An Analysis of Current Trends in Higher Education: The Place and Importance of Students’ Learning Experiences in Quality Assurance

Asking for students’ feedback concerning different constituents of learning is regarded as an important indicator of quality in today’s higher education. As higher education has become more internationalized, quality assurance and its implementation in different forms have gained significance. This study explores current trends in higher education which developed as a consequence of globalization and internationalization. Accordingly, the study analyzes the driving factors behind the current state of accreditation as a widely utilized quality mechanism leading to an emphasis on student evaluations. Relevant literature was reviewed to offer a comprehensive analysis of the role and importance of customer-orientation, quality, accreditation, students’ learning experiences and student evaluations in higher education. The situation was specifically elaborated on for the Turkish context. Also, examination of standards of a number of programs with national and/or international accreditation in accordance with the Council of Higher Education (YÖK) regulations concentrating on student evaluations demonstrates that student evaluations are implemented as part of the quality criteria specified by accrediting agencies, and thus, they are already a constituent of quality assurance mechanisms for many universities. Therefore, it is of prime importance for Turkish universities to eliminate any potential irregularities with regard to different aspects of student evaluations to enhance the transformative power of higher education as well as assuring quality for higher education as a whole.

Yükseköğretimdeki Güncel Yönelimlerin Analizi: Kalite Güvence Uygulamalarında Öğrenci Deneyimlerinin Yeri ve Önemi

Öğrencilerden öğrenme süreçlerine ilişkin geribildirim talep etmek, günümüz yükseköğretiminde önemli kalite göstergelerinden biri olarak görülmektedir. Yükseköğretimin uluslararasılaşması, kalite güvence ve çeşitli şekillerdeki kalite uygulamalarının önemini artırmıştır. Bu çalışmada, yükseköğretim kurumlarında küreselleşme ve uluslararasılaşma ile birlikte ortaya çıkan güncel yönelimler incelenmiştir. Bir kalite güvence mekanizması olarak gün geçtikçe yaygınlaşan akreditasyon ve akreditasyon sürecinin önemli bileşenlerinden olan öğrenci değerlendirmelerine yapılan vurgunun arkasındaki unsurlar ele alınmıştır. Yükseköğretimde müşteri odaklılık, kalite, akreditasyon, öğrenci deneyimleri ve öğrenci değerlendirmelerinin yeri ve önemi kapsamlı bir literatür taraması aracılığıyla sunulmuştur. Durum, Türkiye bağlamında özel olarak irdelenmiştir. Yükseköğretim Kurulu (YÖK) düzenlemeleri gereğince ulusal ve/veya uluslararası akreditasyon almış olan bazı programların öğrenci değerlendirmelerine odaklı standartlarının incelenmesi, birçok üniversitede öğrenci değerlendirmelerinin akreditasyon kuruluşları tarafından öngörülen standartlara göre uygulandığını ve halihazırda önemli bir kalite güvence unsuru olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu sebeple, Türk üniversitelerinde öğrenci değerlendirmelerinin farklı boyutlarına ilişkin potansiyel düzensizlikleri ortadan kaldırmak hem genel olarak üniversitede öğretim kalitesini güvence altına almak hem de yükseköğretimin eğitim yoluyla öğrenciyi dönüştürme gücünü artırmak için büyük önem arz etmektedir.

Kaynakça

Altbach, P.G., and Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: motivations and realities, Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3/4), 290-305.

Anderson, G. (2006). Assuring quality/Resisting quality assurance: academics’ responses to ‘quality’ in some Australian universities, Quality in Higher Education, 12(2), 161-173.

Arthur, L. (2009). From performativity to professionalism: lecturers’ responses to student feedback, Teaching in Higher Education, 14(4), 441-454.

Atalay, S. (2018). When students become customers; the changing relationship between the student and the academic: a case study from social sciences in Turkey, Journal of Higher Education and Science, 8(3), 512-521.

Balam, E.M., and Shannon, D.M. (2010). Student ratings of college teaching: a comparison of faculty and their students, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(2), 209- 221.

