CHANGES IN QUALITY STANDARDS OF HIGHER EDUCATION

IN TURKEY AND GEORGIA SINCE 2005

Adem Demirci, Natela Doghonadze
MA ,K.maras,Turkey
Professor,Tbilisi ,Georgia

ABSTRACT
This study discusses the changes in the quality standards in higher education system in Turkey and
Georgia since 2005, dealing with related issues of the Bologna Process. For this purpose past and
recent practices and laws have been compared. It has been shown that the Bologna process has
facilitated the Turkish and Georgian education system to become part of European one. The process
focuses on quality and the implementation of it into education system, aiming at high standards
adequate for higher education of European countries. The Quality Assurance system in Turkey and
Georgia have been discussed in respect to Bologna Process. The internal and external quality
assurance and its influence on higher education system has been analyzed.
Introduction: Taking into consideration the processes of globalization, the majority of countries are
trying to make adequate changes to their education systems, to keep in pace with the international
community. Turkey and Georgia are no exclusion. Their relevant governing organs, as well as
university administration and academicians are trying to do their best to meet the international
standards. This is not only necessary for countries‟ successful development, but also helps to make
higher education institutions competitive ones on the growing educational markets without borders.
Research methodology: We held a survey (quantitative method) with undergraduate and graduate
students of Turkish and Georgian universities to see how much the reforms have reached them and
whether they really benefit from them .
Results and implications: the results of our work is
Turkey is more successful in:
 International mobility
 Realization of the role of independent study

Georgia is more successful in

 Students‟ and graduates English skills
 Program assessment
 Fairness in admission to higher education
 Student-centered approach
Conclusion: Though the results of the survey are generally positive enough, much has to be done, to
compleetly meet the international standards in both countries.
 Diploma recognition procedure should be simplified and become more graduate-friendly.
 Mobility (in the university, between universities and international) has become more available,
but is still linked with many problems (paper-work, very tough competition, level of foreign
language knowledge).
 Diploma supplement is still a document not automatically given to students in Turkey; its
importance is not fully realized by employers in both countries.

Keywords: qality standards, higher education, Bologna process, mobility, employability, educational
legislation, stakeholder satisfaction
 Turkey and the Bologna Process

Turkey set the priorities for harmonizing its higher education with other countries higher education.
For that reason, Turkey signed the Bologna Process at the Prague Communique in 2001 providing
educational reforms that Turkey needs to reconstruct its higher education system.

Since welcoming the Bologna Process, Turkey has accomplished important improvements in
access to higher education. UNESCO data indicates that the ratio of tertiary enrolment in Turkey
increased from 22% in 1999 to 38% in 2008, which shows that higher education has become both
more available and more prestigious (Mizikaci, 2006).

The Bologna Process has already had a great impact on Turkish Higher Education, as stated in
EUA Trends (Sursock & Smidt, 2010). Turkey, alongside with such countries as, for example, the
Baltic States, Georgia, Hungary, Ireland, the Nordic countries, the United Kingdom, had a long history
of using credits. By now the ECTS credit system has been totally established in the Turkish higher
education system. Turkey has seen a significant (40%) staff mobility increase. On the other hand,
strategies for lifelong education are only being developed, so at the moment there is no such national
strategy.

The most “weighty” stakeholders of Bologna Process in Turkey are: The Council of Higher
Education (YÖK), the Turkish University Rectors‟ Committee (TURC) and the Interuniversity Council
(UAK). The Turkish National Agency created a National Team of 12 Bologna Promoters in 2004 that
contributes to the implementation and understanding of the Bologna Process in Turkey (National
Report, 2005).

As a signatory state of the Bologna Declaration, some special measures were taken to develop
mobility of students and academic staff. In 2004, Erasmus program was started in the universities, and
activities were organized to introduce the program to the students and academic staff. In addition,
English courses were increased to solve the language problem. But, still there are several obstacles to
overcome. Turkish universities provide many grants for students and academic staff, but grants
available are not enough to support all students and staff mobility, the demand is three times higher
than the total grant available. The most obvious barrier is to get visas for outgoing students (National
Report, 2009).

