A report on High School Student Protests in Turkey (April 2025)

by

 

High School Student Protests in Turkey (April 2025)

In April 2025, Turkey saw- and is still seeing- a wave of high school student protests in response to controversial teacher reassignments at elite public high schools known as “proje okulları” (“project schools”). These schools – some of the country’s most prestigious, exam-selective institutions – were subject to a Ministry of Education policy limiting teacher tenure and enabling broad staff rotations. When thousands of experienced teachers at these schools were suddenly transferred or not reappointed in early April, students mobilized in defense of their educators. Below is a detailed report on the causes of the unrest, where it unfolded, how students protested, what messages they voiced, and how various stakeholders reacted, with key developments noted by date.

Students organized protests in many schools over the dismissal of their teachers. Beşiktaş Atatürk Anatolian High School students boycotted classes.

Causes of the Protests

Teacher Reassignments at “Project Schools”: The immediate trigger was a Ministry of Education decision to rotate or reassign teachers en masse at certain high-performing high schools. On April 8, 2025, the ministry announced the results of a routine appointment cycle for “Special Program and Project Schools,” affecting many veteran teachers (Proje okullarında neden protestolar düzenleniyor, MEB ve eğitimciler ne diyor?). Under a regulation introduced in 2020, teachers at these project schools can only serve up to 8 years at the same institution, after which their term must be renewed or they are moved elsewhere (Proje okullarında neden protestolar düzenleniyor, MEB ve eğitimciler ne diyor?). In the 2025 cycle, thousands of teachers were not renewed, including many with decades of service at their schools. Education Minister Yusuf Tekin stated that about 38,000 teachers’ terms had expired nationwide, and 80% were extended, leaving roughly 6,000 not renewed (Liselilerden sessiz çığlık: Öğretmenime dokunma!). Officials framed this as a normal rotation of staff whose tenure was up (Turkish high school students protest at teacher changes | Reuters). For example, Istanbul’s governor announced “no teachers were suspended; those whose term ended were simply reassigned” (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü). Minister Tekin argued that long-serving teachers had to make way for others, saying some had been at the same school for 40 years and that “we’re bringing in hardworking colleagues… We cannot involve ourselves in any action that would disrupt education” (Proje okullarında neden protestolar düzenleniyor, MEB ve eğitimciler ne diyor?).

Allegations of Political Motives: Students, parents, and educators suspected the reassignments were politically or ideologically motivated rather than purely routine. The affected schools are among Turkey’s top schools with strong academic traditions, and many of the displaced teachers were well-respected senior staff. Teacher unions (e.g. Eğitim Sen) and opposition voices pointed out that no clear criteria or merit-based evaluation explained which teachers were moved, calling the process arbitrary (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var) (Proje okullarında neden protestolar düzenleniyor, MEB ve eğitimciler ne diyor?). They alleged that many transferred teachers were those deemed “muhalif” (oppositional) or secular-minded, and that the appointments favored those loyal to the government (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var). “Project schools have become the address of political patronage,” one union leader said, criticizing “appointments with no transparent, objective criteria – entirely based on political and administrative discretion” (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var). In other words, the protestors believed the government was purging veteran teachers (some with 20–30+ years at these schools) to install its own allies, thereby undermining educational quality and the schools’ culture. As one parent put it, removing so many teachers meant “the school’s memory and culture are being erased” (Liselilerden sessiz çığlık: Öğretmenime dokunma!). These grievances – a mix of educational, political, and social concerns – set the stage for student action.

Schools and Regions Involved

The protests began in the second week of April and spread to numerous high schools across multiple cities, indicating a broad, countrywide movement rather than an isolated incident. Starting around April 11, 2025, students at various project schools in Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir and other provinces staged the first demonstrations, and by the following week the momentum had grown (Liseliler Ayakta: “Öğretmenime Dokunma!” | Uluslararası İşçi Dayanışması Derneği). Here are some of the key locations where high schoolers mobilized:

Forms and Methods of Protest

(İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var) Students at a high school protest hold up handmade signs – one reads “Okullar aile apartmanı değildir” (“Schools are not family apartment buildings”) in critique of nepotistic appointments. April 2025.

