Policy for the Assessment of Learning Outcomes-2026.pdf

1.1 This Policy for the Assessment of Learning Outcomes (hereinafter referred to as the Policy) specifies the principles, requirements, and procedures for assessing the learning outcomes at Al-Farabi Kazakh National University NJSC (hereinafter referred to as the University) based on approved criteria, as well as mechanisms for improving the quality of assessment aimed at unlocking students’ individual potential and improving teaching and learning methods.

1.2 The Policy aims to ensure the objective, transparent, and consistent assessment of students’ achievement of learning outcomes in educational programs, as well as to improve teaching and learning methods.

1.3 This policy has been developed and is implemented in accordance with the current legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, including legislation in the field of science and higher and/or postgraduate education, and the University’s internal policies and regulations, taking into account the University’s priorities and objectives, as well as international approaches to the assessment of learning outcomes (Appendix 1).

1.4 The requirements of this Policy apply to students, academic staff, managers, and employees of the University’s departments, as well as other persons concerned

2.1 Academic calendar – the master schedule that structures the flow of the academic year. It outlines key dates for instruction, registration, exams, holidays, public holidays, and graduation, serving as a planning backbone for students, faculty, and administrators.

2.2 Academic credit – the unified unit to measure the volume of research and/or academic work (workload) undertaken by students and/or lecturers, required to achieve the educational programme learning outcomes.

2.3 Academic integrity – a set of principles and norms of ethical conduct in educational, research, and administrative activities, including the prevention of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, collusion, and other forms of academic misconduct.

2.4 Academic Committee on the Quality of Teaching and Learning – a collegial advisory body of the University faculty that coordinates methodological support for ensuring and improving the quality of teaching and learning at the faculty, including analysis and monitoring of compliance with the internal quality assurance system based on international standards, as well as improving the effectiveness and efficiency of academic activities.

2.5 Grade-rating and letter grading system of educational achievements – a system for assessing the level of academic achievements using the grades that correspond to the letter grading system, with numerical equivalents being accepted in international practice, which allows determining the students’ academic ranking.

2.6 Academic Affairs Department (AAD) – a structural unit of the University responsible for planning, organizing, and improving teaching and learning, based on monitoring, analysis, and quality assurance of educational activities.

2.7 Distance learning – a mode of learning involving interaction between the teacher and students at a distance, including the use of information and communication technologies and telecommunications.

2.8 Distance learning technologies – the information and communication technologies and telecommunications used in distance learning.

2.9 European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) – a system for measuring the workload of educational programs and academic disciplines, used for the accumulation and transfer of academic credits between higher and postgraduate education institutions.

2.10 Indicators of learning outcomes achievement – specific, observable, and measurable criteria that make it possible to determine the extent to which a particular learning outcome has been achieved.

2.11 Information System Univer (IS Univer) – an information and software complex Univer.kaznu.kz, which represents a comprehensive system for the administration and management of the University’s educational activities, covering the full cycle of the learning process.

2.12 Qualification examination – a procedure for assessing the extent to which students have mastered the curriculum and/or modules and other forms of academic activity specified in the educational program in accordance with the national compulsory standard for higher and postgraduate education.

2.13 Competence – an ability to apply knowledge, skills, and personal qualities to solve professional challenges.

2.14 Credit learning technology – a system of study where the students may choose and independently plan the sequence of study of disciplines and/or modules with academic credits accumulation.

2.15 Assessment criteria – pre-defined and clearly formulated indicators of learning outcomes, used to determine a student’s performance in coursework.

2.16 Assessment of learning outcomes – a process of determining the extent to which the students have achieved the learning outcomes, based on established criteria and assessment procedures.

2.17 Educational program (EP) – a comprehensive set of basic characteristics of education, including its goals, outcomes, content, organization, methods of implementation, and criteria for evaluating learning outcomes.

2.18 Midterm assessment of students – a procedure conducted during the examination session in order to assess the extent to which the students have mastered the content of part of the full scope of the academic discipline after completion of its study.

2.19 Learning outcomes – the knowledge, skills, and competencies demonstrated by a student upon completion of a learning process, as confirmed through assessment.

2.20 Criterion-based assessment rubrics – an assessment tool containing assessment criteria, descriptors of task performance levels, and the basis for awarding credits for the relevant type of coursework.

