Practices and opinions of teachers working at public, private and International Baccalaureate schools on measurement and evaluation

Abstract


Introduction
The education system of each country gains functionality in line with the features of its curriculum. Two main approaches are mentioned while creating a curriculum. In the first one, curricula are thought of as a system and considered a complex whole of items serving common aims (Erden, 1998). Aims of education of any subject area can be determined and analyzed in advance within the scope of community and student characteristics. The content, method, and learning environment of education are specified within the frame of expert views, and studies. Evaluation means the level of achieving the goal (Demirel, 2012;Ertürk, 2013). Curriculum elements can be reviewed following the results of the evaluation (Demirel, 2012;Ertürk, 2013). However, in the second approach, student needs and processes are more prioritized than the outcome. The goal and process change constantly in accordance with the conditions in which the teaching is performed. For that reason, it is not possible to know them in advance (Erden, 1998). Also, students` and teachers` opinions, preferences, perceptions are more prominent than the expert opinions regarding the decisions to be taken for the curriculum (Demirel, 2012;Ertürk, 2013). Accordingly, the adopted design approach brings along the differentiation of the goals, educational status, content, measurement, and evaluation method.
The primary school curriculum proved in Turkey collectively in 1968 was revised based on the constructivist approach by the Ministry of National Education (MEB) between the years 2004-2005(Yüksel & Sağlam, 2014. The teacher is not the one who transfers the information directly but facilitates the students to reach the information in constructivism (Erdoğan, Kayır, Kaplan, Ünal & Akbunar, 2015;Senemoğlu, 2012). Curriculum revision studies were carried out in 2013 and 2018. At all the curriculum that has been implemented since 2018, it is stated that it is not realistic to expect a standard measurement and evaluation process for each student, and thus importance should be given to variety. The flexibility of these processes, methods and techniques to be used by the teachers and educational practitioners are expected to be original and creative. It has also been pointed out that; not only the outcomes but also the processes should be looked into so that, tools and methods should in compliance with the technical, and academic standards, individual differences should be given importance cognitive-emotional, and psychomotor areas should also be assessed, and in the process of measurement and evaluation both the students and the teachers should take active roles (MEB, 2013;2018;. In the MEB 2023 Educational Vision, it is seen that these expectations evolved to targets like "establishment of proficiency-based measurement, and evaluation system", "monitoring of social, cultural and sportive activities", "monitoring the students from preschool to university with e-portfolio", "enabling measurement and evaluation methods". All the mentioned applications are expected from public schools as well as from all private schools supervised by the Ministry of National Education Private Education Institutions Regulation (2012).
Tough some studies include opinions of partners about conditions of learning and measurement and evaluation few of them focus on identifying the extent of fulfilling the expectations of MEB by schools and teachers. Gelbal and Kelecioğlu (2007) examined teacher opinions on constructivism based in-class measurement and evaluation methods. They've found that the teachers prefer traditional methods to determine student success; used the methods and techniques that they feel self-sufficient about frequently, and they used student evaluation methods the least frequently. The teachers who stated that they do not face any problems in using the methods also mentioned the high number of students in a classroom, inadequate time, and difficulty of tool preparation. In the study of Arda (2009), where competencies of primary school teachers, and their opinions about measurement, and evaluation were examined. The teachers mentioned the problems arising from students' lack of training in the use of constructivist assessment means and techniques stated in the renewed program. They stated that although they followed the measurement, and evaluation rules, students were not able to assess themselves and thus hold them responsible rather than the assessment tools for the failure. Besides, they also stated that the problems they encountered arose from physical setting, social environment, and parent profile, and the detailed, complex, and time-consuming characteristic of measurement, and evaluation, and from the program itself. Gok and Sahin (2009) worked with 4th and 5th-grade teachers. The teachers considered themselves sufficient in using traditional evaluation methods, and therefore, did not prefer new evaluation methods. Another finding was that teachers needed help with the use of the new evaluation methods in terms of tool preparation and grading, and transforming the results on the school reports. Similar results were obtained by Yapıcı and Demirdelen (2007).
There are currently 54036 public, 12809 private, and four open education schools provide formal education with all levels in our country (MEB, 2019). Even though the same curricula are implemented at all of these schools, the practices differ according to the qualifications of teachers and practitioners, and the goals of the institutions. While these differences are more related to the qualifications of teachers in public schools, studies are carried out to serve the institutional policies of private schools. It is observed that private schools adopt different studies from public schools in order to increase the frequency of being preferred, and student and parent satisfaction. These activities can be sports, and artistic activities as well as using their curricula approved by MEB, or they can also differentiate these curricula with STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering ve Math) activities, or get accreditation from foreign institutions such as the International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO). In this study, International Baccalaureate (IB) schools were included along with the public and private schools. Only 79 of the schools in our country (2 public schools, 77 private schools) received accreditation as an IB school (IBO, t.y.).