Despite their young age, high school students employed a range of protest methods to make their point, generally peaceful but often highly creative. The demonstrations were largely school-based (taking place on or just outside campus during school hours), and they varied in format from school to school. Below are the common forms of protest observed:

  • Class Boycotts and Walkouts: In many schools, students chose to skip classes in protest. This often meant not attending the first lesson of the day, or in some cases, refusing to go to class for half a day or more. For example, at Ankara’s Betül Can Anadolu Lisesi, students did not enter their first-period classes on the morning of April 14 as an act of protest (Öğretmenlere sürgün Türkiye’yi ayağa kaldırdı: Okullar eylem alanına döndü). Similarly, students at Istanbul’s Nişantaşı Anadolu Lisesi announced they would “not be going to class” in order to draw attention to their teachers’ plight (Öğretmenlere sürgün Türkiye’yi ayağa kaldırdı: Okullar eylem alanına döndü). By collectively staying out of classrooms, the teenagers aimed to show that normal instruction could not continue without their teachers. In several instances, entire grade levels gathered in school courtyards instead of going to lessons, effectively staging a walkout while still on school premises.
  • Sit-ins and Peaceful Occupations: The most prevalent form of protest was the sit-in (oturma eylemi). Students would congregate in a central area of the school – typically the courtyard or entrance hall – and sit on the ground, often holding placards, in a silent or slogan-chanting vigil. At İzmir Atatürk Lisesi, for instance, hundreds of students sat down in the courtyard after the morning assembly and remained there through multiple class periods (Liselilerden sessiz çığlık: Öğretmenime dokunma!). In Istanbul, Kadıköy Anadolu Lisesi students gathered and shouted slogans in protest, while at Beşiktaş Atatürk Anadolu Lisesi, youth sat on the ground and refused to go to class, effectively occupying the schoolyard (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var). These sit-ins were generally orderly – in many cases the protesting students simply read books or held signs quietly during the sit-in. The emphasis was on visibility and persistence: making their discontent visible to school authorities (and any media) but avoiding violence. Some sit-ins lasted an hour; others continued for most of the school day, with students rotating in and out.
  • Chants, Slogans and Banners: Whether sitting in or marching around campus, the students frequently voiced their demands through chants and banners. The catchphrase “Öğretmenime dokunma!” (“Don’t touch my teacher!”) echoed across numerous schoolyards as the unifying slogan of the movement (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü). In addition, teens chanted phrases like “Her yer lise, her yer direniş!” (“Everywhere is a high school, everywhere is resistance”), adapting a famous protest slogan to signal that their resistance was as widespread as their schools (Lise öğrencileri öğretmenleri için eylemde). Other popular rallying cries included “Hak, hukuk, adalet!” (“Rights, law, justice!”) – emphasizing their call for fairness (Lise öğrencileri öğretmenleri için eylemde) – and “Liseler bizimdir, bizim kalacak!” (“The high schools are ours, and will remain ours!”) (Liseliler Ayakta: “Öğretmenime Dokunma!” | Uluslararası İşçi Dayanışması Derneği). Students made handmade placards with slogans such as “Eğitimde torpilin ne işi var?” (“What place does nepotism have in education?”) and “Gelecek gençlerin, gençler öğretmenlerin” (“The future belongs to the youth, and the youth [stand with] their teachers”) (Liseliler Ayakta: “Öğretmenime Dokunma!” | Uluslararası İşçi Dayanışması Derneği). These signs and chants encapsulated their grievances in catchy, memorizable form, helping spread the message. In some cases, large banners were hung from school buildings or gates – for example, a banner reading “Öğretmenime Dokunma” was unfurled in front of an Ankara high school (Lise öğrencileri öğretmenleri için eylemde), and another reading “Liseme Dokunma” was displayed by students in Amasya (Öğretmenlere sürgün Türkiye’yi ayağa kaldırdı: Okullar eylem alanına döndü).
  • Symbolic Gestures: Beyond the usual chants and sit-ins, students also resorted to powerful symbolic acts of dissent. One notable example occurred at Istanbul’s Pertevniyal High School: during the morning flag ceremony, a group of students turned their backs to the speakers in protest of their teachers’ “exile.” They stood silently with backs turned, instead of facing the administration – a bold gesture in Turkey’s formal school culture. School officials reacted by taking down the names of the students who did this (Öğretmenlere sürgün Türkiye’yi ayağa kaldırdı: Okullar eylem alanına döndü). Another creative protest took place at Ankara Gazi Anadolu Lisesi: students there held an “attendance roll call” for their absent teachers. They gathered and read aloud the names of each teacher who had been removed, and for each name the crowd shouted “Burada!” (“Here!”) as if the teacher were present (Lise öğrencileri öğretmenleri için eylemde) (Lise öğrencileri öğretmenleri için eylemde). This act – effectively a symbolic “we are all here” – illustrated that the teachers were part of the school’s community and would not be forgotten or easily replaced. In Istanbul, some students even invoked republican-national symbols in their protests to underline their good faith: at one science high school, protesting students collectively recited the “Andımız” (the old Turkish student oath) in the courtyard while objecting to the teacher reassignments (Öğretmenlere sürgün Türkiye’yi ayağa kaldırdı: Okullar eylem alanına döndü). At another school, as noted, students read Atatürk’s Nutuk. These nationalist-infused gestures signaled that the students saw their actions as defending the true values of education and the republic, countering any narrative that they were troublemakers.
  • Coordination and Social Media: The high school protests, while decentralized, showed a degree of coordination via social media and alumni networks. Students used messaging apps and Twitter to share protest plans and encourage peers at other schools to take up the cause. The hashtag #ÖğretmenimeDokunma (“Don’t touch my teacher”) trended on Turkish Twitter in mid-April, as students and supporters posted updates and messages of solidarity (Liselilerden sessiz çığlık: Öğretmenime dokunma!). Many alumni associations of these schools also played a role in spreading the word (for example, by posting open letters and rally times). On April 14, students from multiple Istanbul schools converged for a larger rally at Beşiktaş Square after school hours, a gathering facilitated by online communication. There and elsewhere, university students and recent graduates joined in support of the high schoolers (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü) (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü). This digital connectivity meant that by the time one school protested, students at another school across the country were aware of it within hours and often launched their own action the next day. As a result, what began as isolated school-level protests coalesced into a broader youth movement in a matter of days.