2.21 Syllabus – is an academic course working program. The format, structure, and procedure for developing and approving academic course working programs (syllabuses) are determined by the University.

2.22 Students’ educational achievements – the knowledge, skills, and competencies acquired by students during the learning process, reflecting their level of academic development.

3.1 The purpose of assessment is to objectively verify the extent to which the students have achieved the learning outcomes and to ensure that every student has the opportunity to demonstrate their level of achievement for the award of academic credits and/or the conferment of the relevant qualification.

3.2 Assessment principles:

- systematic approach – assessment is performed in a consistent and integrated manner throughout all stages of studying the subject, module, or curriculum;

- сumulativity (cumulative grading system) – assessment of learning outcomes for the course is based on the overall results achieved by the student during the academic term on several interrelated assessment activities. The grade is determined based on the results of formative, midterm, and summative assessments, in accordance with a predetermined grading scheme. It is not permitted to replace summative assessments by awarding the majority of grades based solely on the results of a single assessment.

- objectivity – correspondence between the assigned grade and the actual level at which the students achieve the learning outcomes;

- validity – assessment procedures are aimed at verification of learning outcomes that have been achieved and checking compliance with the intended learning outcomes;

- reliability – assessment results are consistent and reproducible, subject to compliance with the established quality control procedures;

- transparency – assessment criteria, formats, and procedures are pre-established, published, and available to students;

- inclusivity and fairness – assessment ensures equal opportunities for students to demonstrate their achievements, including their individual educational needs;

- authenticity – assessment tasks reflect the real conditions or conditions for the knowledge and skills application that are close to the professional activity;

- consistency – assessment methods correspond to the learning outcomes and teaching methods used.

4.1 The methods and forms of assessment of learning outcomes at the University are student-centered and ensure transparency of assessment criteria, comparability of results, academic integrity, and objective confirmation of the achievement of learning outcomes. 

4.2 Assessment methods should be consistent with the learning outcomes of the discipline and the indicators of their achievement.

4.3 The University uses criterion assessment, a system for evaluating students' academic achievements based on comparing achieved results with pre-established and communicated criteria aligned with learning outcomes and their indicators. Criterion-based assessment includes formative and summative assessment.

4.4 Formative assessment is carried out during the course of mastering the discipline and is aimed at obtaining current information about the student's progress in achieving learning outcomes, identifying difficulties, providing feedback, and timely correction of the educational process. Formative assessment is carried out in the forms provided by the syllabus of the discipline.

4.5 Summative assessment is carried out upon completion of a certain stage of mastering the discipline and is aimed at establishing and fixing the level of achievement of learning outcomes for the relevant period. It is used in the performance of assessment tasks provided for by the syllabus of the discipline, including tasks of independent work of the student, as well as in the final control.

4.6 The following forms of assessment are used at the University:

- oral;

- written;

- practical;

- test-based assessment;

- combined;

- use of digital assessment technologies, including learning management systems (LMS), online testing, and other digital tools;

- other forms that provide confirmation of the achievement of learning outcomes.

4.7 Within the framework of these forms of assessment, various types of assessment tasks can be used, including practical, design, research, creative, and analytical tasks, cases, essays, laboratory work, test tasks, and protection of completed works.

4.8 The selection of methods, forms of assessment, and types of assessment tasks is carried out by the teacher, taking into account the learning outcomes of the discipline, indicators of their achievement, the content of the discipline, the level of training of students, and the need to comply with the principles of objectivity, validity, reliability, transparency, cumulativeness, and academic integrity.

4.9 The educational process uses modern approaches to assessing learning outcomes, including self-assessment, peer assessment, as well as digital assessment technologies, including learning management systems (LMS), online testing, and other digital tools aimed at improving the objectivity and transparency of assessment and developing students’ independent learning skills.

5.1 Formative and summative assessments are implemented within the framework of current, midterm, and final controls, depending on the objectives, the stage of discipline development, and the nature of the assessment event. 

5.2 Current control is a systematic review of students' academic achievements in accordance with the syllabus, carried out by the teacher in classroom and extracurricular activities during the academic period.

5.3 The current control is cumulative and ensures step-by-step monitoring of mastery of the discipline content and achievement of learning outcomes.

