Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi
ISSN (Online): 2687-5314

Derleme Makalesi    |    Açık Erişim
Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi 2025, Clt. 7(2) 310-331

Criteria Used in Curriculum Evaluation

Mehmet Okur, Etem Yeşilyur

ss. 310 - 331   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ated.2025.1388.9

Yayın Tarihi: Aralık 31, 2025  |   Görüntüleme Sayısı: 6/5   |   İndirilme Sayısı: 6/6

PDF İndir

Özet

Just as educational curricula are expected to possess certain qualities such as suitability for their purpose in theoretical and practical terms, scientific grounding, cost-effectiveness, functionality, and applicability, certain criteria must also be considered from the perspective of curriculum evaluation. The primary aim of curriculum evaluation in education is to obtain feedback regarding the deficiencies or erroneous aspects of a curriculum that is under development or in use, and to make the necessary revisions in the curriculum based on this feedback. For the evaluation of an educational curriculum, the degree to which the curriculum achieves its objectives must be measured, and the measurement results must be compared with various criteria. The criteria used in evaluation, as well as the priority order of these criteria, may vary depending on variables such as the type and purpose of the curriculum and the instructional level at which it is implemented. In this context, the question “What are the criteria used in the evaluation of an educational curriculum?” comes to the forefront. No study has been found in the literature that addresses as a whole the criteria used in curriculum evaluation and the general characteristics of these criteria. Conducted within the framework of a qualitative research approach through a review of the literature and functioning as a compilation study, the present research aims to identify the criteria used in the evaluation of educational curricula and to explain the general characteristics of these criteria. Within the scope of the study, it was determined that the criteria used in the evaluation of educational curricula include curriculum evaluation approaches, curriculum evaluation models, objectives, competencies, standards, accreditation, learning outcomes, examinations, 21st-century skills, literacy, and development/advancement, and the general characteristics of these criteria were explained. The results obtained are expected to guide stakeholders of the education system, particularly those involved in curriculum development and evaluation studies, and to contribute to the related literature.

Anahtar kelimeler: Educational Curriculum, Curriculum Development, Curriculum Evaluation, Evaluation Criteria

Bu makaleye nasıl atıf yapılır

APA 7th edition
Okur, M., & Yesilyur, E. (2025). Criteria Used in Curriculum Evaluation. Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi, 7(2), 310-331. https://doi.org/10.29329/ated.2025.1388.9

Harvard
Okur, M. and Yesilyur, E. (2025). Criteria Used in Curriculum Evaluation. Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi, 7(2), pp. 310-331.

Chicago 16th edition
Okur, Mehmet and Etem Yesilyur (2025). "Criteria Used in Curriculum Evaluation". Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi 7 (2):310-331. https://doi.org/10.29329/ated.2025.1388.9