Student Discourses and Demands

Throughout the protests, the students articulated a clear set of discourses and demands. Despite the spontaneous nature of the movement, common themes emerged in their slogans, public statements, and social media messages. At the heart of their discourse was defending their teachers and their school’s integrity. Some of the key points voiced by students include:

  • “Don’t Touch My Teacher!” – Defending Educators: The phrase “Öğretmenime dokunma!” became the rallying cry for the movement, encapsulating the primary demand: reinstating their teachers and halting arbitrary transfers. To the students, their teachers were more than employees – they were mentors who embodied the school’s spirit. Protesters described the removal of a long-time teacher as akin to ripping out a part of their school’s identity. “Siz hep bizim yanımızdaydınız. Şimdi sıra biz öğrencilerde,” read one student declaration – “You [teachers] were always by our side; now it’s our turn as students [to stand up for you]” (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var). This sentiment was echoed across different cities. At Beyoğlu Anadolu Lisesi in Istanbul, tearful students told reporters that “22-year veteran teachers of ours have been taken [away]. We are only 9th and 10th graders… Removing them will affect our education. It’s clear our teachers were removed because of their ideas. We want our teachers back; we want them not to touch our teachers” (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var). Such statements show the personal bond and loyalty students felt – their first and foremost demand was that their “exiled” teachers be allowed to stay.
  • Quality Education and School Culture: Beyond individual loyalty, students framed the issue as a fight for the quality and culture of their education. Many feared that replacing experienced, beloved teachers with new appointees would “destroy the educational culture” and academic excellence of their schools (Turkish high school students protest at teacher changes | Reuters). In their eyes, these top schools had reputations built over decades – often “köklü okullar” (deep-rooted schools) – and that legacy was now at risk. An Istanbul alumni association’s statement passionately asked: “Bir öğretmenin 30 yıllık emeği hangi cüretle bir kalem darbesiyle silinir?… Okulumuzun köklü geçmişi neden adaletsiz bir atama düzeniyle [yok edilmek isteniyor]?” – “By what audacity can 30 years of a teacher’s labor be erased with a stroke of a pen?… Why is our school’s storied past being undermined by an unjust assignment scheme?” (Şehremini Anadolu Lisesi öğrencileri: Öğretmenime dokunma) (Şehremini Anadolu Lisesi öğrencileri: Öğretmenime dokunma). Students and alumni frequently mentioned “okulun hafızası ve kültürü” – the memory and culture of the school – arguing that ousting veteran teachers would sever the transmission of that culture to current students (Liselilerden sessiz çığlık: Öğretmenime dokunma!). In protest chants, this was reflected by slogans like “Şehremini bizimdir, bizim kalacak!” (“Şehremini [High School] is ours, it will remain ours”) (Şehremini Anadolu Lisesi öğrencileri: Öğretmenime dokunma), asserting student ownership over the fate of their school. The underlying message was a demand to preserve educational standards and school identity, which they felt were being sacrificed.