The International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO) was established to realize an intercultural and global education system in Geneva, Switzerland. This foundation aims to stop children of diplomats, and people working at international jobs from preventing geographical, and cultural mobility of academic developments by establishing a standard education system (Ateş, 2011;IBO, 2012). IBO continues supporting lifelong learners as primary years program (PYP), middle years program (MYP), diploma program, and career-related program (CP). IBO aims to have a learner-centered, inquiry and research-based system using previously planned learning conditions to serve seven themes (who we are, where we are in place, and time, How we express ourselves, How we organize ourselves, Sharing the planet) with a supra-disciplinary approach, and raise individuals showing tolerance to differences, to enable academic honesty using measurement, and evaluation (IBO, 2012). In order to realize these aims, the expected skills are described under the "IB learner profile" title: inquirers, knowledgeable, thinker, communicator, principled, open-minded, caring, risk-taker, balanced reflective (IBO, 2018a;IBO, 2018b).
In IB measurement and evaluation, while process and product are evaluated together, support of teachers to their students, in order to enable them to evaluate, is prioritized. The teachers are expected to implement the assessment and evaluation in three stages: Assessing, documenting, and reporting. It is emphasized that all assessment tools and methods can be used concerning the individual differences of each student, including the process and product in assessing, and above all, learning should be supported with feedback (IBO, 2018c). It is also mentioned that students should be included in the evaluation process rather than being informed about their evaluation processes, criteria, and results. In the documentation stage, the importance of documenting the results of measurement tools, anecdotes, student reflections, and findings of student improvement is highlighted instead of just keeping them as an observation or teacher opinion. Furthermore, in this stage, all partners contributed or will contribute to the learning process of the student should provide verbal, and written, comprehensive, objective, and fair reports or sharings ( teacher-student, teacherparent, teacher-student-parent participated). Prior to these stages, a school should have its own measurement and evaluation policy, and the practices to be carried out under this policy should be carried out with the participation of all partners in the processes. Regular inspections by IBO also require all schools to carry out systematic measurement and evaluation activities (Büyükgenç, 2014;IBO, 2018d;IBO, 2012).
In the studies where the private schools which have completed their IBO accreditation processes are compared to other schools, issues like communication among family members, and social skills (Özeke Kocabaş & Akkök, 2016), the difficulties that the school administration faced (Oraz, 2019) during the process of becoming an IB school are encountered. Moreover, in the studies on IB primary year program, teacher opinions about the program (Guler & Yaltırık, 2011), applications, values, and beliefs of teachers (Twigg, 2010) were examined. In IB diploma program studies issues like teacher opinions on values education of schools in different countries (Şanver, 2016), reading habits of students. Their attitudes towards reading (Keleş, 2013); the effect of the program on the misconception about the plagiarism (Baysen, Baysen & Çakmak, 2017), students' perception of learning climate (Bora, 2010), geography class taught in this program (Ates, 2011), the differences in its implementation (Kauffman, 2005), opinions of graduate students (Büyükgenç, 2014) are included. In all studies, it is said that the IB program has a positive effect on related features, and when compared to other schools, the IB program has more strong aspects. In addition to these studies, how the aim of educational evaluation is described in evaluation policies, and evaluation applications of schools was researched in action research conducted in a project which is carried out by Toe et al. (2015), and performed in eight different schools in IB primary years program. At the end of the research, it was seen that the teachers use formative and summative evaluation together; although there were differences in opinions about the integration of large scale tests into the system, the universal approach was dominant. They stated that the teachers make plans to describe the level of their students, improve their learnings, enable them to evaluation by considering individual differences as the main element, and to use different evaluation tools together. Besides, they also stated that they adopted the continuity in the development concept, and recorded the information they obtained and emphasized the importance of feedback rather than personal praise. These results are in line with the studies of Güler andYaltırık (2011) andOraz (2019).
