education literature studies.
According to the results of the research, although there has been an increase in the number of publications related to multicultural education in Turkey since 2015, a downward trend in the international arena took place after 2015. In the study carried out by Günay and Aydın (2015), it is stated that researches on multicultural education in Turkey has increased since 2005. The main dynamics underlying this situation is also the reason for the change in the national literature. It is thought that in line with an initiative process which started by Turkey towards owned different cultural groups, the developments occurred in the education system affected multicultural educational researches. In addition, Turkey is becoming the first stop for the refugees as a result of the Syrian Civil War (İçduygu, 2015;Baban, Ilcan & Rygiel, 2016), the increase in asylum demands of Iranian, Iraqi, Palestinian, Uzbek, Somalis, and Sudanese people (İçduygu & Aksel, 2012) and the increase in the number of irregular migrants (Sirkeci, 2017) have led to changes in Turkey's social structure and to the emergence of needs for the recognition and integration of different cultures in education. In order to ensure that individuals who are raised in a multi-lingual and multicultural society do not experience socio-cultural disconnection with the society they live in and that integration can be carried out in a healthy way, the correct infrastructure needs to be prepared (Akıncı, Nergiz & Gedik, 2015). This circumstance creates a need for studies in the field of multicultural education more than ever.
The increases in the number of academic works for multicultural education in Turkey can be utilized in line with these needs and developments. Education policies, which have been established on a solid basis today as a result of the understanding of the need and importance of multicultural policies and practices in the early period from Turkey, can be shown as the reason of the downward trend in the number of publications in ERIC indexed journals. Unlike this situation, in Europe and the United States today, nationalist policies are rising due to immigrants and the nationalist rhetoric of country leaders draws attention. For example, the election campaign and policies directed towards discrimination and xenophobia carried out by Trump praising white and middle-class Americans (Harris, Davidson, Fletcher & Harris, 2017), the declaration of failure of multiculturality by Chancellor Merkel for the first time (Yardım, 2017), and the clash of cultures with the UK's desire to isolate itself from Europe and the influx of refugees who reach Europe (Jackson, 2018) have caused changes in view of multiculturality and multicultural policies. This can also be shown as a result of the tendency to decrease in the publications related to multicultural education in the international arena. It has been determined that the method preferences of articles for multicultural education are different in ERIC and ULAKBIM databases. In the research in ULAKBIM database, it was determined that the survey pattern, the scale aimed to determine attitude, perception and view as a data collection tool, and the predictive statistical methods used in the data analysis process were frequently used within the scope of quantitative research approach. Furthermore, while the use of quantitative methods has an increase trend by years, qualitative and literature studies show a decline. In national multicultural education research reached by Günay and Aydın (2015), it is observed that quantitative research and attitude scales as a data collection tool were predominantly preferred until 2014. In ERIC database, on the other hand, qualitative research, and in this context, case study pattern weighted study tendency is observed. In accordance with this research direction, document and interview methods were employed during the data collection process. In the analysis process, content analysis is dominant within the context of qualitative analysis. In contrast to our study, it was reached in the study conducted by Soth-Mcnett and Moreno (2007) that quantitative research was used to most within the scope of multicultural counseling competence, while literature studies were used to most in content analysis conducted by Arredondo et al. (2005). In addition, it has been determined within the scope of this study that literature studies are more in ERIC database. The rate of mixed-method research in both databases is very limited. The sampling preferences of the studies in ERIC and ULAKBIM databases show different tendencies. While studies are conducted with large sample groups since the quantitative screening pattern was preferred in Turkey, small sample groups were preferred in ERIC indexed articles in accordance with the nature of qualitative research. Similarly, Günay and Aydin (2015) concluded that previous studies in Turkey were carried out with large sample groups. Although quantitative studies are conducted with larger groups in a shorter period of time, it is not possible for them to give the opportunity to reveal the perception, value, or experience of individuals in depth (Choy, 2014). Qualitative research, on the other hand, include numerous methods and variations (Punch, 2005), an interpretive framework (Creswell, 2012) and makes it easier to understand the situation in depth by allowing detailed information to be obtained (Patton, 2014). Therefore, qualitative studies are needed in order to reflect the diversity present in Turkey on the educational environment and to evaluate the political arrangements in this regard in terms of experiences, needs and problems with depth and multiple perspectives.
