Türkiye’de Yükseköğretimde Kullanılan Bağıl Değerlendirme Sistemlerinin İstatistiksel Olarak Karşılaştırılması

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to identify different norm-referenced assessment systems used in Turkish higher education, and to compare them empirically. Norm-referenced assessment regulations of 70 universities in Turkey was primarily analyzed, and universities were divided into four different groups depending on their norm-referenced assessment systems (only applying T-score conversion, the most commonly used method; applying T-score conversion and quantiles together; applying T-score conversion, quantiles and standard deviation together; applying standard deviation based norm-referenced assessment system). After the algorithms of two universities applying T-score conversion and three universities applying other norm-referenced assessment system were selected, they were used to convert end-of-year grade for each course of 19,574 students in a state university into letter grades and 4-point system. To test the differences of the norm-referenced assessment systems used in these universities, the norm-referenced system of a university were compared with the criterion-referenced system of the same university as well as norm-referenced systems of other universities. The paired t-test was used to identify the difference between norm-referenced and criterion-referenced assessment, while the differences between norm-referenced assessment systems were analyzed through one-way analysis of variance. The findings revealed that the letter grades calculated through the norm-referenced assessment were statistically different than the ones calculated with criterion-referenced; besides, a statistically significant difference was identified between the letter grades obtained using the norm-referenced assessment systems of universities. At the end of the study, the findings were discussed in term of students and instructors.Likewise, the letter grades of the students are given with the percentages of the students in the class in some of the universities that apply T score calculation method (Artvin

Pre-Service Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Perceptions and Metacognitive Skills in Predicting the Measurement and Evaluation Course Achievement

“…We can say that there was a strong and statistically significant relationship between two ratings of raters (Reynolds et al, 2010). Then, for this study general course achievement score was calculated by taking 40% of midterm and 60% of final score (Atalmış, 2019;Öztürk-Gübeş, 2021).…”

Dominance One-Roof Schools Principal Excellent Leadership in the Digital Age in Indonesia

“…Notlar bu işlevi, öğrenci başarısının geçerli ve güvenilir yansıtıcısı olması durumunda yerine getirebilir. Literatür incelendiğinde çoğu araştırmanın (Atalmış, 2019;Atılgan, Yurdakul & Öğretmen, 2012;Başol-Göçmen, 2004;Kaya & Semerci, 2017;Lok, McNaught & Young, 2016;Nartgün, 2007;Sayın, 2016) norm dayanaklı değerlendirme ile mutlak değerlendirmeyi…”

“…In Turkey, while some of the universities use a criterion-referenced grading system, some of them use the norm-referenced grading system (Nartgün, 2007). In many universities, criterion-referenced or norm-referenced grading systems are applied using the grade interval, which is based on the T score (Atalmış, 2019). In grading systems, while combining different assessments to calculate a composite score, raw scores of midterm and final multiplied by a ratio.…”

“…The weighting problem in grading is significant because it affects the fairness of the grading system and the hortative effects of grades. In the literature, most of the studies (Atalmış, 2019;Atılgan, Yurdakul, & Öğretmen, 2012;Başol-Göçmen, 2004;Kaya & Semerci, 2017;Lok, McNaught & Young, 2016;Nartgün, 2007;Sayın, 2016) have focused on comparing norm-referenced assessment with criterion-referenced assessment system. A few studies (Kelley & Zarembka, 1968;Tinkelman, Venuti, & Schain, 2013) focused on the weighting problem in the normreferenced grading system.…”

The complexity of the grading system in Turkish higher education

“…These elements include setting objectives, defining content, organizing educational scenarios (learning-teaching processes), and designing measurement and evaluation activities (Demirel, 2007). Measurement and evaluation are crucial for assessing whether the objectives outlined in the educational program align with individuals' readiness levels, and whether the strategies, methods, and techniques employed in determining their educational status are consistent with their achievements (Atalmış, 2019). One of the objectives of measurement and evaluation studies in education is to grade students based on their academic achievements in schools (Kubiszyn & Borich, 2000).…”