With these in mind, the present study focuses on the measurement and evaluation studies of teachers working at IB schools in Turkey, and public and private schools under the Ministry of National Education, and their opinions on this issue. One of the essential reasons is that students who graduate from IB schools can apply to European universities with different university entrance opportunities (university entrance without exam, meeting the university criteria, etc.). Therefore, as an alternative to the educational process in our country, the measurement and evaluation processes need to be looked into differing school types and perspectives of study groups especially teachers and implementation of the measurement and evaluation approaches proposed in the curriculum for all types of schools by teachers. Also, employing efficient methods from other schools can help reduce the differences between different types of schools. As a result of this contribution, especially when these differences are reduced, the bias problem of the measurements of the evaluation may also be reduced. Therefore, it is thought that preliminary information can be provided on issues such as "fairness", "bias", "differential item functioning" and "measurement invariance", which are frequently discussed in the field of measurement and evaluation.

Purpose of the Research
The purpose of this research is to examine the opinions of teachers working at public, private, and International Baccalaureate Schools on measurement, and evaluation studies, use of measurement, and evaluation strategies, and methods, documenting of information, and the feedback frequencies given to both students, and parents. In accordance with this purpose, answers to below-stated subproblems are sought.
1. Which concepts do teachers working at public schools, private schools, and IB schools relate "Measurement, and evaluation" with? 2. Does the thought of being liable to a measurement and evaluation system show a significant difference? How do the teachers who are in the opinion of being liable to a system contribute to this system? 3. Is there a significant difference among teachers of public schools, private schools, and IB schools regarding the frequencies of; 1. the use of different measurement, and evaluation techniques, 2. (i) documenting the results of measurement and evaluation (ii) sharing the results with the students (iii) sharing the results with the parents

Method
The opinions of teachers working at different types of schools on measurement, and evaluation studies, use of assessment tools, documentation of the data, and the feedback frequencies given to both students and parents were examined in this study. Thus, survey research was used as it aims to describe, and transfer the present state, individuals or objects in their conditions without making any change (Büyüköztürk, Çakmak, Akgün, Karadeniz & Demirel, 2019).

Population and Sampling
The population of this research includes teachers teaching at public schools in Turkey, IB candidate/IB schools, and private schools in the 2019-2020 academic year. 54036 teachers from public schools, 12809 from private schools (MEB, 2019), and 77 from IB schools participated in the study. Therefore, 80.8% of all schools participating in this study were public, 19.1% were private, and 0.1% were IB schools (IBO, t.y.).
The sample of this research was identified as convenience sampling which is one of the nonrandom sampling methods and aims to eliminate the limits (Büyüköztürk et al., 2019) caused by time, money, and workforce. However it was aimed to reach more teachers at the first stage of the research since a limited number of individuals can be reached, the sampling effect is the most important factor affecting the external validity of this research.
In this sample, 168 teachers are working at an IB school, IB candidate school, public school, or private school at 23 different provinces in the 2019-2020 academic year. 84 (50%) of the teachers were teaching at public schools, 30 (18%) at IB schools (6 at IB candidate schools), and 54 (32%) at private schools. As the number of participants in the IB candidate school was small, they were merged with IB school participants. Since this study aims to compare schools in terms of the assessed characteristics, the number of teachers working in IB primary years, middle years, and schools implementing diploma programs were kept higher than the ratio of schools of population. 95 (56%) of the participants are women, and 73 (44%) are men. 26 (16%) of the participants work in preschool, 44 (26%) in primary school, 51 (31%) in secondary school, and 52 (31%) in high school (teachers are working in more than one level.). It is seen that the number of teachers who completed or continue their postgraduate education is 31 (37%) in public school, 19 (63%) in IB school, 14 (26%) in private school. When the participants' experiences were analyzed, it was observed that 52 (62%) of teachers in public schools, 8 (27%) of teachers in IB schools, and 24 (44%) of teachers in private schools had an experience of 10 years or less.

Data Collection Tool
A questionnaire prepared by researches was used to collect data. For the appropriateness of the questions, expert advice was received from five people; three of them were academicians in the field of measurement and evaluation, and two of them were in the curriculum and teaching field. Four of the experts worked as educators at the International Baccalaureate Educator Certificate program. The experts agreed on the appropriateness of all the questions, and suggested customizing the form designs for IB and edit on the text. The differentiated questions for IC teachers were as follows: "What is your total working time as a teacher at an IB school" "The IB Program you work at: " "What does "measurement and evaluation" mean for teachers working at MEB? Can you explain it?" In the first section of the survey demographic characteristics of participants, and their description of measurement, and evaluation; in the second section, measurement, and evaluation tools, documenting, and frequency of using it to give feedback, and in the third section, their opinions on the difficulties they faced, and suggestions to project partners were included. The questionnaire consisting of 26 questions in total was posted on the Internet by using "Google Forms" in the Google browser. The answers were given to the questions about the difficulties they experienced in the questionnaire, and the suggestions to the partners' section were not reported because of the similarities to the answers of other questions and the word limitation.

