Evaluation of measurement and evaluation in education curriculum

This study aims to evaluate the curriculum of measurement and evaluation in education, which is a compulsory course in all programs of faculties of education. In the research, a multi-stage evaluation design, one of the mixed-method designs, was used. As the curriculum evaluation model, Stake's Responsive Evaluation Model was preferred. The Description Matrix of Stake's Congruence-Contingency Evaluation Model was used in the data collection process. In addition, the research was conducted considering the program evaluation standards prepared by the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (JCSEE). The accessible population of the study is the public schools operating under the Rize Provincial Directorate of National Education, the Faculties of Education and Theology of Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Trabzon University, and Giresun University. In the study, data were collected from 484 pre-service teachers, 16 teachers, 8 school administrators, and 7 instructors, determined by methods such as criterion sampling, maximum diversity sampling, typical sampling, and study group, using semi-structured interview forms, observation form, achievement test, and checklist. Various measures such as expert opinion, participant confirmation, consistency between coders, and item analysis were taken to ensure the validity and reliability of the research data. Moreover, content analysis, and descriptive analyzes were used in the analysis of the data. Independent sample t-test, one-way ANOVA, Mann-Whitney U, and Games Howell tests were used to determine whether achievement test scores differ in terms of various variables. Research findings show that both teachers and pre-service teachers do not consider themselves qualified in measurement and evaluation. This situation is largely related to the quality of measurement and evaluation training offered to teachers during their pre-service training. According to the results obtained, there are problems such as not complying with the principles of selecting and writing objectives, not considering the variables such as fields of teacher candidates, student characteristics, and institutional differences in determining the objectives and contents of the program. In addition, many variables such as CoEH programs, Bologna processes, quality and accreditation processes, PPSE contents, and field expertise of the instructors cause confusion in the determination of the goals and contents. Distance education practices evaluated as limiting in terms of processes such as communication, interaction, and participation, teaching methods and techniques, measurement and evaluation. The course duration is criticized for being too short to allow practice. Teachers and teacher candidates who take the teaching practice course think that the theoretical knowledge they have learned about measurement and evaluation has no equivalent in schools. In addition, it was observed that the updates and changes made by CoEH on the course did not make a positive difference compared to the previous regulations. In the study, various suggestions that are believed to contribute to the elimination of the problems identified and to the program evaluation researches to be carried out on similar issues are presented.