Kaynakça
  1. Aslan, M., & Çıkar, İ. (2017). Evaluation of 4th grade mathematics curriculum by Tyler’s objective based evaluation model. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 172-196. https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.373149 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  2. Aşıcı, M. (2009). Literacy as a personal and social value. Journal of Values Education, 7(17), 9-25. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ded/issue/29183/312492 [Google Scholar]
  3. Ataman, O., & Adıgüzel, A. (2019). Investigation of Turkey and Australia’s teacher education systems and accreditation policies. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 12(2), 678-700. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.430580 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  4. Ataş, R., Baysal, O., Aykol, N., & Ünver, G. (2021). Analysis of the subjects and reasons of curriculum studies. Western Anatolia Journal of Educational Sciences, 12(1), 177-205. https://doi.org/10.51460/baebd.866149 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  5. AYÇ (2022). Avrupa yeterlilikler çerçevesi [European competences framework]. https://europa.eu/europass/tr/europass-araclari/avrupa-yeterlilikler-cercevesi [Google Scholar]
  6. Aydoğdu, Ü. R., Karamustafaoğlu, O., & Bülbül, M. Ş. (2017). The relation between research methods and sample in academic researches: A case of confirmatory document analysis. Dicle University Journal of Ziya Gökalp Education Faculty, (30), 556-565. https://doi.org/10.14582/DUZGEF.1803 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  7. Aygören, F., & Er, K. O. (2018). Classifıcations of curriculum. Turkish Studies Educational Sciences, 13(11), 269-296. http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.13230 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  9. Çelik, V., & Yeşilyurt, E. (2013). Kalkınmada eğitimin rolü: Sayısal veriler ışığında KOP bölgesi eğitim göstergeleri [The role of education in development: Education indicators in the KOP region in light of numerical data]. KOP Bölgesel Kalkınma Dergisi [KOP Journal of Regional Development], 1(1), 141-152. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344206736 [Google Scholar]
  10. Çetin, B. (2014). The relati̇on of educati̇on and development: The sample of Turkey [Master’s thesis: Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University]. Thesis number: 375641. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ [Google Scholar]
  11. Çiftçi, S., Sağlam, A., & Yayla, A. (2021). Student, teacher and educational environments in the context of 21. century skills. RumeliDE Journal of Language and Literature Studies, (24), 718-734. https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.995863 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  12. Çilek, E. (2017). Problems about program evaluation in Turkey (Samsun province as sample) [Master’s thesis: Ondokuz Mayıs University]. Thesis number: 471980. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ [Google Scholar]
  13. Dağyar, M. (2021). Eğitim programının temel ögesi: Hedef [The basic element of the curriculum: Objective]. E. Yeşilyurt (Ed.), Eğitimde program geliştirme ve değerlendirme [Curriculum development and evaluation in education], (pp. 357- 401). Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  14. Dağyar, M. (2022). Orijinal ve yenilenmiş Bloom taksonomileri [Original and a revision of the Bloom’s taxonomy]. E. Yeşilyurt (Ed.), Eğitim taksonomileri [Educational taxonomies], (pp. 31- 52). Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  15. Demirel, Ö. (2017). Kuramdan uygulamaya eğitimde program geliştirme [Curriculum development in education: From theory to practice]. Ankara: Pegem. [Google Scholar]
  16. Demirtaş, Z. (2017). A general view to program evaluation approaches in education. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 7(4), 756-768. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.388616 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Doğan, E. (2022). Analysis of approaches to curriculum evaluation in Turkey [PhD thesis: Gaziantep University]. Thesis number: 738890. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ [Google Scholar]
  18. Doll, R. C. (1996). Curriculum improvement: Decision making and process. Boston: Allyn Bacon. [Google Scholar]
  19. Donmuş Kaya, V. (2022). Simpson’ın psikomotor alan taksonomisi [Simpson's psychomotor domain taxonomy]. E. Yeşilyurt (Ed.), Eğitim taksonomileri [Educational taxonomies], (pp. 275-295). Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  20. Elaldı, Ş. (2022). Krathwohl ve arkadaşlarının duyuşsal alan taksonomisi [Krathwohl and colleagues' affective domain taxonomy]. E. Yeşilyurt (Ed.), Eğitim taksonomileri [Educational taxonomies], (pp. 247-274). Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  21. EPDAD (2016). Öğretmen eğitiminde program değerlendirme ve akreditasyon el kitabı [Curriculum Evaluation and Accreditation Handbook in Teacher Education]. https://epdad.org.tr [Google Scholar]