Data Analysis
The quantitative data included in the first section of the questionnaire was analyzed with SPSS 25 Program. Percentages and frequencies were used for the description of the data through data analysis, and chi-square (χ 2 ) test was used for frequency distributions. Moreover, descriptive analyses were done for the answers given to open-ended questions. In the descriptive analysis, the most common concepts used by teachers were identified and listed under titles. The concepts seen on the tables were limited to at least two or three frequencies, and concepts with one frequency were added to make some comparisons.

Ethic Issues
Data of the research was collected via the Internet on a volunteer basis. For that reason, in the instruction prepared for the participants it is stated that their names will not be saved, their answers will not be used for any other purposes rather than this research, they have the right not to participate in the study, and leave the study at any time after their participation, and there will not be any money exchanged for their participation. Additionally, the below-stated explanation was also included in the instruction section. By clicking the "Submit" button at the end of the form, you will declare that you agree with the statement below. "I have understood all the explanations made to me about the research in detail. I agree with this work with my consent under no influence."

Concepts Related to Assessment and Evaluation
The answers of teachers to open-ended questions were analyzed in the data obtained via "what are the concepts that come to the minds first of teachers in public schools, IB schools, and private schools when "measurement, and evaluation" mentioned?" question. It was seen that all opinions could be grouped under five main titles namely as determined as "Basic Concepts," "Statistics," "What Do We Assess?", "Why do We Assess?" and "How Do We Assess?" The keywords of the "Basic Concepts" group title for each school type were validity, reliability, scale, criteria, evaluation, fairness, process evaluation. 76 teachers from the public school, 22 from the private school, and 26 from the IB school stated their opinions about the basic concepts of measurement and evaluation. The most prominent concepts were validity and reliability in public schools, validity, and process evaluation in private schools, process, and product evaluation in IB schools. However, it can be said that fairness and holistic assessment concepts were only mentioned in IB schools.
The key words collected under the "Statistics" title for each school type were standard deviation, difficulty, discrimination, mode-median, item analysis. 29 teachers from public schools, 9 from private schools, and 2 from IB schools mentioned these keywords. The most prominent keywords were standard deviation, and item difficulty in public schools, item analysis, and standard deviation in private schools, and similarly, item analysis in IB schools.
The keywords collected under the "What do we assess?" title for each school type were achievement, performance, success, learning level, taxonomy, symptom, process, skill, acquisition. 49 teachers from public schools, 22 from private schools, and 21 from IB schools stated the mentioned keywords. The most prominent concepts were acquisition and performance in public schools; success, and acquisition in private schools; process, achievement, and skill in IB schools.
The keywords collected under the "Why do we assess" title for each school type were feedback, quality of education, and motivation of the student, determining the situation, reflective thinking, improving quality, identifying deficiencies, differentiating, improving learning, planning, reporting. 28 teachers from public schools, 12 from private schools, and 36 from IB schools answered the mentioned question. The most prominent concept was feedback. Producing solutions, reflective thinking, differentiation, needs assessment, planning, and reporting were the concepts solely provided by IB school teachers.
The keywords collected under "How do we assess" title for each school type were an exam, question, written exam, observation, point, open-ended, multiple-choice, grade, portfolio, rubric, process analysis, reflecting, group work, and homework. 91 teachers from public schools, 46 from private schools, and 21 from IB schools had answered the question. It was seen that the most prominent concepts were an exam, question, and test in public schools, exams, tests, and rubric in private schools, and rubric, and process-oriented tools in IB schools. It can be said that the concepts stated only in IB schools were anecdote, presentation, and reflection.

Opinions about measurement, and evaluation system, and contributions to the system
Chi-square difference test results concerning the "Do the teachers working at public school, private school, and IB school think that they are liable to measurement, and evaluation system?" question are presented in the Table 1.  Table 1 shows that, while 48% of the teachers working in public schools believe that they do have a measurement and evaluation system yet 52% think the opposite. 83% of the teachers in IB schools think that there is an applied measurement and evaluation system at the schools they are working at, and 17% do not. While the rate of teachers who think that they do not have a measurement and evaluation system falls to 7% in private schools, and the rate of those who think that the system exists has increased to 93%. This differentiation between the ratios was found statistically significant at the level of 0.05 (χ2 = 34.531; sd = 2; p <0.05). Their opinions about whether there is a measurement and evaluation system in their schools vary according to the type of school.
