QUALITY ASSURANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION

1
QUALITY ASSURANCEIN HIGHER EDUCATION

• By
• Prof. Dr. Abdul Raouf, SI
• Distinguished National Professor of Higher
  Education Commission, Pakistan
• Patron and Professor, Institute of Quality and
  Technology Management, University of Punjab,
  Lahore

HEC Self Assessment Workshop Lahore May 10, 11,
2006
2
Presentation Plan

• Introduction
• Q.A. Needs its Improvements
• Q.E.C. Functions and Organization.
• Definitions
• Assessment Need.
• Current practice
• Assessment model.
• Criteria and standards.
• Procedure.
• Closing remarks

3
QUALITY DOES NOT HAPPEN BY ACCIDENT IT HAS TO
BE PLANNED
WE DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE QUALITY AS A
GOAL SURVIVAL IS NOT COMPULSORY
CONTINUING IMPROVEMENT
QUALITY IS NOT ANY SINGLE THING BUT AN AURA, AN
ATMOSPHERE, AN OVERPOWERING FEELING THAT THE
INSTITUTION IS DOING EVERYTHING WITH EXCELLENCE
4
Continuous Improvement

• Means to be Running to be Stationary
• Grouping of Organizations

BULK
Upper 10th Percentile
Lower 10th Percentile
Running Hard to Remain In the Group
Running Harder to Join Those Who are Ahead
Running Hard to Survive
5
Continuous Improvement Through Quality
Management

• Models of Excellence
• BALDRIGE (National Quality Award)
• EFQM ( Excellence Model to Improve Performance)
• ISO STANDARDS
• These are applicable to Manufacturing as well
  as Service Industries. Basis for these are Self
  Assessment.

6
QAA OPERATIONS An OUTLINE
Selection of Peers. Peer Orientation
University Rating Standards and Evaluation
Guidelines
Program Self Assessment Guidelines
Q.E.C
Q.E.C
University Self Assessment
QAC
Programs
QAA
Self Assessment / External Review By Councils
University Evaluation by External Peers (Council
Members)
Accreditation by External Bodies
QAA Reports Published
7
Q.E.C. Functions

• The Quality Enhancement Cell (QEC) is to be
  headed by a Dean reporting directly to Vice
  Chancellor/Rector. He is to be the correspondent
  with the outside bodies.
• QEC is responsible for promoting public
  confidence that the quality and standards of the
  award of degrees are enhanced and safeguarded.
• QEC is responsible for the review of quality
  standards and the quality of teaching and
  learning in each subject area.
• QEC is responsible for the review of academic
  affiliations with other institutions in terms of
  effective management of standards and quality of
  programs.
• QEC is responsible for defining clear and
  explicit standards as points of reference to the
  reviews to be carried out. It should also help
  the employees to know as to what they could
  expect from candidates.

8

• QEC is responsible to develop qualifications
  framework by setting out the attributes and
  abilities that can be expected from the holder of
  a qualification, i.e. Bachelors, Bachelor with
  Honors, Masters, M. Phil., Doctoral.
• QEC is responsible to develop program
  specifications. These are standard set of
  information clarifying what knowledge,
  understanding, skills and other attributes a
  student will have developed on successfully
  completing a specific program.
• QEC is responsible to develop quality assurance
  processes and methods of evaluation to affirm
  that the quality of provision and the standard of
  awards are being maintained and to foster
  curriculum, subject and staff development,
  together with research and other scholarly
  activities.

9

• QEC is responsible to ensure that the
  universitys quality assurance procedures are
  designed to fit in with the arrangements in place
  nationally for maintaining and improving the
  quality of Higher Education.
• QEC is responsible to develop procedures for the
  following
• Approval of new programs
• Annual monitoring and evaluation including
  program monitoring, faculty monitoring, and
  students perception.
• Departmental review
• Student feedback
• Employer feedback
• Quality assurance of Masters, M. Phil. And Ph.
  D. degree programs.
• Subject review
• Institutional assessment
• Program specifications
• Qualification framework

10
QEC Organizations
V.C.
HEC
QEC
TEACHING AND LEARNING CETNER
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS CENTER
PROGRAM ASSESSMENT CENTER

• Promoting Public Confidence
• Affiliations
• Entrance Exams.
• Organizing Workshops on Test Construction
  Techniques
• Studying Students Pre-University Performance and
  Performance in Specific University Subjects.

