The Peer Evaluation Report Preparation Guide has been prepared by the Strategic Management and Quality Office of Hitit University to provide guidance for academic and administrative units in objectively, constructively, and improvement-orientedly evaluating each other’s internal assessment reports.
The purpose of the guide is to ensure that the quality assurance and continuous improvement processes carried out at our university are implemented in a participatory, transparent, and comparable manner. In this context, peer evaluation is a planned review process conducted among units with similar roles and responsibilities. Within this process, each unit evaluates another unit’s Internal Evaluation Report based on evidence, explanations, and maturity levels, and reports its findings together with justifications, offering improvement suggestions and examples of good practice.
Peer evaluation provides an external and independent perspective that supports the self-assessment process. In this way, the strengths and areas for improvement of the units are revealed in a comparative manner, strengthening the culture of learning, sharing, and continuous development across the institution.
The guide has been developed based on the Institutional Self-Assessment Report Preparation Guide and the Maturity Scoring Rubric published by the Turkish Higher Education Quality Council (THEQC). Accordingly, the peer evaluation process is carried out within the framework of 46 sub-criteria grouped under the four main areas defined in the Institutional Self-Assessment Report (Leadership, Governance and Quality; Education and Training; Research and Development; and Social Contribution). For each sub-criterion, the maturity level (ranging from 1 to 5) is reviewed and rescored by the evaluating units based on evidence.
Peer evaluation reports are prepared digitally through the HEP (Hitit Action Plan) system under the coordination of the Strategic Management and Quality Office and entered into the system by the authorized units. The results obtained at the end of the process are analyzed together with the self-assessment findings of the units and directly contribute to the preparation of the Institutional Self-Assessment Report.
This guide contributes to the institutional implementation of the continuous improvement cycle and the dissemination of a quality culture across the university by promoting mutual learning among units.
For the guide, please visit our webpage.
