Kurum İç Değerlendirme Raporu, yükseköğretim kurumlarının Yükseköğretim Kalite Kurulu’nun ölçütlerine göre her yıl hazırladığı öz değerlendirme raporudur. Her alt ölçüt 1 ile 5 arasında bir olgunluk düzeyiyle değerlendirilir ve kanıtlarla desteklenir.

Öğrenme çıktısı KİDR’de hangi alt ölçütlerde geçer?

En doğrudan üç alt ölçüt B.1.3 Ders kazanımlarının program çıktılarıyla uyumu, B.1.4 Öğrenci iş yüküne dayalı ders tasarımı ve B.1.5 Programların izlenmesi ve güncellenmesidir. Ölçme araçlarının çıktılarla uyumu B.2.2 Ölçme ve değerlendirme alt ölçütünde de ele alınır.

Olgunluk düzeyi 3 ile 4 arasındaki fark nedir?

Düzey 3’te uygulama programların genelinde yapılıyordur. Düzey 4’te ise uygulamanın sonuçları izlenir, izleme sonucuna göre iyileştirme yapılır ve bunların hepsi kanıtlanır. Kısacası düzey 4 ölçülmüş sonuç ve kapatılmış bir iyileştirme döngüsü ister.

Düzey 5 için ne gerekir?

Düzey 4’ün yanında uygulamanın sistematik ve sürdürülebilir olması, iyileştirme döngüsünün birkaç kez kapatılmış olması ve kurum genelinde içselleştirilmesi gerekir. Kılavuz bağımsız bir kuruluşça örnek olarak teyit edilmeyi de arar.

Kanıtlar nasıl adlandırılır?

Adlandırma kuralları kılavuzun sürümüne göre değişir; Sürüm 3.2.1 kanıt adlandırma kurallarını güncellemiştir. Kanıtları adlandırırken kurumunuzun kullandığı güncel kılavuzu esas alın.

Guide · YÖKAK

How to prepare learning outcome evidence for the KİDR

In the KİDR (Türkiye’s institutional self-evaluation report), learning outcome evidence is required mainly in three sub-criteria: B.1.3 alignment of course outcomes with programme outcomes, B.1.4 course design based on student workload, and B.1.5 monitoring and updating of programmes. Matrices and course information packages support level 3. Level 4 needs records showing that outcome attainment is measured, that improvements are made based on the results, and that their effect is tracked.

Sub-criteria

What each sub-criterion asks for, and what evidence to prepare

The summary below is based on the explanations and sample evidence in YÖKAK’s KİDR Preparation Guide; the guide’s text is not reproduced word for word. Use the guide itself when writing the report.

B.1.3

Alignment of course outcomes with programme outcomes

Course outcomes should be defined, mapped to programme outcomes and published; the cognitive, affective or psychomotor level of each outcome should be clear from its wording.

Evidence for level 3

Course outcome and programme outcome matrices across programmes; outcomes published in course information packages; outcome writing principles.

Additional evidence for level 4

Records showing that alignment is monitored and improved: which outcome was changed in which course, why, and the result in the following term.

B.1.4

Course design based on student workload

Course ECTS values should be set according to student workload, published and verified by workload tracking; internships, professional practice and mobility should also be covered.

Evidence for level 3

Course information packages with workload tables for all courses; defined workload credit for internships and projects; the Diploma Supplement.

Additional evidence for level 4

Records showing that workload was verified with students (survey or workload log) and that ECTS or course design was updated as a result.

B.1.5

Monitoring and updating of programmes

Monitoring periods, principles and indicators for the aims and learning outcomes of every programme and course should be set, with updates made using stakeholder input.

Evidence for level 3

An annual and end-of-programme monitoring plan; a system that tracks programme outcome attainment; annual programme self-evaluation reports.

Additional evidence for level 4

Improvements made as a result of monitoring, a record that stakeholders were informed, and feedback that the programme is meeting its aims.

The alignment of assessment methods with outcomes is also covered in sub-criterion B.2.2 Assessment and evaluation.

