Assessment and Improvement

Assessment and Evaluation

This program applies different assessment methods such as midterm exams, homework, exercises, projects, practical work and end-of-semester exams. Assessment methods may include classical examinations, multiple-choice examinations, homework, performance assessment and product assessment. To graduate from the program, the weighted grade point average must be at least 2.00. The grade of a course is determined as a result of the evaluation of the above components and is given as a letter grade. A minimum letter grade of DD is required to pass a course. Letter grades and the coefficient of each grade are shown below.

Letter Grade	Coefficient
AA	4.0
BA	3.5
BB	3.0
CB	2.5
CC	2.0
DC	1.5
DD	1.0
FD	0.5
FF	0.0
NA	0.0

Measurement of Program Outcomes

Course syllabi and course files

The syllabus of each course includes the learning outcomes and their weighted relationship with the program outcomes. Course files are requested periodically from the department’s faculty members; the files are kept in redundant form in electronic media.
Student survey

Before the final examinations and presentations of each semester, the Head of Department prepares a Google Form survey based on the program outcomes for all courses; faculty members share the survey with students via Google Classroom. The results are evaluated in Excel and calculated on both a 5-point and a 100-point scale; a score of 50 or above is considered sufficient.
Question-based course evaluation

After the final examinations and the graduation project, Multidisciplinary Integrated Project and COOP presentations are completed, a question-based Excel evaluation is carried out in compulsory courses; the program outcomes are evaluated out of 100 points according to projects, homework and examinations. A score of 50 or above is considered sufficient.
Letter grade success

An evaluation is made on the basis of the ratio of students who passed the course (grade DD or above) according to OBS letter grades to all students taking the course; if at least seventy percent of students pass the course, the relevant program outcome is considered achieved (sufficient).

Source: MÜDEK Self-Evaluation Report (July 2023) (in Turkish), Criterion 3.2 (Pages 20–22).

Continuous Improvement

Monitoring of course files

Every compulsory course file is tracked both in the archive and in the interactive environment; missing files are requested from the faculty member teaching the course.
End-of-semester course evaluation

If the program outcome of the relevant course is low in one or both of the survey and the question-based Excel evaluation or letter grade results, the faculty member is asked to complete a course evaluation form and to inform the Head of Department of the measures planned for future semesters. Approval of improvements is given by the Head of Department, while their implementation and monitoring are carried out by the faculty member.
Annual monitoring

The Head of Department monitors the attainment levels of the program educational objectives and program outcomes on an annual basis; in case of undesirable results, views are exchanged with the Curriculum Development and Assessment and Evaluation Committees for subsequent semesters.
Course Evaluation Committee

At its meeting dated 28.08.2019, the department decided to establish a Course Evaluation Committee to check and keep the contents of the courses in the curriculum up to date within the scope of continuous improvement.