  22. Erdamar, F. S. (2020). The analysis of primary school teachers' curriculum literacy perceptions and primary school administrators' perceptions of teachers' curriculum literacy skills in the context of progressive philosophy [PhD thesis: Fırat University]. Thesis number: 621287. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ [Google Scholar]
  23. Erden, M. (1998). Eğitimde program değerlendirme [Curriculum evaluation in education]. Ankara: Anı. [Google Scholar]
  24. ERG (2005). Yeni öğretim programlarını inceleme ve değerlendirme raporu [Report on the review and evaluation of new curriculums]. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ilkonline/issue/8607/107225 [Google Scholar]
  25. Ertürk, S. (2014). Eğitimde program geliştirme [Curriculum development in education]. İstanbul: Edge. [Google Scholar]
  26. Eviren, Ö. S. (2017). Training evaluation models. The Journal of Limitless Education and Research, 2(3), 57-76. https://doi.org/10.29250/sead.343245 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  27. Fink, A. (1995). How to design surveys. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication, [Google Scholar]
  28. Fitzpatrick J. L., Sanders J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2011). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Pearson Education. [Google Scholar]
  29. Gelen, İ., & Alış, E. (2018). Opinions of stakeholders about evaluation of middle-school mathematics and science curriculum dimensions. Journal of Interdisciplinary Educational Research, 2(4), 28-42. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jier/issue/42063/482147 [Google Scholar]
  30. Gökmenoğlu, T. (2014). The wide angle: Program evaluation studies in Turkey in terms of models and approaches. International Journal of Curriculum and Instructional Studies, 4(7), 55-70. https://ijocis.epo-der.org/arsiv-archive/ [Google Scholar]
  31. Güllü, M., Arslan, C., Uğraş, S., & Görgüt, İ., (2011). The evaluation of the new secondary school physical education time table convenience. Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Education Facult, 8(Special Issue), 122-133. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/yyuefd/issue/13708/165970 [Google Scholar]
  32. Güner, H., Çelebi, N., Taşçı, G., & Korumaz, M. (2014). Analysis of international tests (PISA, TIMSS and PIRLS) in the context of neoliberal education policies and equality of opportunity in education. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 3(3), 33-75. https://doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v3i3.329 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  33. Günkör, C. (2017). Exploration of the relationship between educationand development. Journal of International Social Sciences Education, 3(1) , 14-32. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/issej/issue/32023/341447 [Google Scholar]
  34. Herdman, E. A. (2006). Guidelines for conducting a literature review and presenting conference papers. Journal of Education and Research in Nursing, 3(1), 2-4. https://jer-nursing.org/jvi.aspx?un=JERN-25348&volume=3&issue=1 [Google Scholar]
  35. Karademir, T., Öztürk, H. T., & Alper, A. (2014). An international review of objects of ınformational technology and software course. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311102665 [Google Scholar]
  36. Karagülle, S., Varkı, E., & Hekimoğlu, E. (2019). An investigation of the concept of program literacy in the context of apllicability and functionality of educational program. Journal of Educational Reflections, 3(2), 85-97. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/eduref/issue/50553/535626 [Google Scholar]
  37. Karahan, M. (2018). Evaluation of the development level and development measures of the country results of the PISA exam. Atlas Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi [Atlas Journal of Social Sciences], 2(3), 291-310. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/atlas/issue/55582/760710 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kaya, Z. (2002). Uzaktan eğitim [Distance education]. Ankara: Pegem. [Google Scholar]
  39. Kılıç, A. (2022). An evaluation of Turkish higher educatıon qualificatıons framework graduate level definitions within the 21st century skills classification of P21. Journal of New Approaches in Education, 5(2), 66-83. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/eyyad/issue/74212/1153145 [Google Scholar]
  40. Koltay, T. (2011) The media and the literacies: media literacy, ınformation literacy, digital literacy. Media, Culture & Society, (33), 211-221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443710393382 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  41. Kotluk, N., & Yayla, A. (2016). An evaluation of hıgh school 9th grade physics curriculum accordıng to Tyler's objective based evaluation model. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 16(4), 1832-1852. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/aibuefd/issue/28550/304599 [Google Scholar]