  • Keep Politics Out of Education – Demand for Merit and Justice: A significant aspect of the student discourse was a call for educational meritocracy and an end to political meddling in schools. Protesters suspected that the teacher rotations were influenced by politics – possibly punishing teachers for dissent or making room for patronage hires. Thus, they demanded transparency and fairness in appointments. A common chant, “Hak, hukuk, adalet!” (“Rights, law, justice!”), underscored their appeal to fairness (Lise öğrencileri öğretmenleri için eylemde). In a widely shared press statement, students of Şehremini Anadolu Lisesi declared: “Liyakat ve şeffaflığı esas alınmasını talep ediyoruz. Eğitim, siyasetin gölgesinden kurtarılsın. Okullarımız ideolojik hesapların değil, bilginin ve aklın merkezi olsun” (Şehremini Anadolu Lisesi öğrencileri: Öğretmenime dokunma). In English, “we demand meritocracy and transparency… Let education be freed from the shadow of politics. Let our schools be centers of knowledge and reason, not of ideological agendas.” This statement captures how students were rejecting political interference, be it partisan or ideological, in their education. Many felt that their highly competitive schools (which admit students via national exams) should have the most qualified teachers chosen on merit – not teachers picked for loyalty. Indeed, one slogan seen at protests was “Eğitimde torpilin ne işi var?” – “What business does favoritism have in education?” (Liseliler Ayakta: “Öğretmenime Dokunma!” | Uluslararası İşçi Dayanışması Derneği). The students’ demands therefore extended beyond just undoing the current transfers; they called for a more just system where such “haksız ve hukuksuz uygulamalar” (unjust, unlawful practices) would not happen in the first place (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var). In essence, the youth were standing up not only for their own teachers, but for depoliticized, quality education for the future.
  • Solidarity and Resistance Identity: The high schoolers also adopted a proud tone of youth solidarity and resistance in their discourse. The chant “Her yer lise, her yer direniş!” (“Everywhere is a high school, everywhere is resistance!”) became popular, signaling that they saw themselves as part of a larger movement, and even drawing an analogy to past social movements in Turkey (Lise öğrencileri öğretmenleri için eylemde). They frequently referred to each other as “liseliler” (high schoolers) in a fraternal sense, and used collective slogans like “Liseliler biat etmez!” – “High schoolers do not submit!” – which appeared on a banner at a protest in front of the Istanbul education directorate (Öğretmenlere sürgün Türkiye’yi ayağa kaldırdı: Okullar eylem alanına döndü). This phrase directly rebuts the notion that students should be docile or obedient. In interviews, many students expressed that they could not stay silent in the face of perceived injustice against their teachers (Şehremini Anadolu Lisesi öğrencileri: Öğretmenime dokunma). “Biz bu utanca ortak olmayacağız… Öğretmenlerimizin yanında dimdik duracağız,” declared a group of students and alumni, “We will not be party to this shame… we will stand tall beside our teachers.” (Şehremini Anadolu Lisesi öğrencileri: Öğretmenime dokunma) (Şehremini Anadolu Lisesi öğrencileri: Öğretmenime dokunma). Such language shows how the students constructed an image of principled youthful resistance – they cast themselves as standing up for what is right, even under pressure. On social media, messages from students often included phrases like “#öğretmenimedokunma” alongside “#liseliler” and even “#gençlik” (youth), creating solidarity not just within each school but among high school students nationally. This emergent identity as a protesting youth vanguard was bolstered by support from older generations (university students, alumni, parents), which reinforced the students’ confidence in voicing their demands.

