Yükseköğretim Değerlendirme ve Kalite Güvencesi Kapsamında Gerçekleştirilen Durum Raporlarının Tematik Olarak İncelenmesi: İngiltere ve Türkiye Örneği

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 12 Sayı: Supplement, 99 - 110, 30.11.2022

Nazire Burçin Hamutoğlu Emine Nur Ünveren Bilgiç Muzaffer Elmas

https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.21.718804

Öz

Bu çalışmada 2015 yılından bu yana ortaya koyduğu amaçları gerçekleştiren Yükseköğretim Kalite Kurulu’nun (YÖKAK) 2016, 2017 ve 2018 yıllarında değerlendirme ve kalite güvencesi kapsamında yayınladığı durum raporlarının tematik olarak incelenmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Buna ek olarak, çalışma kapsamında elde edilen sonuçlar İngiltere’nin kalite güvence ve değerlendirme sistemi ile karşılaştırılmıştır. Bu noktadan hareketle, kalite güvencesinde ileriye yönelik yapılabilecek sürdürülebilir gelişim planlarındaki iyileştirmelere yönelik önerilere yer verilmiştir. Çalışmada sınırlı sayıda kaynağın derinlemesine betimlenmesi ve incelenmesi hedeflendiği için nitel bir paradigma takip edilerek durum çalışması deseni kullanılmıştır. İçerik analizinin kullanıldığı çalışmada, yükseköğretimde kalite kapsamında faydalanılan toplam 77 kaynak içerik analizi yöntemi ile incelenmiştir. Çalışmada elde edilen sonuçlar, kalite güvence sisteminin kalbini oluşturan kurumsal özerklik ve liderlik çalışmalarını uluslararasılaşma kapsamında ele alması ve ileriye yönelik misyonların oluşmasında öneriler sunması açısından önemlidir. Türkiye’deki yükseköğretim kurumları arasında iş birliği ve eklemlenme kapsamında hem diploma programları hem de mikro kredilendirme sistemlerine yönelik ileriye dönük öneriler sunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Değerlendirme, içerik analizi, İngiltere, kalite güvence, Türkiye, yükseköğretim

Thematic Analysis of Status Reports Made within the Scope of Higher Education Assessment and Quality Assurance: The Comparative Case of England and Türkiye

Öz

In this study it is aimed to examine the status reports which were published by the Turkish Higher Education Quality Council (YÖKAK) in 2016, 2017 and 2018 within the scope of evaluation and quality assurance, thematically. In addition, the results were compared with the UK’s quality assurance and evaluation system. From this point of view, suggestions for improvements in sustainable development plans that can be made for the future in quality assurance are included. This study describes and examines a limited number of sources in depth, so a case study design with a qualitative focus was employed. The study, in which content analysis was used, was analyzed with the content analysis method of a total of 77 resources used within the scope of quality in higher education. The results obtained in the study are important in terms of considering the institutional autonomy and leadership studies, which form the heart of the quality assurance system, within the scope of internationalization. Forward-looking suggestions were presented concerning both the diploma programs and micro-credit systems within the scope of collaboration and articulation among institutions of higher education in Türkiye.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Content analysis, England, evaluation, higher education, quality assurance, Türkiye

Teşekkür

The dataset of this study regarding England was obtained when one of the authors was an academic visitor to the UK under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Orhan Gemikonakli. We thank Dr. Gemikonakli for his contributions to the study.

Kaynakça

• Gemikonakli, O. (2009). Quality assurance and strategic decision making. Internal Quality Assurance System in Armenian Higher Education Institutions, TEMPUS-TACIS JEP No. 27178-2006 “ARMQA”, London, UK.
• Gemikonakli, O., Kindberg, C., & M. Dikerdem (2008). Objectives, principles and techniques of quality assurance and institutional quality assurance: A case study. Proceedings of the Dissemination Workshop: Internal Quality Assurance, Experience, Problems, and Trends (pp. 34–42), 23–24 September, 2009, Yerevan, Armenia.
• Gencel, U. (2001). Total quality management and accreditation in higher education services. [Article in Turkish] Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 3(3), 164–218.
• Harvey, L. (2005). A history and critique of quality evaluation in the UK. Quality Assurance in Education, 13(4), 263–276.
• Hill, Y., Lomas, L. & MacGregor, J. (2003). Students’ perceptions of quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Higher Education, 11(1), 15–20.
• Kır, Ş., & Bozkurt, A. (2022). A conceptual evaluation of micro-credentials in higher education. [Article in Turkish] Uşak Üniversitesi Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 8(1), 12–29.
• Middlesex University (2008/2009). Learning and quality enhancement handbook. Retrieved from https://www.mdx.ac.uk/about-us/policies/academic-quality/handbook (December 5, 2019).
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
• Mitchell, I., Sheriff, M., & Georgiadou, E. (2008). A framework for quality assurance in curriculum development. Proceedings of the Dissemination Workshop: Internal Quality Assurance, Experience, Problems, and Trends (pp. 43–57), 23–24 September, 2009, Yerevan, Armenia.
• QAA (2003). UK quality code for higher education. Retrieved from https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/qualifications-frameworks.pdf (November 13, 2019).
• YÖDEK (2005). Academic evaluation and quality improvement regulation in higher education institutions. [Regualtion in Turkish] Retrieved from http://www.yodek.org.tr/download/yonetmelik_dl.pdf (November 11, 2019).
• YÖDEK, (2007). Academic evaluation and quality improvement guide in higher education. [Guide in Turkish] Retrieved from http://www.yodek.sakarya.edu.tr/yodek/files/7aa12f8d2582deb44d4249c7aa4a2020.pdf (November 13, 2019).
• YÖKAK (2017). Higher education evaluation and quality assurance 2016 status report. [Report in Turkish] Retrieved from https://yokak.gov.tr/Common/Docs/Site_Activity_Reports/2016-Y%C3%9CKSEK%C3%96%C4%9ERET%C4%B0M%20DE%C4%9EERLEND%C4%B0RME%20VE%20KAL%C4%B0TE%20G%C3%9CVENCES%C4%B0%202016%20YILI%20DURUM%20RAPORU.pdf (November 13, 2019).
• YÖKAK (2018). Higher education evaluation and quality assurance 2017 status report. [Report in Turkish] Retrieved from https://yokak.gov.tr/Common/Docs/Site_Activity_Reports/2017-Y%C3%9CKSEK%C3%96%C4%9ERET%C4%B0M%20DE%C4%9EERLEND%C4%B0RME%20ve%20KAL%C4%B0TE%20G%C3%9CVENCES%C4%B0%202017%20YILI%20DURUM%20RAPORU%20v13.pdf (November 13, 2019).
• YÖKAK (2019a). 2018 higher education evaluation and quality assurance status report. [Report in Turkish] Retrieved from https://yokak.gov.tr/Common/Docs/Site_Activity_Reports/2018DurumRaporuv2.pdf (November 13, 2019).
• YÖKAK (2019b). 2018–2019 Higher education evaluation and quality assurance status report. [Report in Turkish] Retrieved from https://api.yokak.gov.tr/Storage/AnnouncementFiles/23-10-2019/79/2018-2019%20durum%20raporu%20v4.pdf (November 13, 2019).
• YÖKAK (2019c). YÖKAK general evaluation report. [Report in Turkish] Retrieved from https://yokak.gov.tr/Common/Docs/Site_degerlendirme_prog_doc/GenelDegerlendirme20152019.pdf (November 13, 2019).¬