Başbuğ, G., and Ünsal, P. (2010). Kurulacak bir performans değerlendirme sistemi hakkında akademik personelin görüşleri: Bir kamu üniversitesinde yürütülen anket çalışması [The opinion of the academic personnel about a future performance appraisal system: a survey study conducted in a public university], Studies in Psychology, 29(1), 1-24.

Belenli, İ., Günay, D., Öztemel, E., Demir, A., Şerifoğlu, F., Elmas, M., Eryiğit, R., Aydın, O., & Kılıç, M. (2011). Türkiye yükseköğretim kurumları için kalite güvence oluşumu üzerine bir model önerisi [A model offer on the formation of quality assurance for Turkish higher education institutions], Journal of Higher Education and Science, 1(3), 128-133.

Beran, T. N., and Rokosh, J. L. (2009). Instructors’ perspectives on the utility of student ratings of instruction, Instructional Science, 37, 171-184.

Billing, D., and Thomas H. (2000). The international transferability of quality assessment systems for higher education: the Turkish experience, Quality in Higher education, 6(1), 31-40.

Bunce, L., Baird, A., and Jones, S.E. (2017). The student-asconsumer approach in higher education and its effects on academic performance, Studies in Higher Education, 42(11), 1958-1978.

Chan, C.K.Y., Luk, L.Y.Y., and Zeng, M. (2014). Teachers’ perceptions of student evaluations of teaching, Educational Research and Evaluation, 20(4), 275-289.

Çakır, M. (2008). Vakıf üniversitelerinde akademik personelin performans değerlendirmelerinin eğitim kalitesine etkisi [The effect of performance appraisal of academic staff at private universities on the education quality], Master’s Thesis, Ankara: Gazi University.

Chaves, C. (2006). Involvement, development and retention: theoretical foundations and potential extensions for adult community college students, Community College Review, 34(2), 139-152.

Darwin, S. (2016). The emergence of contesting motives for student feedback-based evaluation in Australian higher education, Higher Education Research & Development, 35(3), 419-432.

Dattey, K., Westerheijden, D.F., and Hofman, W.H.A. (2019). Compliance with accreditation measures in Ghanaian universities: students’ perspectives, Quality in Higher Education, 25(3), 304-323.

Dill, D.D. (2007). Quality assurance in higher education: practices and issues, The 3rd International Encyclopedia of Education, 1-13.

Douglas, J., and Douglas, J. (2006). Evaluating teaching quality, Quality in Higher education, 12(1), 3-13.

Douglass, J.A., Thomson, G., and Zhao, C. (2012). The learning outcomes race: The value of self-reported gains in large research universities, Higher Education, 64(3), 317-335.

Dunrong, B., and Fan, M. (2009). On student evaluation of teaching and improvement of the teaching quality assurance system at higher education institutions, Chinese Education and Society, 42(2), 100-115.

Eaton, J.S. (2007). Assault on accreditation: Who defines and judges academic quality? Liberal Education, 93(2). Eaton, J.S. (2012). The future of accreditation, Planning for Higher Education, 40(3), 8-15.

Eaton, J. S. (2018). Fifty years as an opportunity-for change magazine, accreditation, and the rest of us, Change, 124-127.

Ek, A.C., Ideland, M., Jönsson, S., and Malmberg, C. (2013). The tension between marketisation and academisation in higher education, Studies in Higher Education, 38(9), 1305-1318.

Emil, S. (2017). Qualitative sacrifice for quantitative increase: The case of Turkish higher education system in S. Georgios, K.K. Joshi & S. Paivandi (Ed.), Quality Assurance in Higher Education: A Global Perspective (pp. 183-202). New Delhi: Studera Press.

EPDAD. (2016). EPDAD Öğretmen Eğitimi Standartları [Teacher Education Standards]. Retrieved from: https://epdad.org.tr/ data/genel/pdf/standartlar.pdf

Esen, M, and Esen, D. (2015). Öğretim üyelerinin performans değerlendirme sistemine yönelik tutumlarının araştırılması [An investigation of the attitudes of the faculty members to the performance evaluation system], Journal of Higher Education and Science, 5(1), 52-67.