When the activities of the teachers, who think that there is a measurement, and evaluation system in their schools, to apply this measurement, and evaluation system in their schools are analyzed, it has been observed that these activities are collected under five titles which are "Placement", " Reinforcement of learning", "Contribution to the quality of the system", "Evaluation," and "Documenting." The keywords collected for each school type under the title of "Placement" were written exam, question-answer, oral exam, outcome evaluation, ready-made tests, questions prepared by teachers based on outcome or taxonomy, new generation questions, test, and assessment of skills. The teachers who stated that they have a measurement and evaluation system in their schools and apply placement studies to actualize this system stated 32 opinions in public schools, 39 opinions in private schools, and 14 opinions in IB schools.
The keywords for "Learning Reinforcement" are homework, praising or grading punishment, repetition, inquiry studies. The teachers who stated that they have a measurement and evaluation system in their schools and perform learning reinforcement studies to actualize this system stated eight opinions in public schools, four opinions in private schools, and five opinions in IB schools. The most prominent learning reinforcement studies were homework, and repetition in public schools; repetition in private schools, and inquiry studies in IB schools. It can be said that the studies that are carried only in IB schools are inquiry studies.
The keywords for "Contribution to the Quality of the System" are acting fairly, making it more enjoyable, group cooperation, butterfly system, comfortable classroom environments, Web 2.0 tools, making it understandable, having an R&D team, considering individual differences, associating with daily life, inter-disciplinary working, using a plagiarism program, setting the criteria with the students or informing the students about the criteria. The teachers, who stated that they have a measurement and evaluation system in their schools, and carry out studies that contribute to the quality of the system to actualize this system, stated 8 opinions in public schools, 11 opinions in private schools, and 15 opinions in IB schools. In this regard, the most prominent practices were acting fairly in public schools; considering individual differences, and group cooperation in private schools, and interdisciplinary working, and group cooperations, and setting the criteria with the students or informing the students about the criteria in IB schools. It can be said that the studies that are seen only in IB schools are about acting fairly, the R&D team, enabling active participation of students in the measurement, and evaluation processes, and the studies saw only in private schools are butterfly systems, plagiarism programs, and Web 2.0 tools.
The key words collected for each school type under the "Evaluation" title are feedback, observation forms, performance evaluation, portfolio, self-peer assessment, process-oriented evaluation, rubric, criteria-based evaluation. The teachers who stated that they have a measurement and evaluation system in their schools and apply evaluation studies to actualize this system stated 26 opinions in public schools, 35 opinions in private schools, and 20 opinions in IB schools. The most prominent evaluation studies were feedback and performance in public schools, feedback, and process-oriented evaluation in private schools, and rubric, and process-oriented evaluation in IB schools. It can be said that studies that were seen only in IB schools are self-awareness, scales, and rubric.
The keywords for the "Documentation title" are analysis results, improvement reports, and education planning. The teachers who stated that they have a measurement and evaluation system in their schools, and document information to actualize this system stated two opinions from public schools, one opinion from private schools, and ten opinions from IB schools. Even though the analysis and reporting studies were mentioned once, planning and education planning studies have become prominent in IB schools.

Frequency of using tools, and techniques, documenting, and sharing of the information
Teachers were asked to grade 10 different measurements, and evaluation tools, and techniques ranging from 1 to 6 as "1: Never, 2: Once a year, three maximum once in a semester, 4: Once a month, 5: Once a week, 6: Always". The data obtained were grouped under four headings as the frequency of teachers' using (a) tools, and techniques, (b) documenting, (c) sharing them with students, and (d) parents. A chi-square difference test was conducted on whether these four topics differed among schools or not. In order to interpret the results related to the significance test at the level of 0.05 correctly, it is essential that the expected value of the number of rows being less than five should not exceed 20% (Field, 2009). For this reason, the number of rows was examined, categories 1, 2, and 3 were combined as "maximum once in a semester", and categories 5 and 6 were combined as "at least once a week." The chi-square test results of public and IB schools concerning the frequency of using measurement and evaluation tools/techniques are stated in Table 2. Categories 1, 2, 3, and four are combined as "at least once a month" to provide the ratio expected to be less than 20% in the frequency tables of "monitoring" of students and "feedback." Table 2 demonstrates that the frequency of teachers' observing students, and giving feedback, performance evaluation (presentation, discussion, role play, etc.), multiple-choice questions, and using open-ended tasks are at least once a week in all three school types, and the frequency of using portfolio is at most once in all three school types. These frequencies did not differ according to school type (p <0.05). Therefore, values related to these tools and techniques are not included in the table.  While the majority of the teachers working at public schools stated that they use the self and peer assessment, checklists, and rubric once in a semester at most, the majority of the ones from the private schools and IB schools said they use them at least once a week. The highest frequency is "at least once a week" in IB schools. These differences between the rates significant at the 0.05 level. While the frequency of use in IB schools, and private schools was at least once a week in general, the frequency of use in public schools was at most once in the period.
