Program akreditasyonu ile kurumsal akreditasyon arasındaki fark nedir?

Kurumsal değerlendirme ve akreditasyon üniversitenin bütününe bakar; Türkiye’de Yükseköğretim Kalite Kurulu (YÖKAK) tarafından yürütülür. Program akreditasyonu tek bir diploma programına bakar ve YÖKAK’ın yetkilendirdiği ya da tanıdığı kuruluşlarca yapılır. İkisi birbirini tamamlar: program akreditasyonunun kanıtları kurumsal değerlendirmede de kullanılır.

Ders notları program çıktısına ulaşıldığının kanıtı sayılır mı?

Tek başına sayılmaz. Ders notu birçok farklı öğrenmenin birleşimidir ve telafi edicidir: güçlü bir konu zayıf bir konuyu kapatır. Değerlendiriciler çıktının, onu ölçen soruların sonuçlarından ayrıca izlendiğini görmek ister.

Anket sonuçları yeterli mi?

Anketler dolaylı kanıttır ve tek başına yeterli sayılmaz. Mezun ve işveren görüşü, ders içi doğrudan ölçümle birlikte okunduğunda güçlü bir kanıt olur; iki kaynak ayrıştığında bunun nedeni de değerlendirilmelidir.

“Döngünün kapanması” ne demektir?

Hedefin altında kalan bir çıktı için bir karar alınması, kararın uygulanması ve etkisinin bir sonraki ölçümle gösterilmesidir. Yalnızca sorunun tespit edilmesi ya da karar yazılması döngüyü kapatmaz.

Hangi kuruluşun ölçütlerine bakmalıyım?

Programınızın alanına göre YÖKAK’ın tanıdığı kuruluşun güncel ölçüt belgesine ve öz değerlendirme raporu şablonuna bakın. Ölçütler dönemsel olarak güncellenir; bu sayfa kuruluşlar arasındaki ortak ilkeyi anlatır.

SixBloom akreditasyon dosyasına nasıl katkı verir?

SixBloom program eğitim amacından soruya kadar bütün zinciri tek yerde tutar: matrisler, ölçme planları, çıktı bazında sonuçlar, anketler ve iyileştirme kayıtları. Kilitli ölçüm koşularına dayanan öz değerlendirme raporu kanıtlarını Word ve Excel olarak verir; raporda öğretim elemanı adı ile ölçüm sonucu birlikte yer almaz.

Guide · accreditation

Programme outcome evidence in accreditation

In programme accreditation, reviewers want evidence of three things: that programme outcomes are defined, that they are measured and that improvements are made based on the results. The evidence should form a traceable chain from the programme educational objective to the course learning outcome and the question that measures it. Course grades alone do not provide this evidence; outcome-level measurement, surveys and closed improvement loops are presented together.

Educational objectiveexpected of graduates
Programme outcomeat graduation
Course outcomecontribution matrix
Question and resultoutcome-level measurement
Improvementdecision · action · effect

Two levels in Türkiye

Institutional evaluation and programme accreditation

Institutional level · YÖKAK

The Higher Education Quality Council evaluates universities as a whole. Institutions prepare an internal evaluation report every year; external evaluation, monitoring and, for volunteer institutions, an institutional accreditation programme are carried out. Under education and teaching, programmes are expected to be designed in line with learning outcomes and the national qualifications framework, assessed in a student-centred and competence-based way, and regularly monitored and updated.

Programme level · recognised bodies

The accreditation of a single degree programme is carried out, depending on its field, by bodies authorised or recognised by YÖKAK. Their criteria headings are largely shared: students, programme educational objectives, programme outcomes, continuous improvement, curriculum, teaching staff, infrastructure, and management and decision-making processes.

Some programme accreditation bodies by field

Body	Domain
MÜDEK	Engineering and technology programmes
FEDEK	Science and literature faculty programmes (e.g. history, geography, Turkish language and literature, philosophy)
STAR	Economics and administrative sciences, applied sciences, humanities and social sciences programmes
SABAK	Health sciences programmes
HEPDAK · EPDAK	Nursing · midwifery
MEDEK	Vocational school programmes
DEDAK	Foreign language education

The list is illustrative; fields such as medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, veterinary science, architecture and education have their own bodies. The current, complete list is published on YÖKAK's website.