In summary, the students’ discourse blended personal affection for teachers with broader principles. They demanded the return of their teachers and the continuation of quality education at their schools, and in doing so also called for rule of law, merit, and an end to political favoritism in the education system. Their slogans and statements emphasized that they were fighting for their future (“the future is the youth’s”) and that they wouldn’t bow to authority if they believed they were in the right. This strong messaging helped win significant public sympathy, even as authorities pushed back against the protests.

Reactions and Responses

The high school protests elicited a wide range of reactions from different stakeholders – including school administrations, government officials, political opposition, media, and the broader public. Below is an overview of how each responded:

School Administrations and Education Authorities: The immediate response within some schools was attempts to contain or discourage the protests. Some principals and local administrators urged students to end the demonstrations and return to class. For example, at İzmir Atatürk Lisesi the school administration used loudspeakers to tell students “please go back to your classrooms,” but the sit-in continued regardless (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü). In a few cases, officials reacted more harshly. At Ankara’s Mamak Çağrıbey Anadolu Lisesi, the District Education Director showed up during a student protest and reportedly threatened the students with disciplinary action for participating (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü). (This was met by defiant shouts of “Isn’t it a crime for you to threaten us?” from the students (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü).) At other schools, administrators tried to block outside support: Istanbul’s Kadıköy Anadolu Lisesi did not allow alumni onto campus to join the protest, prompting current students to climb over the fence to meet the alumni outside (Öğretmenlere sürgün Türkiye’yi ayağa kaldırdı: Okullar eylem alanına döndü). In a few instances, administrators even called in police. Students at Beylikdüzü Social Sciences High School in Istanbul reported that their school administration invited the police onto campus; seeing riot police at the school gates, the students publicly criticized the move (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var). At Eyüpsultan Anadolu Lisesi (Istanbul), during a protest the administration locked the school gates to prevent students from exiting or others from entering, and one teacher who was supporting the students’ action was allegedly manhandled and detained by police (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var). These examples show that while many protests proceeded without incident, some school authorities responded with a security-first approach, treating the student gatherings as disturbances to be quelled. On the other hand, there were also indications (often off-record) that some teachers and administrators sympathized with the students. In many schools, teachers stood aside or quietly allowed the protests to happen. For instance, an İzmir parent noted “the school hasn’t made any statement, but I’m sure the administrators also don’t want the school’s culture and memory erased. Our kids do not want to be a ‘project’” (Liselilerden sessiz çığlık: Öğretmenime dokunma!). This suggests that inside the institutions there were mixed feelings – with official policy pushing for order and compliance, but many educators privately understanding the students’ frustrations.