The results of the chi-square test regarding the frequency of documenting the information collected through measurement and evaluation by the teachers working in public schools, IB schools, and private schools are given in Table 3.  The data on Table 3 reveals that the highest frequency rate of documenting the information obtained by teachers by observing students, and feedback in every school type is at least once a week, but this rate is higher in IB schools than others. It is also seen that the highest frequency rate of the public and private school teachers to record the information they obtained through the portfolio was maximum once in a semester, and the highest rate of this frequency in IB schools was s at least once a week. While they stated with the highest rate that they recorded the information they obtained through the use of performance evaluation, self, and peer assessment, checklists, and grading key at most maximum once in a semester in public schools, while in the private schools, and IB schools they recorded them at least once a week. These differences between the rates were found significant at the 0.05 level. The highest value of these rates was observed in IB schools.
The frequency of documenting the information collected through multiple-choice questions in public schools, and IB schools varied from at most maximum once in a semester, toat least once a month in private schools. Nevertheless, the highest frequency of documenting the information collected through the use of open-ended tasks was at least once a week in every school type. These rates did not show significant differences (p <0.05). Therefore, the values related to these frequencies were not included in the table. The frequency of documented information collected from multiplechoice questions and open-ended tasks in public schools, IB schools, and private schools do not change.
The results of the chi-square test of teachers working in public school, IB school, and private schools regarding the frequency of sharing the measurement and evaluation results with students have been given in Table 4. The highest frequency of the teachers observing the students, and sharing the information they obtained with open-ended tasks with their students was indicated as at least once a week in all three school types. It was observed that the highest frequency of sharing the information they obtained with the portfolio with their students was at most maximum of once in a semester in all three school types. It was observed that the frequency of teachers to share the information they obtain with multiple choice questions, performance evaluation, self, and peer assessment, checklist, and grading key with their students was at most maximum of once in a semester in public schools, at least once a week in private, and IB schools. These differences between the rates were found to be significant at the 0.05 level. The highest value of these rates was observed in IB schools.
The highest frequency of teachers to share the information they obtained with feedback is stated at least once a week in all three school types. These differences between rates were not found statistically significant at the 0.05 level. There is no difference between school types. Therefore, the values related to these frequencies are not included in the table.
The results of the chi-square test of teachers working in public school, IB school, and private schools regarding the frequency of sharing the measurement and evaluation results with parents have been given in Table 5.  As can be seen at the table the frequency of teachers' sharing the information obtained by observing the students with their parents was at most once in the public schools, and at least once a week in private and IB schools. It was seen that the frequency of sharing the information they obtained through performance evaluation with their parents was at most once in the public schools, once in IB schools, and at least once a week in private schools. These differences between ratios were not found statistically significant at the 0.05 level. Therefore, the values related to these frequencies are not included in the table. There is no difference between the frequency of sharing the information by observing students and evaluating performance with parents.
It was seen that the highest frequency of teachers' sharing the information with their parents that were collected through feedback was maximum of once in a semester in public schools, and at least once a week in private and IB schools. The frequency of sharing the information through multiple choice questions was at most maximum once in a semester in public and IB schools, and at least once in Private schools. The frequency of sharing the information with their parents that they obtain through open-ended tasks was at most once in public schools, and private schools, at least once a week in IB schools; The highest frequency of sharing the information with their parents that they obtain with the portfolio, self, and peer assessment, checklist, and grading key was maximum of once in a semester in all three school types. These differences between the rates were found statistically significant at the 0.05 level. The frequency of information sharing with parents varies between schools. While the frequency of sharing with parents in IB schools, and private schools was at least once a week in general, it was generally observed at most maximum once in a semester in public schools. The highest value of these rates was observed in IB schools.

Discussion, Conclusion and Implications
In this research, the measurement and evaluation studies of the teachers working at MEB public, private, and IB schools in Turkey and their opinions on this subject were examined. The findings of the research mainly included the concepts that came to their minds of teachers firstly when measurement and evaluation were mentioned. These concepts were grouped under "Basic Concepts", "Statistics", "What Do We Assess?", "Why do We Assess?" and "How Do We Assess?" titles.
