SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Milli Eğitim Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 54 Sayı: 247

Comparative Examination of Exams Used in Applying to Postgraduate Programs: The Case of GRE, GMAT and ALES

Lisansüstü Programlara Başvuruda Kullanılan Sınavların Karşılaştırmalı İncelenmesi: GRE, GMAT ve ALES Örneği

Tansu Alan(ADIYAMAN UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-5855-0302
Seher Yalçın(ANKARA UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-0177-6727
Pages
1801–1832
Publication Date
2025-08-01
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conducted as a case study within qualitative research methods, a comprehensive literature review was performed, and a comparative analysis was used to evaluate the data obtained.The results indicate that ALES comprises subtests that assess similar skills to those measured by GRE and GMAT and employs comparable reliability methods.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In Türkiye, the Academic Staff and Graduate Education Entrance Exam (ALES) is widely used for admission to graduate programs, while internationally, the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) and the Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT) are preferred.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Given that ALES, GMAT, and GRE are key exams used to measure academic and professional success, this study aims to compare these exams based on their purpose, subtests, scaling, psychometric properties, test security, test theory, and administration methods.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conducted as a case study within qualitative research methods, a comprehensive literature review was performed, and a comparative analysis was used to evaluate the data obtained.The results indicate that ALES comprises subtests that assess similar skills to those measured by GRE and GMAT and employs comparable reliability methods.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Lisansüstü eğitim · ALES · GRE

Abstract

In Türkiye, the Academic Staff and Graduate Education Entrance Exam (ALES) is widely used for admission to graduate programs, while internationally, the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) and the Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT) are preferred. Given that ALES, GMAT, and GRE are key exams used to measure academic and professional success, this study aims to compare these exams based on their purpose, subtests, scaling, psychometric properties, test security, test theory, and administration methods. Conducted as a case study within qualitative research methods, a comprehensive literature review was performed, and a comparative analysis was used to evaluate the data obtained.The results indicate that ALES comprises subtests that assess similar skills to those measured by GRE and GMAT and employs comparable reliability methods. However, it was also found that ALES differs from GRE and GMAT in terms of its administration and underlying test theory. To elevate ALES to international test standards similar to GRE and GMAT, this study recommends implementing test equating and bias analysis in its development process, as well as introducing computer-based adaptive testing based on item response theory. These steps can help transform ALES into an exam with more standardized testing conditions, thereby contributing to a more valid and reliable assessment of candidates.

Özet

Türkiye'de lisansüstü programlara başvurularda yaygın olarak Akademik Personel ve Lisansüstü Eğitimi Giriş Sınavı (ALES) kullanılırken, uluslararası düzeyde Lisansüstü Eğitim Giriş Sınavı [Graduate Record Examination (GRE)] ve Lisansüstü Yönetim Kabul Sınavı [Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT)] tercih edilmektedir. ALES, GMAT ve GRE, akademik ve mesleki başarıyı ölçmek için kullanılan önemli sınavlar olmasından dolayı bu sınavların kullanım amacı, alt testleri, ölçeklenme şekli, psikometrik özellikleri, test güvenliği, test kuramı ve uygulanma şekli bakımından karşılaştırılmasını amaçlayan bu araştırma nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden durum çalışması olarak yürütülmüştür. Bu kapsamda alan yazın incelemesi yapılmış, elde edilen verilerin çözümlenmesinde karşılaştırmalı analiz yapılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, ALES’in GRE ve GMAT ile benzer becerileri ölçen benzer alt testlerden oluştuğu ve benzer güvenirlik yöntemlerinin kullanıldığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bunun yanı sıra ALES’in uygulanma şekli ve temel aldığı test kuramının GRE ve GMAT’ten farklı olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bu çalışmada, ALES'in GRE ve GMAT gibi uluslararası test standartlarına ulaşabilmesi için test geliştirme süreçlerinde test eşitleme ve yanlılık analizlerinin yapılması, ayrıca madde tepki kuramına dayalı bilgisayar tabanlı uyarlanabilir testlerin uygulanması önerilmektedir. Bu adımlar, ALES’in daha standart test koşullarını sağlayan bir sınav haline gelmesini mümkün kılarak, adayların daha geçerli ve güvenilir bir şekilde değerlendirilmesine katkıda bulunabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Alan, T., Yalçın, S. (2025). Comparative Examination of Exams Used in Applying to Postgraduate Programs: The Case of GRE, GMAT and ALES. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, Cilt: 54 Sayı: 247, 1801–1832. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.1577420

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

↗New Tab

Loading PDF document...