The most important reform is the promotion of Quality Assurance (QA) for Turkey. The Turkish
higher education has a highly „„heterogeneous structure‟‟ in terms of the quality of education because
of the „involvement of private sector and already existing differences in educational opportunities and
resources” in the regions. Some universities have a very high quality with an excellent research and
graduate reputation, while others do not have same chances and facilities (Mizikaci, 2006). For that
reason, to increase the standardisation and quality systems in higher education, promotion of the
quality assurance should be developed. In Turkey, and also many countries in the world, adopting the
Quality Assurance has become an important key to solve the quality problems in higher education
institutions.
Unlike many countries, Turkey does not have a ministry for higher education institutions (hereafter
HEIs), instead, YÖK - a Council of Higher Education (hereafter CoHE) - carries out its functions and is
responsible for administration of the HEIs in Turkey. The Council of Higher Education is an
autonomous body with juristic personality which governs all higher education, directs the activities of
the institutions of higher education, within the context of duties and powers given by the law. CoHE
was established in 1981 and is a completely autonomous national board of trustees.
According to the data collected recently, the results of the assessment of the QA organizations and
efforts which were performed by the grouped Higher Education Institutions have been analyzed.
According to this analysis, since the non-profit foundation universities are performed well due to their
more flexible administrative structure, on the other hand newly-established universities (established in
2006 and after) are also started to perform even if their quite new in the arena (Kaplan, n.d. , p.5).
In Turkey, the Council of Higher Education is the central authority for the recognition of foreign
qualifications; therefore the application for the recognition of foreign diplomas is submitted to the
“Equivalency Unit” structured under the Council of Higher Education. Diploma Supplement is not a
document that guarantees recognition of diplomas issued by the foreign higher education institutions,
but that facilitates the “equivalency process”. Holders of foreign qualifications must prove other
documents the validity of the qualification in the awarding country for further studies.
Georgia and the Bologna Process

Georgia joined Bologna Process in 2005 at Bergen Summit. In complete compliance with the
documents of the Bologna Process Higher Education system of Georgia consists of three cycles:

First cycle – Bachelor‟s Degree (240 credits);

Second cycle – Master‟s Degree (120 credits);

Third cycle – Doctor‟s Degree (180 credits)

The following are the higher education institution types in Georgia:

 College – higher education institution implementing professional higher educational

programme or/and only the first cycle programmes – Bachelor programmes;
 Teaching University – higher education institution implementing higher educational
programme/programmes (except for doctoral programmes). It is required to provide the
second cycle – Master educational programme/programmes.
 University – higher education institution implementing educational programmes of all the three
cycles of higher academic education.

External quality assurance in Georgia is carried put through accreditation process. Accreditation is
conducted by National Education Accreditation Centre. Ministry of Education and Science (MoES):
implements a unified HE policy; develops basic documents reflecting HE system indicators; proposes
the amount of state education grants; implements licensing procedures. On the other hand, HEIs are
free to develop and approve study, research and creative work policies, develop and approve rules for
personnel recruitment, their internal regulations, elect their management bodies and officials and
manage their finances and property.

The state recognizes the qualification documents issued only by an accredited or equaled thereto
higher education institution, whether LEPL (Legal Entity of Public Law) or private (Ministry of
Education and Science of Georgia, 2009). In 2006 student loan system was introduced in Georgia in
cooperation with the leading private Banks of Georgia, to make studies at universities more affordable
(Japaridze, 2008).

In 2005 Georgia introduced unified national admission exams to fight the corruption dealing with
admission issues, widespread before the introduction of this practice (Meyer et al, 2013).

In May 3, 2006, the National Team of Bologna Promoters (NTBP) was established according to the
Decree of the Minister of Education and Science of Georgia. Eleven public and private HEIs, the
National League of Student Organizations and the Ministry of Education and Science of Georgia
nominated the members of NTBP; NTBP elaborated an action plan for 2006- 2010.

All higher education institution have been applying ECTS credit system since 2009/2010.
Mechanisms of quality assurance, including authorization and accreditation, are defined by adopted
Law on “Development of Quality of Education” (July 2010) (EACEA, 2010).

How does it all work?

Based on the literature analysis, both in Turkey and in Georgia the major requirements of the
Bologna Process (see table 1) have been mostly implemented, thus making the education systems of
higher education of both countries part of European higher education area, congruent with its
demands.
 Table 1. Bologna Process requirements and benefits and their
realization in Turkey and Georgia
Requirements
1 Easily readable and comparable
degrees (undergraduate/graduate)
2 ECTS
3 Student and staff mobility
4 Introduction of diploma
supplement with basic info about
education system, credits, taken
courses, etc.
5 Internal QA system
6 External QS system
7 Lifelong education system
8 Involvement of universities and
students in self-assessment and
decision making
Fulfillment in Turkey
√ √
The majority of universities
either apply it, or two
systems (ECTS and local),
depending on students‟
needs
√, they have greatly
increased, however, not as
available as desirable; the
advantage is that it is
available based on
achievements
√ (some universities give it
automatically, and some –
on demand)
√ √
İn the process of
development, first steps
have already been made
First steps are being made
– no legislative basis yet
Students assess lectures
(courses), not programs;
decision making is still
rather centralized (YÖK)
Fulfilment in Georgia
√
√, they have greatly
increased, however, not
as available as
desirable; the
advantage is that it is
available based on
achievements
√
√ (on the national scale)
First steps are being
made – no legislative
basis yet
Students assess
lectures (courses) and
programs, however,
assessment by NCEQE
 is decisive