Fairness and holistic evaluation are the concepts were seen in only one school under the title of "Basic Concepts". The holistic evaluation concept was more prominent in IB schools, and was considered as a more suitable method for making decisions about students, especially in the transition to European universities that accept students without an entrance exam (IBO, 2018d). Due to the frequent use of exams and tests in public schools and private schools for evaluation, decision making based on the rank and score of the students was more common (Gelbal & Kelecioğlu, 2007). Therefore, it was thought that the concept of justice does not stand out since the concept of justice differs, and the evaluation for individual development in IB schools does not aim to rank.
It was seen that the prominent concepts of the "Statistics" title were similar in IB and private schools. This can be a result of having a school coordinator or measurement and evaluation expert in private and IB schools that enable the teachers to evaluate their questions.
Process evaluation studies were more prominent in IB schools than in other schools because studies were carried out to enable mastery learning, and to monitor and develop the students concerning their individual differences (IBO, 2018d). Accordingly, the prominent concepts as an answer to "What do we assess?" question in IB schools were expected to be process, outcome, and skill. Consequently, individualization of the curriculum would contribute to mastery learning not only when special education is needed but also when it has a flexible structure that can be differentiated according to the need of each student (Ayyıldız & Üzümcü, 2016).
It has been seen that the most prominent concept for the answer to "Why do we assess?" question is feedback in all school types. Reflective thinking, differentiation, needs assessment, planning, and reporting was not only performed to assess the students, but was also seen as a means to support learning, and performed for evaluation at IB schools. This finding was supported by the study results reported by Toe et al. (2015), and by the study results of Guler Yaltirik (2011) with the idea that teachers regard the measurement, and evaluation as the strength of IB.
It was seen that the answer to the "How do we assess?" question, the measurement, and evaluation tools used in public schools focused on the preparation of exams, and in private schools, both exam and development of the student is considered. It has been observed that tools are differentiated according to the needs of the students to serve the IB learner profile based on inquiry, and skill development (IBO, 2018d). This finding showed similarities with the study results reported by Toe et al. (2015).
The second research question about whether the teachers have a measurement and evaluation system that they use at their schools and if so how they implement this system at their the classrooms. The measurement and evaluation system planned to be used at schools by teachers, and education practitioners were included in the MEB curriculum, and they were free to implement these in the classroom in accordance with their competencies; but its implication was emphasized (MEB, 2013;2018;. However, in IB schools, measurement, and evaluation practices required to be applied, recorded, and reported (IBO, 2018d). 48% of the teachers in public schools, 83% of the private school teachers, and 93% of the IB school teachers stated that they applied a measurement and evaluation system. It was seen that the rate in public schools was quite less than the other school types. The studies of Guler, and Yaltirik (2011), and Toe et al. (2015) indicated the strength of IB as the regular evaluation of their measurement and evaluation practices by IBO officials. This requirement varied in private schools in line with the school policies. Therefore, it could be said that an inspection mechanism is needed in order to enable the teachers to apply and adopt the measurement and evaluation practices.
The teachers with a measurement and evaluation system in their schools, the ones mentioning about the activities carried out to apply this system was 69% of all participants. Participant expressions were grouped under "Summative", "Reinforcement of Learning", "Contributing to The Quality of The System", "Evaluation Practices" and " Documenting of Collected İnformation" titles.
It could be said that the teachers who stated having "Summative" practices, the studies which varied according to the schools were the assessment of skills, writing questions in line with the outcome-taxonomy, new generation questions. It could be stated that this differentiation was mainly a result of exam-focused preparation of students in public and private schools. These findings obtained for public schools also match up with the findings of other studies in the literature (Arda, 2009;Gök & Şahin, 2009;Yapıcı & Demirdelen, 2007). It was seen that the cognitive level of the students' learning or their deficiencies were determined by writing questions based on the outcome, and taxonomy in private schools.
It could be said that the teachers who stated having "Reinforcement of Learning" practices, the studies which vary according to the schools were inquiry studies. Within this context, the learning reinforcement studies were limited to the traditional level in public and private schools, and they focused on the reinforcement of skills in IB schools. This situation also indicates that IB schools adopted the philosophy specified by IBO (2012;2018b;2018c;2018d) at the school level. It can be said that, especially in IB schools (Kauffman, 2005), the national-international perspectives gained by teachers in the process of developing students' learning through inquiry-based studies diversify teacher competencies.