References (47)

  1. Aliustaoğlu, F., ve Tuna, A. (2016). Akademik personel ve lisansüstü eğitimi giriş sınavı (ALES) matematik sorularının MATH taksonomisine göre analizi. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(2), 126-137. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/trkefd/issue/24152/256284
  2. Arapgirlioğlu, H., Zahal, O., Gürpınar, E. ve Özhan, U. (2014). Lisansüstü programlara başvuran adayların ALES, yabancı dil ve mezuniyet not ortalamaları arasındaki ilişkiler (İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü Örneği). İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1(1), 30-40. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/inujgse/issue/8717/108866
  3. Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory. ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.
  4. Bedsole, C. B. (2013). Apples to apples? comparing the predctive validity of the GMAT and GRE for business schools, and building a better admissions formula. [Unpublished doctoral dissertion]. The University of Georgia.
  5. Bock, D.B., Muraki, E., & Pfeiffenberger, W. (1988). Item pool maintenance in the presence of item parameter drift. Journal of Educational Measurement, 25(4), 275-285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1988.tb00308.x
  6. Bulut, O. (2015). Applying item response theory models to Entrance Examination for Graduate Studies: Practical issues and insights. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 6(2), 313-330. https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.17523
  7. Coşkun, E. ve Tuna, A. (2021). ALES matematik sorularının MATH taksonomisine göre incelenmesi: 2006 –2013. Online Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (OJOMSTE),2(1), 43-54. https://www.ojomste.com/index.php/1
  8. Desjardins, C. D., & Bulut, O. (2018). Handbook of educational measurement and psychometrics using R. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  9. Donaldson, B. and McNicholas, C. (2004). Understanding the postgraduate education market for UK-based students: A review and empirical study. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 9(4), 288-379. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.259
  10. Embretson S. E., & Reise S. P. (2000). Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
  11. Espinosa, M. P., & Gardeazabal, J. (2010). Optimal correction for guessing in multiple-choice tests. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 54(5), 415–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2010.06.002
  12. Ercoşkun, M. (2020). Öğretmen adaylarının akademik ve ALES (Akademik Personel ve Lisansüstü Eğitimi Giriş Sınavı) başarı puanlarının incelenmesi. Akdeniz Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(33), 523-541. https://doi.org/10.29329/mjer.2020.272.24
  13. ETS (2024). The GRE general test. Educational Testing Service. https://www.ets.org/gre/test-takers/general-test/schedule.html
  14. ETS (2023). Guide to the use of scores. Educational Testing Service. https://www.ets.org/content/dam/ets-org/pdfs/gre/gre-guide-to-the-use-of-scores.pdf
  15. ETS (2024). A Snapshot of the Individual Who Took the GRE Genel Test. https://www.ets.org/pdfs/gre/snapshot.pdf?utm_source
  16. GMAT (2025). GMAT exam. Graduate Management Admission Council. https://www.mba.com
  17. GMAT (2024). GMAT™ Geographic Trend Report: Testing Year 2023. https://www.mba.com/-/media/files/gmac/research/geographic-trends/gmat-geographic-trend-report-testing-year-2023-pdf.pdf
  18. Hambleton, R., Swaminathan, R., & Rogers, H.J. (1991). Fundementals of Item Response Theory. California: Sage Pub.
  19. Karaman, S. ve Bakırcı, F. (2010). Türkiye’de lisansüstü eğitim: Sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2, 94-114. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/gopsbad/issue/48557/616554
  20. Kearney, M. L. (2008). The role of post-graduate education in research systems. UNESCO/DCU workshop on trends in post-graduate education (Dublin City University, 5-7 March 2008).
  21. Kelecioğlu, H. (1994). Öğrenci seçme sınavı puanlarının eşitlenmesi üzerine bir çalışma. [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi.
  22. Klieger, D.M., Cline, F.A., Holtzman, S.L., Minsky, J.L. & Lorenz, F. (2014). New perspectives on the validity of the GRE general test for predicting graduate school grades. ETS Research Report Series, 1-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12026
  23. Koys, D. (2005). The validity of the Graduate Management Admission Test for non-U.S. students. Journal of Education for Business, 80, 236–239.