Evidence file

What evidence is prepared for programme outcomes?

Link	What is shown?	Typical evidence
Programme educational objectives (PEO)	The career and professional goals graduates are expected to reach a few years after graduation; set with stakeholder input.	PEO statements, stakeholder meeting minutes, graduate and employer survey results
Programme outcomes (PO)	The knowledge, skills and competences expected at graduation; related to the national qualifications framework and the outcomes the accreditation body expects.	List of POs, mapping of POs to the TQF and to the body's outcomes
Course learning outcomes	The measurable outcomes of each course and how much each contributes to which programme outcome.	Course information packages, course outcome to programme outcome matrix
Assessment	Which exams and questions measure the outcomes; results calculated per outcome, separately from the course grade.	Assessment plans, question to outcome mapping, outcome-level attainment reports
Evaluation	Comparing results with targets; reading direct (course measurement) and indirect (survey) evidence together.	Programme outcome attainment report, evidence layers, committee review minutes
Continuous improvement	The decision taken for an outcome below target, its implementation and its effect shown in the next measurement: closing the loop.	Improvement records, decision and implementation dates, comparison of the previous and next measurements

Tuzaklar

Common mistakes in accreditation files

Treating the course grade as outcome evidenceThe grade is compensatory and hides the gap in the outcome. The outcome should be tracked separately from the results of the questions that measure it.
Filling in the matrix without measuringEvery cell in the course outcome to programme outcome matrix that claims a contribution should be backed by a question that measures that outcome.
Relying on a single sourceSurveys alone or course measurement alone are weak; direct and indirect evidence should be read together.
Not closing the loopIdentifying a problem and writing a decision is not enough; it must be shown that the decision was implemented and that its effect was seen in the next measurement.
Data that changes afterwardsThe results a report relies on should be frozen; a grade corrected later should not change a past report.

Frequently asked questions

About programme accreditation

What is the difference between programme accreditation and institutional accreditation?

Institutional evaluation and accreditation looks at the university as a whole; in Türkiye it is carried out by the Higher Education Quality Council (YÖKAK). Programme accreditation looks at a single degree programme and is carried out by bodies authorised or recognised by YÖKAK. The two complement each other: evidence from programme accreditation is also used in institutional evaluation.

Do course grades count as evidence that programme outcomes have been achieved?

Not on their own. A course grade combines many different kinds of learning and is compensatory: a strong topic covers a weak one. Reviewers want to see each outcome tracked separately from the results of the questions that measure it.

Are survey results enough?

Surveys are indirect evidence and are not enough on their own. Graduate and employer views become strong evidence when read together with direct course measurement; when the two sources diverge, the reason should also be examined.

What does “closing the loop” mean?

It means taking a decision for an outcome below target, implementing it and showing its effect in the next measurement. Identifying the problem or writing a decision alone does not close the loop.

Which body's criteria should I look at?

Depending on your programme's field, check the current criteria document and self-evaluation report template of the body recognised by YÖKAK. Criteria are updated periodically; this page describes the principle shared across bodies.

How does SixBloom contribute to the accreditation file?

SixBloom keeps the whole chain from programme educational objective to question in one place: matrices, assessment plans, outcome-level results, surveys and improvement records. It provides the evidence for the self-evaluation report, based on locked measurement runs, in Word and Excel; the report never combines an instructor's name with measurement results.

Resources: Higher Education Quality Council of Türkiye; Eurydice · Quality assurance in higher education in Türkiye; ESG 2015. Bodies update their criteria periodically; check the body's current criteria document before applying.

Keep the evidence chain in one place

SixBloom Course Design Studio links every link from the educational objective to the question, freezes results with locked runs and provides the evidence for the self-evaluation report in Word and Excel.

Try it free All features