Government and Officials: The Turkish government’s stance was one of denial of any wrongdoing and warnings against “politicizing” the issue. Education Minister Yusuf Tekin and the Ministry of Education (MEB) maintained that the teacher rotations were a standard procedure blown out of proportion. They repeatedly stated that no teacher had been fired or punished, only reassigned because their term at the project school was finished (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü). In press comments on April 14, Minister Tekin rejected claims that the reassignments targeted opposition-minded teachers, insisting there was “no political motive” and that hundreds of teachers from all backgrounds had been renewed or moved purely due to the tenure rules (Turkish high school students protest at teacher changes | Reuters). The Ministry characterized the protests as unnecessary and driven by misinformation. Tekin appealed to everyone “not to politicize schools or use teachers for political gain,” pointedly asking politicians to be “sensitive and ethical” and not incite protests for their “own political interests” (Liselilerden sessiz çığlık: Öğretmenime dokunma!). He suggested that opposition politicians and certain alumni groups were manipulating students. Indeed, Tekin said protests occurred in roughly “20 schools” and described them largely as “politically motivated manipulation efforts” organized by some alumni associations (Proje okullarında neden protestolar düzenleniyor, MEB ve eğitimciler ne diyor?). The Ministry and even the Presidential Communications Directorate released statements emphasizing that “no teacher was suspended or dismissed” and that this was just a scheduled rotation for those whose “duty term had expired” (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü). Officials seemed keen to frame the narrative as students being misled: Tekin urged students to focus on their studies and not be “used” by those looking to create chaos in education (Liselilerden sessiz çığlık: Öğretmenime dokunma!). At the same time, authorities issued subtle warnings. The Istanbul Governor’s Office, while denying any punitive intent in the teacher moves, noted it would not allow “education to be disrupted” by protests (Proje okullarında neden protestolar düzenleniyor, MEB ve eğitimciler ne diyor?). Security officials monitored the situation; apart from a few instances like the police at Beylikdüzü and Eyüpsultan schools, there were no large-scale crackdowns reported as of mid-April – likely to avoid inflaming the situation. However, the climate was one where the government clearly signaled disapproval. When opposition politicians showed up to support students (as in Istanbul), negotiations with police were needed to allow marches to proceed peacefully (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü). In summary, the government’s reaction combined reassurance (that nothing improper was being done) with reproach (that the protests were misguided or provoked). By insisting the policy was routine and calling the protests “provocations,” officials attempted to invalidate the students’ cause even as the demonstrations continued.