  24. Kuncel, N., Crede, M., & Thomas, L. (2007). A meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT) and undergraduate grade point average (UGPA) forgraduate student academic performance. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 6, 61-68. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2007.24401702
  25. Kurysheva, A., Dilaver, G., Fox, C.M., Kell, H., Kern, M.R., L. & van Rijen, H.V.M. (2024). To test or not to test? The Graduate Record Examinations: Predictive validity toward graduate study success on research masters’ programs in a large European University. Education Sciences, 14, 549. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14050549
  26. Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of ıtem response theory to practical testing problems. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  27. Mutluer, C., L. & Nartgün, Z. (2017). Test equating study concerning to ALES (Academıc Personnel And Postgraduate Education Entrance Exam) scores obtained at different times in a year. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(12), 96-120. http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.1270
  28. MBA (2024). Evolving the score scale with the GMAT™ focus edition. https://www.mba.com/exams-and-exam-prep/gmat-exam/gmat-focus-evolving-score-scale
  29. Örnek, E. (2002). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsüne bağlı yüksek lisans programlarındaki öğrencilerin lisansüstü eğitimi giriş sınavı puanları ile akademik başarıları arasındaki ilişkiler [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi
  30. ÖSYM (2018a). 2017 ALES sonbahar değerlendirme raporu. https://dokuman.osym.gov.tr/pdfdokuman/2018/GENEL/ALESRaporu_13022018.pdf
  31. ÖSYM (2018b). 2018 ALES/2 değerlendirme raporu. https://dokuman.osym.gov.tr/pdfdokuman/2018/GENEL/ales2degrapor24122018.pdf
  32. ÖSYM (2024). ÖSYM resmî sitesi. https://www.osym.gov.tr/
  33. Öztürk, N., ve Anıl, D. (2012). Akademik personel ve lisansüstü eğitimi giriş sınavı puanlarının eşitlenmesi üzerine bir çalışma. Eğitim ve Bilim, 37(165), 180-193. https://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/1141/421
  34. Powers, D. E. (2004). Validity of Graduate Record Examinations (GRE) general test scores for admissions to Colleges of Veterinary Medicine. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 208–219. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.208
  35. Reckase, M.D. (2011). Computerized adaptive assessment (CAA): The way forward. In The road ahead for state assessments, policy analysis for California education and Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy (pp.1-11). Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy.
  36. Robin, F., & Zhao, C. (2014). Timing of the analytical writing measure of the GRE revised general test. The Research Foundation for the GRE revised General Test: A compendium of studies. (C. Wendler, B. Bridgeman, & C. Ezzo, Eds.). Educational Testing Service.
  37. Rotou, O., Patsula, L., Steffen, M., & Rizavi, S. (2007). Comparison of multistage tests with computerized adaptive and paper-and-pencil tests. ETS, Research Report.
  38. Rudner, L. M. (2012). Demystifying the GMAT: computer-based testing terms. Graduate Management Admission Council.
  39. Schrader, W. B. (1984). The Graduate Management Admission Test: Technical report on test development and score interpretation for GMAT users. Educational Testing Services. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED251483.pdf
  40. Segall, D. O. (2005). Computerized adaptive testing. Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, 1, 429–438.
  41. Stocking, M. L., & Lewis, C. (1995). A new method of controlling item exposure in computerized adaptive testing. ETS Research Report Series, 1995(2), i–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1995.tb01660.x
  42. Talento-Miller, E. (2005). GMAT validity for six european MBA programs. GMAC Research Reports, RR-05-07.
  43. Talento-Miller, E. (2008). Generalizability of GMAT validity to programs outside the U.S. International Journal of Testing, 8, 127–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305050802001193
  44. Tokat, E. (2004). Lisansüstü eğitimi giriş sınavı ve diğer kabul ölçülerinin yordama geçerliğine ilişkin bir araştırma [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi
  45. Wilson, K. M. (1982). GMAT and GRE aptitude test performance’ in relation to primary language and scores on TOEFL. ETS Research Report Series. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1982.tb01314.x.
  46. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2020). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  47. Yükseköğretim Kurulu (YÖK). (2025). Yükseköğretim istatistikleri. https://istatistik.yok.gov.tr