Assessment of TEOG Examination Success: Topsis Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method Practice

Halim Kazan () and Engin Karaman ()
Additional contact information
Halim Kazan: Istanbul University
Engin Karaman: Istanbul University

Eurasian Business & Economics Journal, 2017, vol. 8, issue 8, 165-179

Abstract: Turkey held various examinations with different names under the name of system of transition to secondary education in the last 30 years. However, each examination method was found inadequate and Turkish education system could not reach the desired success in PISA examination in which student levels of countries that are members of OECD are assessed. For this reason, it was embarked on new quests. TEOG examination was prepared according to semester curriculum, unlike antecedents which are consisted of single day and sessions. Thus, subjective error was minimized in the assessment by reducing the negative effect of the anxiety level factor in assessment of the student. Also, influence degree of school success points was increased. Hence, creation of a process-oriented education model was targeted not result-oriented. In this study; it was started to be searched whether TEOG examination is different from Institutions' Examination, LGS, OKS, SBS, OGES examinations used in transition to the secondary education in the previous years or not. The essential point in the research is to present success performances of schools after it was explained the PISA examination. In last section, it was examined feature of Decision-Making and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Technique. In implementation phase Successes of 23 secondary schools operating at education-training in Ceylanpınar county which was selected as the pilot region in Şanlıurfa were examined in order to show difference of TEOG examination from the other examinations. 6 courses taught in pilot schools within the scope of TEOG central examination were selected. Success averages of courses selected were weighted and pointed with TOPSIS method which is Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Technique (MCDM). Points were mixed and a ranking was formed. Significant differences were found between the ranking obtained as a result of the study and ranking published by Ministry of National Education. While there is no change in lower and upper ranks in the both rankings, great ranking differences were found in mid-ranks.

Date: 2017
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://eurasianacademy.org/index.php/busecon/article/view/721 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eas:buseco:v:8:y:2017:i:8:p:165-179

DOI: 10.17740/eas.econ.2017.V8-09

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Eurasian Business & Economics Journal from Eurasian Academy Of Sciences
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kutluk Kagan Sumer ().