Fairchild, E., and Crage, S. (2014). Beyond the debates: measuring and specifying student consumerism, Sociological Spectrum, 34, 403-420.

Gosling, D. and D’Andrea, V-M. (2001). Quality development: a new concept for higher education, Quality in Higher Education, 7(1), 7-17.

Gunn, A. (2018). Metrics and methodologies for measuring teaching quality in higher education: developing the Teaching Excellence Framework, Educational Review, 70(2), 129-148.

Günay, D. (2011). Türk yükseköğretiminin yeniden yapılandırılması bağlamında sorunlar, eğilimler, ilkeler ve öneriler-I [Issues, trends, principles and suggestions in the context of re-structuring of Turkish higher education], Journal of Higher Education and Science, 1(3), 113-121.

Günay, D. (2008). Vakıf üniversitesi statüsü ile kalite güvencesi ve akreditasyon ilişkisi [The relationship between foundation university status, quality assurance and accreditation] in İ. Bircan (Ed.), Türkiye’nin 2023 vizyonunda vakıf üniversiteleri [Foundation universities in the 2023 vision of Turkey] (pp. 264-275). Atılım University.

Harrison, R., Meyer, L., Rawstorne, P., Razee, H., Chitkara, U., Mears, S., and Chinthaka, B. (2020). Evaluating and enhancing quality in higher education teaching practice: a meta- review, Studies in Higher Education, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2020.1730315

Harvey, L., and Green, D. (1993). Defining Quality, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9-34.

Harvey, L. (2002). Evaluation for what?, Teaching in Higher Education, 7(3), 245-263.

Harvey, L. (2003). Student feedback (1), Quality in Higher Education, 9(1), 3-20.

Harvey, L. (2004). The power of accreditation: Views of academics, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 26(2), 207-224.

Harvey, L., and Newton, J. (2004). Transforming quality education, Quality in Higher Education, 10(2), 149-165.

Isaeva, R., Eisenschmidt, E., Vanari, K., and Kumpas-Lenk, K. (2020). Students’ views on dialogue: improving student engagement in the quality assurance process, Quality in Higher Education, 26(1), 80-97.

Jacobs, G.J., and Toit, A.D. (2006). Contrasting faculty quality views and practices over a five-year interval, Quality in Higher Education, 12(3), 303-314.

Kalaycı, N. (2009). Yükseköğretim kurumlarında akademisyenlerin öğretim performansını değerlendirme sürecinde kullanılan yöntemler [Methods used in the evaluation process of faculty members’ teaching performance in higher education institutions], Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 15(60), 625-656.

Kaptanoğlu, D., & Özok, A.F. (2006). Akademik performans değerlendirmesi için bir bulanık model [A fuzzy model for academic performance evaluation], ITU Journal, 5(1), 193-204.

Kember, D., Leung, D.Y.P., and Kwan, K.P. (2002). Does the use of student feedback questionnaires improve the overall quality of teaching, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5),411-425.

Kerridge, J.R., and Mathews, B.P. (1998). Student rating of courses in HE: further challenges and opportunities, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(1), 71-82.

Kohler, J. (2003). Quality assurance, accreditation, and recognition of qualifications as regulatory mechanisms in the European higher education area, Higher Education in Europe, 28(3), 317- 330.

Kuh, G.D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning: inside the National Survey of Student Engagement, Change, 33(3), 10-17.

Leckey, J., and Neill, N. (2001). Quantifying quality: the importance of student feedback, Quality in Higher Education, 7(1), 19-32.

Minelli, E., Rebora, G., and Turri, M. (2008). How can evaluation fail? The case of Italian universities, Quality in Higher Education, 14(2), 157-173.

Molesworth, M., Nixon, E., and Scullion, R. (2009). Having, being and higher education: the marketisation of the university and the transformation of the student into customer, Teaching in Higher Education, 14(3), 277-287.