When sampling methods in researches are examined, while non-random sampling methods are frequently preferred in articles within the scope of ULAKBIM, the majority of ERIC indexed articles (73%) did not state their sampling methods. This compromises of the generalizability and validity of the research in ERIC database (Robson, 2015). However, in the context of multiculturality and in the field of guidance and counseling, it has been found by Worthington, Soth-McNett and Moreno (2007) to be the most frequently used sampling method. When sampling levels were examined, it was determined that the studies in two indexes focused on the undergraduate level. While 75% (f= 18) of the undergraduate sample group in the ULAKBIM database consists students of education faculties, this rate in ERIC database is 39.47% (f=45). In the studies indexed by ERIC, unlike the studies in ULAKBIM database, it is remarkable that all the stakeholders involved in education are involved in the sample level. For example, it was also studied in the sample groups of pre-school students, parents and adults which were not involved in the researches in ULAKBIM database. However, it is observed in both databases that policy makers and senior managers in the education field are not involved as sample level.
When the topic preferences in researches are examined, researches in the ULAKBIM index focuses on descriptive issues such as attitudes, views and perceptions related to multicultural education. In the researches indexed in ERIC database, on the other hand, it was determined that there was a tendency towards applied topic areas such as multicultural education practices and experiences. This is proof that multiculturality and multicultural educational research show a much more recent development in Turkey than in the international area. On the contrary, it has been observed that the research in the international field is at a stage in which the practices and the experience related to this process are examined in line with the prevalence of multicultural education practices (Baltes, Hernandez & Collins, 2015;Golub, 2014;Guth, McAuliffe & Michalak, 2014;Perveen, 2014). Studies conducted on multiculturality in Turkey generally show that teacher candidates, teachers, administrators and academics are positive in multiculturality and multicultural education (Akkaya, Kırmızı & İşçi, 2018;Alanay & Aydın, 2016;Avcı & Faiz, 2018;Başarır, Sarı & Çetin, 2014;Damgacı & Aydın, 2013;Kahraman & Sezer, 2017;Polat, 2012), although there are many deficiencies in curricula and textbooks (Akar & Keyvanoğlu, 2016;Akhan & Yalçın, 2016;Çayır, 2016;Keskin & Yaman, 2014;Seban & Uyanık, 2016). Therefore, education policies in Turkey are still not equipped to bring multiculturality into educational environments (Köşker & Özgen, 2018). At this stage, the insufficiency of visionary academic studies also constitutes an important deficiency. All these results, despite the cultural diversity in Turkey, indicate that the nation-state reflex is still active and the insufficiency of political reflections and practices despite the presence of positive attitudes and views of multicultural understanding. Due to its cultural diversity and large number of refugee populations (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR], 2015), and the increase in the number of international students, Turkey must develop multicultural education policies and implement them on a solid basis. In this context, various configurations are needed for the development of educational policies to meet the needs of Turkey, the multicultural school environment, school management, curriculum and teaching process, teacher competencies and counseling. It is certain that the studies related to the topic will be decisive, explanatory and guiding sources in this process.
Although the study has gone some way towards enhancing our understanding of dispositions on multicultural education research in 5-year period, it has certain limitations. This study covers a 5-year process between 2014 and 2018 and ULAKBIM TR and ERIC indexes. In order to move multicultural education studies to a more advanced level, multicultural education researches in journals covered by different indexes (Social Sciences Citation Index, British Education Index, and Australian Education Index etc.) can also be analyzed. Thus, the current situation of multicultural education research can be considered in a more holistic way.
Furthermore, unlike this study, finding out with which discipline the research is conducted will be useful to find out which disciplines have multicultural education accumulation or inadequacy and to determine the needs in this regard. Besides, in addition, a broader analysis can be made by differentiating the years covered by this research. Finally, the direction of multicultural education research can be revealed statistically with meta-analysis studies.