9 Stakeholder involvement Potential employers are at Potential employers are

the moment not sufficiently at the moment not
taken into consideration or sufficiently taken into
informed consideration or
informed

10 Higher education is attractive and √, however, the demand is √

available still quite higher than the
supply; at some universities
/ faculties study is quite
expensive

11 University education is Some universities definitely Few universities are

internationally competitive are, others are striving for a internationally
higher quality competitive

12 Student-centered approach: Many administrators and Many administrators

students‟ needs and assessments teachers still are teacher- and teachers still are
taken into consideration, stressing centered – more training teacher-centered –
learning over teaching, learning and retraining is necessary more training and
outcomes over teaching goals, etc. retraining is necessary

13 Mutual recognition of diplomas √, there is an established √

procedure and transparent
requirements, however,
sometimes unexpected
problems arise

14 National Qualification Framework, √, however, it is still under √ however, it is still

which is adequate for EU improvement to make it under improvement to
more relevant make it more relevant

Method

As we all know, many reforms start on paper, but are not as effective in reality as it looks on paper.
It normally takes a longer time before all interested parties realize the benefits of the new requirement
and start to implement them. With this idea in mind I decided to hold a survey (quantitative method)
with undergraduate and graduate students of Turkish and Georgian universities to see how much the
reforms have reached them and whether they really benefit from them.
The questionnaires, almost identic, (20 items for undergraduates and 26 items for graduates)) were
in Likert scale format (assessing the statements in a 5-point system: 1 - completely disagree, 2-
rather disagree, 3 – neither agree nor disagree, 4 – rather agree, 5 – completely agree). The
questions were chosen based on the analysis items above, especially on the items essential for
students. Some questions were open-ended, to find out details. They were translated into Turkish /
Georgian to avoid comprehension problems.
The participants were all volunteers, the questionnaire was given to them in person or sent via e-mail.
They were 50 BA, MA and PH students and graduates who study/studied in Turkey in both private
and state universities and the same number of Georgian students and graduates. See the results in
Tables 2 and 3.
Table 2 – Results of undergraduate questionnaire

# question Average result for Average result for

Turkish students Georgian students

1 I understand what ECTS means and that it involves 1.47 1.53

both contact and independent work hours.

2 I have participated in student mobility. 1.90 1.73

3 I wanted to participate in student mobility, but 1.75 0.76

couldn‟t do it, due to problems with documents.

4 I wanted to participate in international student 1.90 3.22

mobility, but couldn‟t do it, due to tough competition.

5 I wanted to participate in international student 1.75 1.14

mobility, but couldn‟t do it, due to my English level
skills.

6 More students around me participate in international 3.20 3.81

student mobility than a few years ago.

7 I have participated in course / lecturer assessment 2.85 3.75

as a student.

8 I have participated in program (curriculum) 2.10 3.15

assessment.

9 I think my participation in course / program 2.15 3.42

assessment was quite a formality.

10 In the process of higher education I have obtained 3.3 2.95

skills useful for lifelong education.

11 Being admitted to a university was very tough, but 3.15 4.27

fair.

12 Higher education is attractive for many people in my 3.95 4.07

country.

13 The cost / effeciency ratio of higher education in 2.70 2.58

Turkey is realistic.

14 Getting higher education in EU is more attractive 3.90 4.17

than getting it in Turkey / Georgia

15 The quality of higher education in Turkey is as good 3.10 2.95

as in EU.

16 Teachers‟ relations with students are often teacher- 3.8 2.86

 centered.

17 When students need some assistance of 3.20 2.95

administration, sometimes too much time and/or
paperwork is needed.

18 The qualification which I wanted to get is not 2.75 3.17

included in the qualification framework.

19 I have read the curriculum while choosing the 3.45 2.85

university / faculty, and I regularly ready sillabi.

20 I realize that students should do much independant 4.1 2.86

study.

Table 3 – Results of postrgraduate questionnaire

# question Turkish students Georgian students

1 When (how many years ago / where (in Average – 5.5 Average – 4.5
Turkey/Georgia or abroad) did you get your previous years ago years ago
degree?

2 Are you a) working b) working and studying c) 65% are working, 45% are working,
studying now d) unemployed 35% are working 30% are working
and studying and studying, 25%
are unemployed

3 What degree do you have a) BA b) MA c) 76% - BA , 18% - 70% BA, 22% -

PhD MA, 6% PhD MA, 8% PhD

4 Have you had any problems with recognition of a 95% - No 83% - No

degree obtained abroad? Yes / No

Average results

5 I have had no problems having my diploma 3.57 4.58

recognized by employers and / or for the purposes of
further education.