  42. Kurt, A. (2016). The evaluation of 4th grade english language curriculum by context, input, process, product model [Master’s thesis: Akdeniz University]. Thesis number: 436743. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ [Google Scholar]
  43. Kurt, A. (2021). Eğitimde program değerlendirme: Yaklaşımlar ve modeller [Curriculum evaluation in education: Approaches and models]. E. Yeşilyurt (Ed.), Eğitimde program geliştirme ve değerlendirme [Curriculum development and evaluation in education], (pp. 519–578). Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  44. Kuyubaşıoğlu, R. M. (2019). Investigation of teacher's education program literacy qualifications [Master’s thesis: Mersin University]. Thesis number: 608523. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ [Google Scholar]
  45. Kürüm Yapıcıoğlu, D., Atik Kara, D., & Sever, D. (2016). Trends and problems in curriculum evaluation studies in Turkey: The perspective of domain experts. International Journal of Curriculum and Instructional Studies, 6(12), 91 - 113. https://ijocis.epo-der.org/arsiv-archive/ [Google Scholar]
  46. McCain, D. V. (2005). Evaluation basics. Alexandria: American Society for Training & Development. [Google Scholar]
  47. MEB (2019). PISA 2018 Türkiye ön raporu [PISA 2018 Turkey pre-report]. http://pisa.meb.gov.tr [Google Scholar]
  48. MEB (2021). PIRLS 2021. https://pirls.meb.gov.tr [Google Scholar]
  49. MEB (2022). TIMMS nedir? [What is TIMSS?].https://timss.meb.gov.tr [Google Scholar]
  50. METK (2014). Milli Eğitim Temel Kanunu [National Education Fundamental Law]. https://oygm.meb.gov.tr [Google Scholar]
  51. Morrison, G.S. (1993). Contemporary curriculum K-8. Boston Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon. [Google Scholar]
  52. Oral, B., & Yazar, T. (2020). Eğitimde program geliştirme ve değerlendirme [Curriculum development and evaluation in education]. Ankara: Pegem. [Google Scholar]
  53. Ornstein, C. A., & Hunkins, P. F. (2018). Curriculum: foundations, principles, and Issues. Harlow: Pearson. [Google Scholar]
  54. Özçelik, D. A. (2009). Eğitim programları ve öğretim: Genel öğretim yöntemi [Curriculum and instruction: General teaching method]. Ankara: Pegem. [Google Scholar]
  55. Özdemir, O. (2019). Dijital okuryazarlık [Digital literacy]. E. Kolaç & S. Dal (Ed.), Etkinliklerle Türkçe öğretimi [Turkish language teaching through activities] (pp. 587-604). Ankara: Nobel. [Google Scholar]
  56. Özdemir, S. M. (2009). Curriculum evaluation ın education and examination of the curriculum evaluation studies ın Turkey.Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Education Faculty, 6(2), 126-149. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/yyuefd/issue/13712/166017 [Google Scholar]
  57. Özgeriş, M., & Özer, S. (2022). Evaluation of program outcomes in the accreditation process: A research on the case of Ataturk University landscape architecture. Turkish Journal of Forest Science, 6(2), 496-509. https://doi.org/10.32328/turkjforsci.1147438 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  58. Özgül, İ. (2021). Examination of the music course teaching program in terms of the European qualifications framework and the Turkish qualifications framework. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 18(43), 6806-6838. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.962013 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  59. Özkan, U. B. (2019). Eğitim bilimleri araştırmaları için doküman inceleme yöntemi [Document review method for educational science research]. Ankara: Pegem. [Google Scholar]
  60. Polat, Ü., & Yeşilyurt, E. (2021). Eğitim programının temel ögesi: Sınama durumu [The basic element of the training program: Testing situation]. E. Yeşilyurt (Ed.), Eğitimde program geliştirme ve değerlendirme [Curriculum development and evaluation in education], (pp: 467-486). Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  61. Richardson, V. (1994). Standards and assessments: What is their educative potential? M. Diez, V. Richardson ve P. Pierson (Ed.), Setting standards and educating teachers içinde (ss. 15-36). American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. [Google Scholar]
  62. Sağlam, M., & Yüksel, İ. (2007). Meta-analysis and meta-evaluation methods in program evaluation. Dumlupınar Universıty Journal of Social Sciences, (18), 175-188. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/dpusbe/issue/4760/65397 [Google Scholar]
  63. Sever, D. (2021). Program geliştirmede değerlendirme [Evaluation in curriculum development]. H. Sucuoğlu & M. Gökdağ Baltaoğlu (Ed.), Eğitimde program geliştirme [Curriculum development in education], (pp.227-254). İstanbul: Lisans. [Google Scholar]
  64. Sönmez, V., & Alacapınar, F. G. (2015). Örnekleriyle eğitimde program değerlendirme [Curriculum evaluation with examples]. Ankara: Anı. [Google Scholar]
  65. Stake, R. E. (2004). Standards-based & responsive evaluation. London, New Delhi, Sage. [Google Scholar]
  66. Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. N. (1980). Curriculum development: Theory into practice. New York: Macmillan. [Google Scholar]