5.4 The distribution of points for current control is reflected in the syllabus of the discipline by week and type of academic work, taking into account learning outcomes, assessment criteria, the complexity and scope of tasks, as well as the need for timely feedback to students.

5.5 Midterm control is carried out in accordance with the academic calendar and is designed to assess the degree of achievement of learning outcomes over the relevant period of mastering the discipline.

5.6 Midterm control is an element of cumulative assessment. The midterm assessment is the sum of the assessments for the current assessment results stipulated by the syllabus.

5.7 The University establishes midterm control (MT1 and MT2). In the case of modular and trimester studies, the periods of border control are determined by the academic calendar.

5.8 Final control is aimed at assessing the degree of achievement of learning outcomes in the discipline as a whole and is carried out in accordance with the procedure, forms, and platforms established by the University's «Academic Policy», «Rules for Conducting Final Control», and «Instructions for Conducting Final Control Using Distance Learning Technologies». 

5.9 The forms of current, midterm, and final control, assessment criteria, point distribution, list of assessment measures, and their relationship to learning outcomes should be reflected in the syllabus of the discipline and communicated to students at the beginning of the academic period; adjustments are allowed within the limits established by the University’s «Academic Policy», with mandatory notification of students.

5.10 When designing an assessment, the teacher ensures that the assessment measures comply with the stated learning outcomes, principles of objectivity, validity, reliability, transparency, fairness, consistency and cumulativeness. It is not allowed to substitute systematic assessment by assigning the majority of points based on the results of a single assessment event (Appendix 2).

5.11 The transfer of the results of mastering massive open online courses (MOOCs) is allowed in accordance with the procedure established by the «Academic Policy» of the University and the «Regulation on the procedure for recognizing the results of formal and non-formal education, professional qualifications».

5.12 The procedure for admission to the final control, the terms and forms of its conduct, the procedure for making grades, the rules of appeal, retake, accounting for grades FX, F, I, AU, as well as other procedural issues, are regulated by the «Academic Policy» of the University, the «Rules for conducting Final control» and other internal policies and regulations.

5.13 The formation of the final control of the discipline is carried out according to the point-rating letter system for assessing students' academic achievements in accordance with the procedure established by the "Academic Policy" of the University.

6.1 Criteria for evaluating learning outcomes are pre-established, clearly formulated, verifiable indicators of learning outcomes, based on which the student's level of performance on relevant academic assignments and the degree of achievement of the stated learning outcomes in the discipline are determined.

6.2 Criteria for evaluating learning outcomes:

- correspond to learning outcomes and their indicators;

- are clear, measurable, observable, and verifiable;

- ensure objectivity, transparency, and comparability of the learning outcomes;

- are applied uniformly when evaluating the same type of tasks;

- allow one to determine the level of completion of the task and the basis for awarding points on a 100-point scale in accordance with the point-rating letter system for assessing the academic achievements of students, with their translation into the traditional grading scale and ECTS.

6.3 Criteria for evaluating learning outcomes are specified in the syllabus of the discipline approved by the dean of the faculty.

6.4 For tasks, with the exception of tests, the teacher develops criterion-based assessment rubrics, which are included in the syllabus and in the Final control program for the discipline. 

6.5 Тhe teacher explains the assessment criteria to the students before they begin completing the task. 

6.6 Assessment criteria provide a direct link between the assessment task, the learning outcomes, the indicator of its achievement, and the level of completion of the task.

6.7 Changing the assessment criteria and criterion-based assessment rubrics after the start of the task is not permitted.

7.1 Students

7.1.1 Students have the right to:

- familiarize themselves with the syllabus of discipline during the first week of training;

- receive information about the learning outcomes in the discipline and assessment criteria; 

- contact the teacher for clarification on the application of assessment criteria, criterion-based assessment rubrics, scoring, and assigning grades;

- file an appeal based on the results of the final assessment in accordance with the procedure established by the “Rules for Conducting the Final Assessment” and other internal regulatory documents of the University.

7.1.2 Students are required to:

- perform all types of tasks provided for by the discipline syllabus; 

- adhere to established deadlines for completing assignments;

- comply with approved assessment procedures;

- comply with the requirements of academic integrity when performing all types of assignments and passing current, midterm, and final controls.