6 I understand what ECTS means and that it involves 2.73 2.63

both contact and independent work hours.

7 I have participated in student mobility. 1.2 1.83

8 I wanted to participate in student mobility, but 1.7 0.84

couldn‟t do it, due to problems with documents.

9 I wanted to participate in international student 1.53 1.08

mobility, but couldn‟t do it, due to tough competition.

10 I wanted to participate in international student 1.63 0.95

mobility, but couldn‟t do it, due to my English level
skills.
11 More students around me participate in international 3.10 3.65
student mobility than a few years ago.

12 When I was looking for employment, the potential 2.27 3.62

employers didn‟t care about / were not competent in
interpreting the diploma supplement

13 I was not required a diploma supplement when I was 3.69 0

admitted to MA / PhD studies, just a diploma.

14 I have participated in course / lecturer assessment 3.10 3.97

as a student.

15 I have participated in program (curriculum) 2.01 2.71

assessment.

16 I think my participation in course / program 2.01 2.23

assessment was quite a formality.

17 In the process of graduate education I have obtained 2.8 3.01

skills useful for lifelong education.

18 Higher education is attractive for many people in my 4.10 4.73

country

19 The cost / effeciency ratio of graduate education in 3.03 3.15

Turkey / Georgia is realistic.

20 Getting higher education in EU is more attractive 4.23 4.64

than getting it in Turkey / Georgia.

21 The quality of graduate education in Turkey / 2.73 2.08

Georgia is as good as in EU.

22 Teachers‟ relations with students are often teacher- 3.50 2.06

centered.

23 When students need some assistance of 3.87 3.07

administration, sometimes too much time and/or
paperwork is needed.

24 The qualification which I wanted to get is not 3.23 2.88

included in the qualification framework.

25 I realize that most graduate studies have to be done 3.80 2.15

by the student, the professors are just facilitators.

From the tables we can see that answers are quite similar, however, there are some differences
between the students and graduates from Turkey and Georgia.
Turkey is more successful in:
 International mobility
 Realization of the role of independent study

Georgia is more successful in

 Students‟ and graduates English skills
  Program assessment
 Fairness in admission to higher education
 Student-centered approach
Conclusion
Though the results of the survey are generally positive enough, much has to be done, to compleetly
meet the international standards in both countries.
 Diploma recognition procedure should be simplified and become more graduate-friendly.
 Mobility (in the university, between universities and international) has become more available,
but is still linked with many problems (paper-work, very tough competition, level of foreign
language knowledge).
 Diploma supplement is still a document not automatically given to students in Turkey; its
importance is not fully realized by employers in both countries.
 Students should be more responsible for the quality of their education (actively participate in
course and program assessment, understand terms like ECTS, lifelong education, etc.)
 The need for higher education in Turkey is higher than the supply (vacancies at universities), it
has to be better satisfied. One of the factors of the satisfaction should be tuition fees, which in
some cases are too high. The quality of teaching at all universities should become more
competitive compared to the EU universities.
 The relations between administration, teachers and students should become more student-
centered.
 Universities should not only provide professionally necessary knowledge and skills, but also
transferable skills for lifelong learning.

References:
EACEA (Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency). (2010). Higher Education in Georgia.
http://erasmusplus.org.ge/files/publications/Georgia%20Country%20Fiche%202010%20-%20en.pdf

Japaridze, Sh. (2008). Implementation of Bologna Process in Georgia. Educators‟ and Scientists‟ Free
Trade Union of Georgia. (ESFTUG). Retrieved February 25, 2015 from download.ei-
ie.org/docs/IRISDocuments/.../2008-00050-01-E.doc
Kaplan ,M . (n.d.). Qualıty Assurance Structure and System in Higher Education System of Turkey
[NetLibrary version]. Retrieved November 11, 2014 from
http://www.mqa.gov.my/aqaaiw/Country%20Report/Turkey/QA%20TURKEY%20V3.pdf
Meyer, H.-D., St. John, E., P., Chankseliani, M. & Uribe, L. (2013). Fairness in Access to Higher
Education in a Global Perspective: Fairness in a global perspective. Sense publishers, Rotterdam,
Netherland
Mizikaci, F.(2006). Higher Education in Turkey. Bucharest: UNESCO-CEPES.

National Report Regarding the Bologna Process Implementation. 2004-2005. (2005). EHEA.
Retrieved November 4, 2014 from
http://www.ehea.info/Uploads/Documents/National_Report_Turkey2007.pdf

National Report Regarding the Standards and Guidelines for Quality in EHEA. (2009). Helsinki, 3rd
ed.
Sursock, A. & Smidt, H. (2010). Trends 2010: A decade of change in European Higher Education.
Retrieved March 4, 2015 from
http://www.eua.be/Libraries/Publications_homepage_list/Trends2010.sflb.ashx