Media Coverage: The Turkish media’s response split largely along familiar lines – independent and opposition-leaning outlets amplified the students’ voices, whereas pro-government media either downplayed the events or cast them in a negative light. Mainstream and Opposition Media: Many national news outlets covered the protests as a major story. Newspapers and sites like Sözcü, BirGün, Evrensel, Bianet, and Halk TV ran headlines such as “Liseler ayakta” (“High schools are on their feet”) and “Öğretmenine sahip çık” (“Students stand up for their teachers”), highlighting the youth activism. These reports often included photos of students sitting with banners and quotes from their statements (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü) (Lise öğrencileri öğretmenleri için eylemde). They provided details on how many teachers were being moved and gave space to union representatives and education experts who criticized the Ministry’s policy (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var) (İktidar projesine karşı barikatta liseliler var). In general, opposition media framed the developments as students justly defending meritocratic education against a politicized policy. Some drew parallels to past student movements, suggesting a new generation was finding its voice. Television channels like Halk TV and Fox (NOW) TV aired footage of the school yard sit-ins and discussed the issue in evening news debates, keeping the story in the public eye (Liselerde ‘Öğretmenime Dokunma’ tepkisi yayılıyor! İzmir … – YouTube). On the other hand, Pro-Government Media took a markedly different tone. State broadcasters and government-aligned newspapers initially gave the story minimal coverage, focusing instead on other news, especially since these protests put the Ministry of Education in a difficult light. When they did address it, the framing was often that the protests were “provocations” orchestrated by fringe groups. In a striking example, the mass-circulation pro-government daily Takvim ran an article titled “Protesto değil provokasyon” (“Not protest but provocation”) on April 15. It claimed that behind the high school actions were left-wing outlawed groups like THKP-C/DHKP-C, suggesting that a radical communist youth organization was pulling the strings of the students (Protesto değil provokasyon: Lise eylemlerinin arkasından terör örgütleri THKP-C / DHKP-C çıktı!). The paper alleged that groups named “Youth and High School Committees” – purportedly linked to 1970s-era militant Mahir Çayan – were using the slogan “Öğretmenime dokunma” as cover to stir unrest (Protesto değil provokasyon: Lise eylemlerinin arkasından terör örgütleri THKP-C / DHKP-C çıktı!). This narrative sought to delegitimize the students by painting them as naive pawns of extremist agitators. Such claims were not picked up by most other outlets and were met with skepticism, but they illustrate the attempt by pro-government voices to inject a terror narrative. Apart from overt accusations, government media also emphasized official statements: headlines along the lines of “No teachers fired, Ministry says rotation normal” were common, and any political angle was attributed to opposition “distortion.” In summary, while independent media treated the protests as an important social/youth story and often expressed admiration for the students’ civic engagement, pro-government media either ignored the substance (portraying the kids as misled) or attacked the protests as politically driven. This media divide likely influenced public perception along partisan lines.

Public and Political Reactions: Public reaction to the high schoolers’ protests was generally supportive, especially among opposition-leaning segments and civil society, while supporters of the ruling establishment were more critical. Parents and Alumni: A very visible component of public support came from parents and alumni of the schools. In city after city, parents’ associations and alumni networks organized to back the students. They released solidarity messages and in many cases physically joined the protests outside school gates (Liseliler Ayakta: “Öğretmenime Dokunma!” | Uluslararası İşçi Dayanışması Derneği). At Vefa High School in Istanbul, for example, dozens of alumni gathered at the school’s entrance while students sat in the yard, clapping and chanting to support the kids inside (Lise öğrencileri öğretmenleri için eylemde). At İzmir Atatürk Lisesi, parents stood by the school fence, applauding the seated students and occasionally shouting encouragement or singing the school anthem. This multigenerational alliance lent moral weight to the students’ cause. Many parents gave interviews voicing pride in their children for “standing up for what’s right” and criticizing the Ministry’s decision (“Çocuklarımız proje [okul] olmak istemiyor”, said one parent – “Our children do not want to be a project [school]” (Liselilerden sessiz çığlık: Öğretmenime dokunma!)). In Ankara, a striking image circulated of gray-haired alumni from Ankara Atatürk High School linking arms in front of the school gate, effectively forming a human shield to support the protesting students and teachers (Cumhuriyet Nöbeti | Çok yaşayın #liseliler #öğretmenimedokunma). Such scenes underscored a broad public sentiment that the students were doing what adults found difficult – speaking truth to power about protecting education.