7.2 Academic staff

7.2.1 Academic staff shall:

- independently determine the forms and methods of assessing the learning outcomes within the limits established by the discipline syllabus;

- develop assessment tasks taking into account the specifics of the discipline, provided that they comply with the learning outcomes, achievement indicators, and assessment principles established by this Policy;

- submit proposals for improving the assessment policy of the learning outcomes to the University management (head of department, dean of faculty, director of the Department of Academic Affairs, Member of the Board - vice-rector in charge of academic affairs);

- apply assessment methods and tools that correspond to the learning outcomes and the specifics of the discipline.

7.2.2 Teachers are required to:

- develop a syllabus of the discipline indicating learning outcomes, indicators of their achievement, forms of control, assessment criteria, point distribution, and the structure of the final assessment;

- ensure that assessment tasks and evaluation criteria comply with the stated learning outcomes and indicators of their achievement;

- carry out the assessment objectively, transparently, uniformly, and in accordance with the approved criterion-based assessment rubrics;

- observe the cumulative nature of the assessment and the approved distribution of points by type of academic work;

- refrain from changing the assessment criteria, criterion-based assessment rubrics, and the distribution of points after the start of the relevant assignment;

- provide timely feedback to students based on assessment results;

- submit the results of the current, midterm, and final controls to the IS Univer within the timeframes established by the “Academic Calendar”;

- ensure compliance with the requirements of academic integrity when assessing the learning outcomes. 

8.1 The analysis of learning outcomes assessment is an element of the internal quality assurance system in education and is aimed at:

- assessment of the objectivity, reliability, and comparability of learning outcomes;

- identifying factors affecting students’ academic performance and the achievement of learning outcomes; 

- identifying problems and inconsistencies in the organization and procedures for evaluating the learning outcomes; 

- improvement of methods, tools, and procedures for assessing the learning outcomes; 

- enhancing the quality of teaching and learning. 

8.2 The analysis of assessment results is carried out at the following levels:

- discipline level – by the teacher upon completion of the academic period; 

- department level – the head, deputy head for academic, methodological and educational work based on the results of examination sessions in terms of disciplines, teachers, study groups, and streams; 

- faculty level – the dean, deputy dean for educational and methodological work, and members of the Academic Committee on the quality of teaching and learning based on the results of examination sessions in the context of departments, educational programs, courses, and student contingent; 

- university level – Member of the Board - Vice-Rector for Academic Affairs, Director of the Department of Academic Affairs, Academic Quality Assurance Division, based on the results of the winter and summer examination sessions, in order to identify university-wide trends and systemic risks in the assessment of the learning outcomes. 

8.3 As part of the analysis of the evaluation of the learning outcomes, the following are considered:

- distribution of final grades across disciplines;

- proportion of students with academic deficiencies; 

- results of the final assessment of students;

- comparability of the learning outcomes for similar disciplines;

- comparability of current, midterm, and final control results within a discipline; 

- cases of significant discrepancies between a student’s performance during the academic period and final control results;

- results of appeals and student complaints regarding the correctness, transparency, and fairness of assessment;

- cases of violation of evaluation procedures;

- cases of violation of the principles of academic honesty.

8.4 If necessary, a comparative analysis of the dynamics of indicators for several academic periods is carried out, as well as additional analysis in the context of discipline, educational program, study group, teacher, or student.

8.5 Analytical reports on the results of the analysis of the degree of achievement of the learning outcomes are discussed:

- at a department meeting; 

- at meetings of the Academic Committee for Teaching and Learning Quality and the Faculty Academic Council; 

- at meetings of the University Academic Council at least twice per academic year. 

8.6 The summarized results of the analysis of the achievements of the learning outcomes must be communicated to the teaching staff.

8.7 Based on the results of reviewing analytical reports, decisions are made aimed at:

- adjustment and improvement of criteria, forms, and procedures for evaluating the learning outcomes;

- professional development of academic staff on issues of criteria-based, cumulative, and student-centered assessment of the educational process; 

- strengthening control over compliance with the procedures for assessing the learning outcomes;

- development and implementation of corrective and preventive measures to eliminate identified non-conformities and the causes of their occurrence.

9.1 Students, faculty and employees of the University are responsible for violating the requirements of this Policy, the University’s “Academic Policy,” and other internal regulatory documents of the University governing the assessment of learning outcomes.