Moore, S., and Kuol, N. (2005). Students evaluating teachers: Exploring the importance of faculty reaction to feedback on teaching, Teaching in Higher Education, 10(1), 57-73.

Nair, C.S., Patil, A., and Mertova, P. (2011). Enhancing the quality of engineering education by utilizing student feedback; Quality and the engineering student experience: an institutional approach, European Journal of Engineering Education, 36(1), 3-12.

Newton, J. (2000). Feeding the beast or improving quality? Academics’ perceptions of quality assurance and quality monitoring, Quality in Higher Education, 6(2), 153-163.

OECD. (2009). Higher education to 2030, Volume 2, Globalisation, http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/communia2010/sites/ communia2010/images/OECD_2009_Higher_Education_ to_2030_Volume_2_Globalisation.pdf

Özer, M. (2012). Türkiye’de yükseköğretimin yeniden yapılandırılması ve kalite güvence sistemi [Restructuring of higher education in Turkey and quality assurance system], Journal of Higher Education and Science, 2(1), 18-23.

Özer, M., Gür, B.S., and Küçükcan, T. (2011). Kalite güvencesi: Türkiye yükseköğretimi için stratejik tercihler [Quality assurance: strategic choices for higher education in Turkey], Journal of Higher Education and Science, 1(2), 59-65.

Özer, M., Gür, B.S., and Küçükcan, T. (2010). Yükseköğretimde kalite güvencesi [Quality assurance in higher education]. Ankara: SETA Publishing.

Popli, S. (2005). Ensuring customer delight: a quality approach to excellence in management education, Quality in Higher Education, 11(19, 17-24.

Salmi, J., and Saroyan, A. (2007). League tables as policy instruments: the political economy of accountability in tertiary education, in GUNI Series on the Social Commitment of Universities 2: Higher Education in the World 2007, Accreditation for Quality Assurance – What is at stake? 79-95, Palgrave/MacMillan.

Schuck, S., Gordon, S., and Buchanan, J. (2008). What are we missing here? Problematizing wisdoms on teaching quality and professionalism in higher education, Teaching in Higher Education, 13(5), 537-547.

Şenses, F. (2007). Uluslararası gelişmeler ışığında Türkiye yükseköğretim sistemi: temel eğilimler, sorunlar, çelişkiler ve öneriler [Turkish higher education system in the light of international developments: basic tendencies, problems, conflicts and suggestions]. ERC Working Papers in economics. Ankara: Economic Research Center

Tam, M. (2001). Measuring quality and performance in higher education, Quality in Higher Education, 7(1), 47-54.

Tonbul, Y. (2008). Öğretim üyelerinin performansının değerlendirilmesine ilişkin öğretim üyesi ve öğretmen görüşleri [Faculty and student perceptions on performance assessment for faculty members], Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 56, 633-662.

Tsiligiris, V., and Hill, C. (2019): A prospective model for aligning educational quality and student experience in international higher education, Studies in Higher Education, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1628203

Yorke, M. (1999). Assuring quality and standards in globalised higher education, Quality Assurance in Education, 7 (1), 14-24.

YÖKAK. (2019a). Kurum İç Değerlendirme Raporu (KİDR) Hazırlama Kılavuzu [Institutional Internal Evaluation Report Preparation Guide], Retrieved from: https://www.yokak.gov.tr/Common/ Docs/KidrKlavuz1.4/Kidr_Surum_2.0.pdf

YÖKAK. (2019b). Yükseköğretim Kalite Kurulu 2018 Yılı Öz-Değerlendirme Raporu [Higher Education Quality Council 2018 Self-Evaluation Report], Retrieved from: https://yokak. gov.tr/Common/Docs/Enqa/SARofTHEQCTr.pdf

YÖKAK. (2019c). Yükseköğretim Kalite Kurulu İnfografik Durum Raporu [Higher Education Quality Council Infographic Report], Retrieved from: https://www.yokak.gov.tr/Common/Docs/ Site_degerlendirme_prog_doc/InfoGrafik2019.pdf

YÖKAK. (2020). Yükseköğretim Kalite Kurulu Genel Değerlendirme Raporu 2015-2019 [Higher Education Quality Council General Evaluation Report 2015-2019], Retrieved from: https://www. yokak.gov.tr/Common/Docs/Site_degerlendirme_prog_doc/ GenelDegerlendirme20152019.pdf

Watty, K. (2003). When will academics learn about quality? Quality in Higher Education, 9(3), 213-221.