Opposition Political Figures: Turkey’s opposition politicians largely applauded the students and criticized the government’s handling of the issue. Members of parliament from CHP (Republican People’s Party), İYİ Party, and TİP (Workers’ Party of Turkey) made supportive visits and statements. On April 14, CHP Deputy Chair Suat Özçağdaş (responsible for education policy in the party) and CHP Istanbul Provincial Chair Özgür Çelik actually joined a student rally at Beşiktaş Square in Istanbul (Protesto gösterileri yayılıyor! Liseler ayakta – Sözcü). They negotiated with police at the scene to prevent any intervention, effectively using their political clout to protect the students’ right to protest. Özçağdaş was quoted saying that the mass teacher removals “destroyed the educational culture” of these storied schools and seemed aimed at raising ‘obedient generations’ instead of free-thinking ones (Turkish high school students protest at teacher changes | Reuters). This echoed a common opposition critique that the government wants to indoctrinate youth and stifle critical education. In parliament, opposition MPs submitted questions and gave speeches condemning the Ministry’s project school policy, labeling it “sürgün” (exile) of educators and even calling for Minister Tekin’s resignation on grounds of harming schools’ success. TİP MP Sera Kadıgil showed up at Vefa Lisesi in person and later tweeted, “Our brave high schoolers are teaching a lesson in democracy today.” Notably, even some figures on the nationalist right (who are opposition to the current government) sided with the students – emphasizing how the secular republic’s educational values were being undermined. Ruling-party allies and officials, in contrast, largely toed the government line or stayed silent publicly. There were reports that AK Party MPs privately urged the Ministry to resolve the situation swiftly (some of these schools are in their districts, and angry parents were calling), but officially the government politicians portrayed the students as possibly misguided. No high-profile government MP openly attacked the students (likely wary of backlash), leaving the harsher characterizations to partisan media. However, President Erdoğan in a speech (on a different topic around that time) obliquely warned youth “not to be deceived by those who try to misuse them for politics”, which was widely interpreted as referencing the school protests.

General Public and Social Media: On social media, the majority of commentary applauded the students’ courage. Thousands of tweets and posts using #ÖğretmenimeDokunma and #liseliler praised the high schoolers for standing up. Many viewed it as a positive development that Turkish youth were engaged and demanding accountability. Comments like “These kids give us hope for the future” or “Liseliler showing adults how it’s done!” were common on Twitter and in news comment sections. Even individuals who might not share the students’ every view seemed impressed by their mannerly but firm protest style (for instance, noting the absence of violence or vandalism – these were studious kids advocating their cause). Some public figures, such as journalists, authors, and academics, also voiced support. Well-known economist Mustafa Sönmez tweeted that protecting good teachers was essential for Turkey’s future and that the students’ slogan could apply to universities too (alluding to academic purges). There were, of course, segments of the public that echoed the government’s perspective – a number of pro-government social media users accused the students of being “used by the opposition” or lacking discipline. In more extreme nationalist circles, a few even called for identifying and punishing the “ringleaders” at each school. However, such views did not gain mainstream traction, at least in the short term. By and large, the public discussion acknowledged the students’ grievances as legitimate, even if opinions differed on the method. Notably, former graduates of these elite schools, some now prominent in various fields, wrote op-eds and open letters supporting the protests, lending further credibility and historical context (some recalled similar fights over political appointments in past decades).

By mid-April 2025, the high school protests had achieved significant visibility. The Ministry of Education, facing sustained pressure, arranged meetings with some school administrators and hinted at possible case-by-case reviews of extreme teacher shortages (though standing firm on the policy overall) (Proje okullarında neden protestolar düzenleniyor, MEB ve eğitimciler ne diyor?) (Proje okullarında neden protestolar düzenleniyor, MEB ve eğitimciler ne diyor?). The students, meanwhile, vowed to continue their “Öğretmenime dokunma” campaign until they saw concrete results. While it was unclear if all their demands would be met, their unprecedented activism had sparked a national conversation about depoliticizing education and empowering youth to have a say in their schooling. The image of Turkish high school students holding the line in their schoolyards – defending their teachers with cries of “justice” – became one of the striking civic images of 2025. The protests not only highlighted immediate educational issues but also reflected wider tensions in Turkey between a government seeking control and a younger generation increasingly ready to challenge it in the name of fairness and future opportunity (Turkish high school students protest at teacher changes | Reuters) (Turkish high school students protest at teacher changes | Reuters).

Sources:

Discover more from Erkan's Field Diary

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.