9.2 Violation of the requirements of this Policy shall entail the application of liability measures provided for by the internal regulatory documents of the University.

9.3 The grounds, procedure for considering violations and measures of responsibility of students, faculty and employees of the University are established by the “Academic Policy” of the University, the “Academic Integrity Policy”, the “Rules for Conducting Final Assessment”, as well as other internal regulatory documents of the University. 

9.4 Violations will be reviewed based on the principles of objectivity, transparency, and academic integrity

10.1 This Policy is reviewed and approved by the University Academic Council for a period not exceeding 3 (three) years. Upon the expiration of this period, the document shall be subject to revision.

10.2 The Policy may be updated prior to the established deadline in the event of changes in the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan or the University’s internal policies and regulations.

10.3 Decisions regarding the approval, amendment, supplementation, or repeal of this Policy are made at a meeting of the University Academic Council. 

10.4 This Policy shall be published on the official website of the University and communicated to all participants in the educational process.

10.5 Oversight of the updating of this Policy is assigned to the Academic Affairs Department.  

10.6 This Policy shall enter into force on the date of its approval by the University Academic Council. 

Regulatory Legal Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan

1. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Education” (No. 319-III dated July 27, 2007);

2. Concept for the Development of Higher Education and Science in the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2023–2029; 

3. State Compulsory Standards of Higher and Postgraduate Education (SCES HE RK) (Order of the Minister of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 20, 2022, No. 2); 

4. Rules for Organizing the Educational Process under the Credit Technology of Education in Higher and (or) Postgraduate Education Institutions (Order of the Minister of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 20, 2011, No. 152);

5. Standard Rules for the Activities of Higher and (or) Postgraduate Education Institutions (Order of the Minister of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 30, 2018, No. 595);

6. ECTS Users’ Guide (European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System);

7. Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG).

Internal Regulatory Documents of the University

1. Charter of the NJSC “Al-Farabi Kazakh National University” (Order of the Chairman of the Committee for State Property and Privatization of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated August 25, 2020, No. 512);

2. Academic Policy of the NJSC “Al-Farabi Kazakh National University”;

3. Rules for Conducting Final Assessment;

4. Instruction on Conducting Final Assessment Using Distance Learning Technologies.

1.This Appendix defines the requirements for the distribution of points across types of academic work in a course syllabus.

2. The distribution of points must ensure the cumulative nature of assessment, transparency, fairness, and phased monitoring of the achievement of learning outcomes throughout the academic period and must also prevent the concentration of the majority of points in a single assessment event or within the week of midterm control.

3. For each midterm control, the maximum number of points is 100. 

4. Distribution of points within each midterm control:

Note: * deviations are allowed with justification by the department

5. Points are distributed by weeks and types of academic work, taking into account learning outcomes of the course, assessment criteria, workload, and complexity of tasks, the logic of mastering the course content, and the need for timely feedback to students.

6. The syllabus must specify:

- all assessment events by week;

- the maximum score for each assessment event;

- assessment criteria;

- the alignment of each assessment event with the corresponding learning outcomes;

- the procedure for calculating grades for Midterm 1 (MT1) and Midterm 2 (MT2).

7. The following are not permitted:

- assigning the majority of points of a midterm control based on a single assessment event;

- redistribution of points after the syllabus has been communicated to students;

- use of assessment forms and criteria not provided for in the syllabus;

- replacing current control with a single final assessment event at the end of the midterm control;

- exceeding the maximum limits established in Clause 4 of this Appendix.

8. For courses involving computational, proof-based, project-based, research, laboratory, creative, or other complex tasks, integrative forms of assessment may be used, provided they are included in the syllabus in advance, aligned with learning outcomes, and comply with the requirements of this Appendix.

9. In exceptional cases determined by the specifics of the discipline, deviations from the requirements of Clause 4 of this Appendix are allowed based on a reasoned conclusion of the department, agreed with the faculty academic committee, and approved by the authorized University unit before the start of the semester. Such deviations must be reflected in the syllabus and communicated to students before the course begins.

10. Compliance with these Requirements is monitored during syllabus review, monitoring of learning outcomes assessment, and consideration of student appeals.

11. Syllabuses that do not comply with this Appendix must be revised before the start of the academic period.