Developing and validating a rubric-based approach to quality assurance in Turkish higher education

Akkoyunlu B., BARDAKCI S., AKSU YILDIRIM S., AVŞAROĞLU M. D., Uludağ G., Koçer A., ...Daha Fazla

Evaluation and Program Planning, cilt.113, 2025 (SSCI) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 113
  • Basım Tarihi: 2025
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2025.102673
  • Dergi Adı: Evaluation and Program Planning
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, ASSIA, Business Source Elite, Business Source Premier, CAB Abstracts, Criminal Justice Abstracts, EBSCO Education Source, Educational research abstracts (ERA), EMBASE, PAIS International, Political Science Complete, Psycinfo, Public Administration Abstracts, Public Affairs Index, Social services abstracts, Sociological abstracts, Worldwide Political Science Abstracts
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Development, Higher education, Quality assurance, Reliability, Rubric-based evaluation, Validity
  • Ankara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

This study, initiated by the Turkish Higher Education Quality Council (THEQC), develops and validates a rubric-based approach for evaluating institutional quality assurance (QA) processes within the Turkish higher education ecosystem. Effective quality assurance (QA) in higher education requires evaluation tools that are methodologically robust, responsive to institutional needs, and aligned with international benchmarks. A rubric-based approach offers a structured and transparent framework for consistent assessments. The rubric was created through an iterative, evidence-based process incorporating expert feedback, international benchmarks, site visits, and prior research. It consists of 22 main criteria across four key domains—Leadership, Governance and Quality; Learning and Teaching; Research and Development; and Service to Society—subdivided into 46 sub-criteria, each assessed on a five-point maturity scale. The validity and reliability of the rubric were rigorously examined. Content validity was established through evaluations by 10 QA professionals, addressing four key dimensions: relevance, alignment with the intended domain, appropriateness for the target audience, and clarity of language. Construct and criterion validity were assessed through consistency checks and usability analyses, with data collected from 252 external evaluators across 57 higher education institutions. Additionally, 360-degree feedback was gathered from both external evaluation teams and the institutions involved in the evaluation process. Results: demonstrate strong content validity (Lawshe coefficient = 1.00, p < .05), high interrater consistency, and strong usability across various evaluator groups. Further evaluation confirmed the rubric's applicability and robustness across diverse institutional contexts. This study concludes that the developed rubric is a reliable and valid tool for enhancing and evaluating quality assurance practices in higher education.