• Fostering an Environment of Continuous Academic
  Development
• Assisting Faculty Members to Attain Highest
  Standards in Teaching Research
• Assisting New Faculty in learning techniques for
  teaching

• Promote Culture of Assessment
• Improve and maintain highest Academic Standards
• Enhance Student Learning
• Provide Feedback for Quality Assurance
• Program Accreditation by Councils

11
Assessment

• Assessment is a systematic process of gathering,
  reviewing and using important quantitative and
  qualitative data and information from multiple
  and diverse sources about educational programs,
  for the purpose of improving student learning,
  and evaluating whether academic and learning
  standards are being met.

12
Self Assessment

• Self assessment is an assessment conducted by
  the institution to assess whether programs meet
  their educational objectives and outcomes with
  the purpose to improve programs quality and
  enhancing students learning.

13
The elements of a successful assessment

• Purpose identification
• Outcomes identification
• Measurements and evaluation design
• Data collection
• Analysis and evaluation
• Decision-making regarding actions to be taken.

14
Self Assessment Desired Outcome

• To be proactive than reactive.
• Initiate improvements to achieve academic
  excellence.
• Systematize the process of self assessment.
• To be current and take a leadership role in the
  country.
• Assist in preparing professionals of tomorrow.

15
Accreditation Bodies Requirements

• At the core of ABET Engineering criteria 2000 is
  an outcome assessment component that requires
  each engineering program seeking accreditation or
  re-accreditation to establish its own internal
  assessment process which in turn will be assessed
  by ABET.
• The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of
  Business (ACCSB) requires each business school
  seeking accreditation or re-accreditation to
  establish its own internal assessment process,
  which in turn will be assessed by ACCSB

16
Accreditation bodies requirements

• Computer Science Accreditation Board (CSAB)
  requires programs seeking accreditation or
  re-accreditation to establish their internal
  assessment process, which will be assessed by
  CSAB.
• Pakistan Engineering Council, Pakistan Medical
  and Dental Councils and Councils established for
  accrediting educational Programs .
• The core requirement of all these bodies
  is Self Assessment of Programs
  by Institutions.

17
Current Practice Who is doing it?

• 94 percent of institutions in the United States
  had assessment activities under way and 90
  percent had increased their activities compared
  to five years ago. Rather than depending on
  nationally available assessment instruments, most
  institutions (86 percent) reported using local
  measures and nearly 70 percent were developing
  their own portfolios.

18
Current Practice Who is doing it?

• A sample of these universities include MIT,
  University of Michigan, University of Illinois at
  Urbana, University of Wisconsin at Madison, Texas
  A M University, University of Texas at Austin,
  Purdue University, University of Tennessee,
  Knoxville, Al Ain University at UAE, King Fahd
  University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran and
  many others.

19
Objectives of Self Assessment

•     Improve and maintain academic
  standards
•     Enhance students learning.
•     Verify that the existing programs meet their
  objectives and institutional goals.
•     Provide feedback for quality assurance of
  academic programs.

20
Inputs
Output
Students
Curriculum
Graduates that Perform Outcomes that Achieve
Educational Objectives
Faculty
Processing Delivery
Laboratories, Computing and Library Facilities
Processes
Institutional Facilities
Institutional Support
Assessment/Feedback
Assessment Model
21
Components of The Self Assessment Process

• Criteria Eight Criteria for Self assessment.
• Procedure Specifies the process of initiating,
  conducting, and implementing the assessment.

22
Criteria

• Each criterion has an intent A statement of
  requirements to be met.
• Each criterion has several standards They
  describe how the intents are minimally met

23
Criteria and Standards

• 1.  Program Mission, Objectives and Outcomes ( 3
  standards).
• 2.  Curriculum Design and Organization(7).
• 3.  Laboratories and Computing Facilities (2).
• 4.  Student Support and Guidance (3)

24
Criteria and Standards

• 5.  Process Control ( 5 )
• 6.  Faculty ( 2)
• 7.  Institutional Facilities ( 2 )
• 8. Institutional Support ( 3)

25
Criterion 1 Program Mission, Objectives and
Outcomes

• Intent Each program must have a mission,
  quantifiable measurable objectives and expected
  outcomes for graduates. Outcomes include
  competency and tasks graduates are expected to
  perform after completing the program. A strategic
  plan must be in place to achieve the program
  objectives. The extent to which these objectives
  are achieved through continuous assessment and
  improvements must be demonstrated.