Watty, K. (2006). Want to know about quality in higher education? Ask an academic, Quality in Higher Education, 12(3), 291-301.

Wiers-Jenssen, J., Stensaker, B., and Grogaard, J.B. (2002). Student satisfaction: towards an empirical deconstruction of the concept, Quality in Higher Education, 8(2), 183-195.

Williams, J., and Capuccini-Ansfield, G. (2007). Fitness for purpose? National and institutional approaches to publicizing the student voice, Quality in Higher Education, 13(2), 159-172.

Wood, S. (2006). Faculty interviews: a strategy for deepening engagement and inquiry, in A. Driscoll and D.C. Noriega (Ed.) Taking Ownership of Accreditation: Assessment Processes that Promote Institutional Improvement and Faculty Engagement, 205-228, Virginia: Stylus Publishing.

Zerihun, Z., Beishuizen, J., and Van Os, W. (2012). Student learning experience as indicator of teaching quality, Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 24(2), 99-111.

https://www.aacsb.edu

www. aqas.eu

www.fibaa.org

www.yok.gov.tr

www.yokak.gov.tr

Kaynak Göster

Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi
  • ISSN: 2146-5959
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 3 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 2011

60993

Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Hemşirelik Öğrencilerinin El Hijyenine İlişkin İnanç ve Uygulamalarının Değerlendirilmesi: Tanımlayıcı Bir Çalışma

Öznur Gürlek KISACIK, Münevver SÖNMEZ, YELİZ CİĞERCİ

Hemşirelik Alanında Lisansüstü Eğitim Alan Öğrencilerin Akademik Başarı Durumları ve Etkileyen Faktörler

Özgül EROL, Serap ÜNSAR, Lale YACAN

Yükseköğretimde Öğrencinin Dersi ve Öğretim Elemanının Öğretim Performansını Değerlendirmesi: Pedagojik Formasyon Sertifika Eğitimi Örneklemi

Mustafa Zülküf ALTAN

Ortaokul Matematik Öğretmen Adaylarının Sözel-Sembolik Temsil Dönüşümlerinin ve Süreçte Yaptıkları Hataların İncelenmesi

Deniz EROĞLU, RAMAZAN GÜREL

Yurt Dışı Eğitim ve Mezuniyet Sonrası Yerleşim Tercihleri: Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’de Eğitim Alan T.C. Vatandaşlarının bir Analizi

Murat DEMİRCİ

Üniversite Sıralama Göstergelerinin Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi (AHP) ile Sıralanması

Nuray TOSUNOĞLU, Ayşen APAYDIN

Sağlık Bilimleri Öğrencilerinin COVID-19 Hakkındaki Bilgi, Tutum ve Davranışları: Derleme Çalışması

Aygül KISSAL, Sümeyye KAVİCİ, Fatih OKAN, Fatma AVŞAR

Akademisyenlerin Yaşam Doyumları ve İş Doyumlarını Etkileyen İş Kaynaklı Faktörlerin İncelenmesi

Volkan ÖNGEL, Hasan Sadık TATLI

Hemşirelik Öğrencilerinde Doğum ve Ebeveynliğe Hazırlık Dersinin Doğum Korkusu ve Travmatik Doğum Algısına Etkisi

Duygu Güleç ŞATIR

Öğretmenlerin Kariyer Gelişimi Açısından Lisansüstü Eğitimin Değerlendirilmesi

Osman AKTAN