Maturity levels

What changes from level 1 to level 5?

Each level includes the one before it; to reach a level, the previous steps must be complete.

Level	In short	What it means for learning outcomes
1	No mechanism	Course outcomes are not mapped to programme outcomes.
2	Planning in place	Principles and rules for writing, mapping and monitoring outcomes are defined.
3	Implemented across programmes	Outcomes are written, matrices built and shared through course information packages in all programmes.
4	Monitoring and improvement	Outcome attainment is measured, improvements are made based on the results, and this is evidenced.
5	Exemplary practice	The cycle has closed several times; practice is systematic, sustainable and embedded across the institution.

The essence of moving from level 3 to level 4: Matrices and course information packages show “what you planned”. Level 4 asks “what you measured and what you changed as a result”. The decisive evidence is therefore locked, traceable measurement records showing learning outcome achievement rates and programme outcome attainment term by term.

PDCA

The evidence chain for learning outcomes

Level	What is shown?	Typical evidence
Plan	Outcome writing principles, matrix rules, the workload calculation method, monitoring periods and indicators are written and approved.	Senate or committee decision, regulation, guide
Do	Outcomes are written, matrices completed and course information packages published in all programmes.	Course information packages, matrices, website
Check	Learning outcome achievement rates and programme outcome attainment are measured every term; workload is verified with students.	Measurement reports, survey results, self-evaluation report
Act	A decision is taken for an outcome that was not achieved, implemented, and its effect measured in the following term.	Meeting minutes, change log, comparison with the following term

For the links in the chain, see How to prepare a course information package; for the measurement logic, see How is programme outcome attainment calculated?; for programme-level accreditation, see Programme outcome evidence in accreditation.

Tuzaklar

Common mistakes in learning outcome evidence for the KİDR

Error	Why it is weak, and what to do instead
Presenting only the matrix as evidence	The matrix is evidence of the plan; it supports level 3. Level 4 needs measurement results and improvement.
Treating the course grade average as outcome evidence	A grade mixes different outcomes. Each outcome should be tracked separately from the results of the questions that assess it.
Representing the whole programme with one sample course	Level 3 and above require practice “across programmes”; one course is not enough.
Describing improvements without evidence	Every improvement statement in the report should link to a decision, implementation and result record.
Deriving ECTS from contact hours	B.1.4 requires workload to be verified with students; contact hours are only part of the workload.
Changing past results afterwards	The results a report relies on should be frozen; a correction should be recorded as a new measurement.

Frequently asked questions

About the KİDR and learning outcomes

What is the KİDR?

The Institutional Self-Evaluation Report (KİDR) is the annual self-evaluation report that higher education institutions in Türkiye prepare against the criteria of the Higher Education Quality Council (YÖKAK). Each sub-criterion is rated at a maturity level from 1 to 5 and supported by evidence.

Which KİDR sub-criteria cover learning outcomes?

The three most direct sub-criteria are B.1.3 Alignment of course outcomes with programme outcomes, B.1.4 Course design based on student workload and B.1.5 Monitoring and updating of programmes. The alignment of assessment methods with outcomes is also covered in B.2.2 Assessment and evaluation.

What is the difference between maturity levels 3 and 4?

At level 3, the practice is carried out across programmes. At level 4, its results are monitored, improvements are made based on the monitoring, and all of this is evidenced. In short, level 4 requires measured results and a closed improvement cycle.

What does level 5 require?

In addition to level 4, the practice must be systematic and sustainable, the improvement cycle must have closed several times, and it must be embedded across the institution. The guide also looks for confirmation as an example by an independent body.

How should evidence files be named?

Naming rules vary by guide version; Version 3.2.1 updated the evidence naming rules. When naming evidence, follow the current guide your institution uses.

Resources: YÖKAK KİDR Preparation Guide, Version 3.1; Version 3.2.1.

Produce level 4 evidence automatically every term

SixBloom Course Design Studio measures learning outcome achievement rates and programme outcome attainment every term and locks the results; the improvement decision and its effect in the following term are tracked in the same record.

Try it free All features