26
Criterion 1 Standards

• Standard 1-1 The program must have documented
  measurable objectives that support departmental
  and institution mission statements

27
Meeting Standard 1-1

• Document institution, departmental and program
  mission statements.
• State program objectives.
• Describe how each objective is aligned with
  program, departmental and institution mission
  statements.
• Outline the main elements of the strategic plan
  to achieve the program mission and objectives.
• Provide for each objective how it was measured,
  when it was measured and improvements identified
  and made

28
Criterion 1 Standards

• Standard 1-2 The program must have documented
  outcomes for graduating students. It must be
  demonstrated that the outcomes support the
  program objectives and that graduating students
  are capable of performing these outcomes.

29
Meeting Standard 1-2

• Describe the means for assessing the extent to
  which graduates are performing the stated program
  outcomes/learning objectives.
• 1.   Conducting a survey of graduating seniors
  every semester.
• 2.    Conduct a survey of alumni every two
  years.
• 3.    Conduct a survey of employers every two
  years.

30
Meeting Standard 1-2

• 4.   Carefully designed questions asked
  during cap-stone design projects
  presentations.
• 5. Outcome assessment examination

31
Criterion 1 Standards

• Standard 1-3 The results of programs assessment
  and the extent to which they are used to improve
  the program must be documented.
•  

32
Meeting Standard 1-3

• Describe the actions taken based on the results
  of periodic assessments.
• Describe major future program improvements plans
  based on recent assessments.

33
Criterion 2 Curriculum Design and Organization

• Intent The curriculum must be designed and
  organized to achieve the programs objectives and
  outcomes. Also course objectives must be in line
  with program outcomes. The breakdown of the
  curriculum must satisfy the standards specified
  in this section. Curriculum standards are
  specified in terms of credit hours of study. A
  semester credit hour equals one class hour or two
  to three laboratory hours per week. The semester
  is approximately fifteen weeks.

34
Criterion 2 Standards

• Standard 2-1 The curriculum must be consistent
  and support the programs documented objectives.

35
Meeting Standard 2-1

• Describe how the program content (courses)
  meets the program objectives
• Complete the matrix shown in Table 4.4 linking
  courses to program outcomes. List the courses and
  tick against relevant outcomes.

36
Meeting Standard 1-2
Courses Vs. Program Outcomes
37
Criterion 2 Standards

• Standard 2-2 Theoretical background, problems
  analysis and solution design must be stressed
  within the programs core material.

38
Meeting Standard 2-2

• Indicate which courses contain a significant
  portion (more than 30) of the elements in
  standard 2-2 in the following table.

Standard 2-2 Requirement
39
Criterion 2 Standards

• Standard 2-3 The curriculum must satisfy the
  mathematics and basic sciences requirements for
  the program, as specified by the respective
  accreditation body.
• Standard 2-4 The curriculum must satisfy the
  major requirements for the program as specified
  by the respective accreditation body.

40
Criterion 2 Standards

• Standard 2-5 The curriculum must satisfy
  humanities, social sciences, arts, ethical,
  professional and other discipline requirements
  for the program, as specified by the respective
  accreditation body.
• Standard 2-6 Information technology component
  of the curriculum must be integrated throughout
  the program.
• Standard 2-7 Oral and written communication
  skills of the student must be developed and
  applied in the program.

41
Meeting Standards 2-6 and 2-7

• Indicate the courses within the program that
  will satisfy the standard.
• Describe how they are applied and integrated
  through out the program.
• Indicate the courses within the program that
  will satisfy the standard.
• Describe how they are applied.

42
Criterion 3 Laboratories and Computing Facilities

• Intent Laboratories and computing facilities
  must be adequately available and accessible to
  faculty members and students to support teaching
  and research activities. To meet this criterion
  the standards in this section must be satisfied.
  In addition departments may benchmark with
  similar departments in reputable institutions to
  identify their shortcomings if any.

43
Criterion 3 Standards

• Standard 3-1 Lab manuals / documentation /
  instructions for experiments must be available
  and readily accessible to faculty and students.
• Standard 3-2 There must be adequate support
  personnel for instruction and maintaining the
  laboratories.
• Standard 3-3 The University computing
  infrastructure and facilities must be adequate to
  support programs objectives.