It was seen that for the teachers who stated that they "Contributed to The Quality of The System", the most prominent studies were acting fairly in public schools; considering individual differences, and group cooperation in private schools, and inter-disciplinary working, and group cooperations, and setting the criteria with the students or informing the students about the criteria in IB schools. It was thought that this matched up with the expectations of IBO (2012) and that all educational situations in IB schools were prepared in a learner-centered manner to serve the themes in cooperation with other groups. When the practices of teachers, especially in public, and private schools, were examined, it was seen that they tend towards studies such as fairness, R&D team, butterfly system, or Web 2.0 tools. In this case, it could be said that teachers need more effective support in order to contribute to the quality of the system.
The most prominent studies of teachers who state that they do "Evaluation" studies were feedback and performance evaluation in public schools. While the most prominent studies were the feedback and process-oriented evaluation in private schools, IB schools have grading key and process-oriented evaluation. In this case, it can be said that process-oriented studies are carried out in the evaluation studies in all three school types.
The key words collected according to schools under the "Documenting" title were analysis results, improvement reports, and education planning. The teachers who stated that they had a measurement and evaluation system in their schools, and document the data to actualize this system stated two opinions in public schools, one opinion in private schools, and ten opinions in IB schools.
Even though studies like analysis and reporting were mentioned only once by the teachers who stated having "Documenting of Collected İnformation", studies, planning, and education planning studies have become prominent, especially in IB schools. The reason for this could be indicated as the requirement of evaluation (Güler & Yaltırık, 2011;Toe et al., 2015) to continue IB accreditation. Therefore, it was seen that program evaluation practices, and particularly systematic tracking of their application, required to be given importance. Additionally, it was thought that in-service training studies would help to eliminate the differences between these schools, especially when focused on education planning according to the assessment results.
In the findings concerning the third research question, the frequencies of teachers' using ten given measurement and evaluation techniques stated, documenting of collected information, and sharing this information with students and parents are compared.
In the studies that Gelbal and Kelecioğlu (2007) analyzed the teachers' opinions, they stated that teachers mostly prefer traditional methods, and use the methods for self-assessment of students less frequently. This contradicts with the findings that when the frequency of use of tools and methods were examined, frequency of observation of the students, feedback, performance evaluation (presentation, discussion, role play, etc), multiple-choice questions, open-ended tasks, portfolio use did not differ. As a result of this, it could be said that teachers currently have started to see the complementary measurement and evaluation approaches as a part of the education process.
When the frequency of teachers' documenting collected information was analyzed, it was seen that documenting the frequency of multiple-choice questions, and open-ended tasks did not differ between schools; The frequency of observing students, feedback, performance evaluation (presentation, discussion, role play, etc.), portfolio, self, and peer assessment, checklist, grading key is found to be higher in IB schools than in other schools. This finding matched up with the opinions mentioned in the report prepared by Toe et al. (2015), stating that teachers use different assessment tools together, and record the information they obtained by adopting the concept of developmental continuity.
When the frequency of sharing the information collected by the teachers with the students was analyzed, it was seen that there was a difference in all tools and methods except feedback, and their frequency was higher in IB schools than in other schools. It could be said that teachers, especially the ones working in private and public schools, used the evaluation to grade or review their educational status. However, students needed to be informed about these results in order to guide their learning. When the frequency of sharing the information with parents was analyzed, there was a difference in all tools, and methods except for observing students, and evaluating performance; the frequency of multiple-choice questions and peer assessment was observed higher in private schools, and the frequency of other tools and methods was higher in IB schools. It draws attention that while the frequency of giving feedback to students does not differ, the frequency of giving feedback to the data differs. Toe et al. (2015) emphasized the importance of effective feedback rather than personally praising the students to themselves and their parents.
The findings revealed that in-class applications of teachers in public, private, and IB schools differ in line with the school goals. Consequently, the use of curricula in which the expectations of MEB or any school from "measurement, and evaluation are stated clearly in writing, and sample applications, and studies to implement are given with all details, will ensure making a qualified measurement, and evaluation by enabling teachers to adapt their work. Also, it can be suggested to have a measurement and evaluation specialist and a program development expert at schools in order to provide support for the development of student learning with measurement, and evaluation, and feedback that is needed by teachers. In this way, the necessary support to assess, and develop high-order thinking skills by considering the result, and process together, and with the individual differences. Similarly, when the schools were inspected, the frequency of using measurement and evaluation tools and methods increases. Accountability would be provided by establishing external inspecting mechanisms, and each school will be inspected. The reasons for these findings should be studied in more detail. Finally, studies similar to the ones in IB schools could be carried out in private and public schools, and the effectiveness of these studies could be evaluated by action research.