  67. Taş, U., & Yenilmez F. (2008). Role of education on developments in Turkey and return on educatİon İnvestment. Journal of Socıal Sciences, Eskişehir Osmangazi Unıversıty, 9(1), 155-186. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ogusbd/issue/10993/131558 [Google Scholar]
  68. Taş, U. (2007). The Role of education in the process of development through the development plans of Turkey [Master’s thesis: Eskişehir Osmangazi University]. Thesis number: 206409. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ [Google Scholar]
  69. Tezel, T. (2010). Factors affecting development in least developed countries and the effects of education on development [Master’s thesis: İstanbul University]. Thesis number: 277891. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ [Google Scholar]
  70. Tolunay, A., & Akyol, A. (2006). Development and rural development: Main concepts and definitions. Turkish Journal of Forestry, 7(2), 116-127. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/tjf/issue/20887/224180 [Google Scholar]
  71. TTKB (2023). 21. yüzyıl becerileri ve değerlere yönelik araştırma raporu [Research report on 21st-century skills and values]. https://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/www/baskanligimizca-21-yuzyil-becerileri-ve-degerlere-yonelik-arastirma-raporu-yayimlandi/icerik/509 [Google Scholar]
  72. TYÇ (2020). Terimler sözlüğü, yeterlilik [A dictionary of terms, competence]. https://www.tyc.gov.tr/indir/tyc-terimler-sozlugu-i1.html [Google Scholar]
  73. TYÇ (2022). Yeterlilik [Competence], https://www.tyc.gov.tr/sayfa/yeterlilik-kavrami [Google Scholar]
  74. Uşun, S. (2016). Eğitimde program değerlendirme [Curriculum evaluation in education]. Ankara: Anı. [Google Scholar]
  75. Varış, F. (1997). Eğitimde program geliştirme: Teoriler ve teknikler [Curriculum development in education: Theories and techniques]. Ankara: Alkım. [Google Scholar]
  76. Wood, B. B. (2001). Stake’s countenance model: evaluation an environmental education professional development course. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(2), 18-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960109599134 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  77. Yalçın, S. (2018). 21st century skills and tools and approaches that are used to measure these skills. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 51(1), 183-201. https://doi.org/10.30964/auebfd.405860 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  78. Yazçayır, N. (2016). The development of DACEM curriculum evaluation criteria. International Journal of Curriculum and Instructional Studies, 6(12), 169-186. https://ijocis.epo-der.org/arsiv-archive/ [Google Scholar]
  79. Yeşilyurt, E., & Köroğlu, M. (2021). Eğitimde program değerlendirme: Ölçütler, yöntemler, envanterler [Program evaluation in education: Criteria, methods, inventories]. E. Yeşilyurt (Ed.), Eğitimde program geliştirme ve değerlendirme [Curriculum development and evaluation in education], (pp: 487-517). Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  80. Yeşilyurt, E. (2010). Evaluation of teaching practice curriculum in the light of standard ?based and responsive models [PhD thesis: Fırat University]. Thesis number: 263629. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ [Google Scholar]
  81. Yeşilyurt, E. (2021a). Eğitim programının temel kavramları [Basic concepts of the curriculum]. E. Yeşilyurt (Ed.), Eğitimde program geliştirme ve değerlendirme [Curriculum development and evaluation in education], (pp: 1-38). Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  82. Yeşilyurt, E. (2021b). Eğitimde program geliştirme ve değerlendirme [Curriculum development and evaluation in education]. Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  83. Yeşilyurt, E. (2022a). Eğitim taksonomileri [Educational taxonomies). Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  84. Yeşilyurt, E. (2022b). Eğitim taksonomisi: Temel kavramlar ve tarihsel süreç [Educational taxonomy: Basic concepts and historical process]. E. Yeşilyurt (Ed.), Eğitim taksonomileri [Educational taxonomies], (pp. 1-29). Ankara: Vizetek. [Google Scholar]
  85. YÖKAK (2020). 2019 yılı akreditasyon kuruluşları genel değerlendirme raporu [2019 Accreditation Organizations General Evaluation Report], https://yokak.gov.tr [Google Scholar]
  86. Yüksel, İ. (2010). Development of Turkish program evaluation standards [PhD thesis: Anadolu University]. Thesis number: 262343. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ [Google Scholar]
  87. Yüksel, S., & Sağlam, M. (2012). Eğitim programları ve öğretim ilkeleri [Curriculums and teaching principles]. Ankara: Pegem. [Google Scholar]
Meta
Clt. 7 (2)
İndir
Metric
Geçmiş
Benzer

Cilt 7 Sayı 2

Aralık 2025

Tüm makaleleler

Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi

Copyright © 2026 Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. CC BY
All elements of this website have been created using the BOQ™ - Intelligent Webverse System.