44
Criterion 5 Process Control

• The processes by which major functions are
  delivered must be in place, controlled,
  periodically reviewed, evaluated and continuously
  improved. To meet this criterion a set of
  standards must be satisfied.

45
Criterion 5 Standards

• Standard 5-1 The process by which students are
  admitted to the program must be based on
  quantitative and qualitative criteria and
  clearly documented This process must be
  periodically evaluated to ensure that it is
  meeting its objectives.

46
Criterion 5 Standards

• Standard 5-2 The process by which students are
  registered in the program and monitoring of
  students progress to ensure timely completion of
  the program must be documented This process must
  be periodically evaluated to ensure that it is
  meeting its objectives.

47
Criterion 5 Standards

• Standard 5-3 The process of recruiting and
  retaining highly qualified faculty members must
  be in place and clearly documented. Also
  processes and procedures for faculty evaluation,
  promotion must be consistent with institution
  mission statement. These processes must be
  periodically evaluated to ensure that it is
  meeting its objectives.

48
Criterion 5 Standards

• Standard 5-4 The process and procedures used
  to ensure that teaching and delivery of course
  material to the students emphasizes active
  learning and that course learning outcomes are
  met . The process must be periodically evaluated
  to ensure that it is meeting its objectives.

49
Criterion 5 Standards

• Standard 5-5 The process that ensures that
  graduates have completed the requirements of the
  program must be based on standards, effective
  procedures and clearly documented. This process
  must be periodically evaluated to ensure that it
  is meeting its objectives.

50
Criterion 6 Faculty

• Intent Faculty members must be current and
  active in their discipline and have the necessary
  technical depth and breadth to support the
  program. There must be enough faculty members to
  provide continuity and stability, to cover the
  curriculum adequately and effectively, and to
  allow for scholarly activities. To meet this
  criterion the standards in this section must be
  satisfied

51
Standard 6-1

• There must be enough full time faculty who are
  committed to the program to provide adequate
  coverage of the program areas/courses, continuity
  and stability. The interests and qualifications
  of all faculty members must be sufficient to
  teach all courses, plan, modify and update
  courses and curricula. All faculty members must
  have a level of competence that would normally be
  obtained through graduate work in the discipline.
  The majority of the faculty must hold a Ph.D. in
  the discipline.

52
(No Transcript)
53
Standard 6-2

• All faculty members must remain current in the
  discipline and sufficient time must be provided
  for scholarly activities and professional
  development. Also, effective programs for faculty
  development must be in place.

54
Meeting Standard 6-2

• State criteria for faculty to be deemed current
  in the discipline and, based on theses criteria
  and information in the faculty members resumes,
  what percentage of the faculty members are
  current. The criteria should be developed by the
  department.
• Describe the means for ensuring that full time
  faculty members have sufficient time for
  scholarly and professional development.

55
Meeting Standard 6-2

• Describe existing faculty development programs at
  the departmental and university level.
  Demonstrate their effectiveness in achieving
  faculty development.
• Indicate how frequently faculty programs are
  evaluated and if the evaluation results are used
  for improvement.

56
Criterion 7 Institutional Facilities

• Institutional facilities, including library,
  computing facilities, classrooms and offices must
  be adequate to support the objective of the
  program. To satisfy this criterion a number of
  standards must be met.

57
Criterion 7 Standards

• Standard 7-1 The institution must have the
  infrastructure to support new trends in learning
  such as e-learning.
• Standard 7-2 The library must possess an
  up-to-date technical collection relevant to the
  program and must be adequately staffed with
  professional personnel.

58
Criterion 7 Standards

• Standard 7-3 Class-rooms must be adequately
  equipped and offices must be adequate to enable
  faculty to carry out their responsibilities.

59
Criterion 8 Institutional Support

• Intent The institutions support and the
  financial resources for the program must be
  sufficient to provide an environment in which the
  program can achieve its objectives and retain its
  strength.

60
Criterion 8 Standards

• Standard 8-1 There must be sufficient support
  and financial resources to attract and retain
  high quality faculty and provide the means for
  them to maintain competence as teachers and
  scholars.
• Standard 8-2 There must be an adequate number
  of high quality graduate students, research
  assistants and Ph.D. students.

61
Criterion 8 Standards

• Standard 8-3 Financial resources must be
  provided to acquire and maintain Library
  holdings, laboratories and computing facilities.

62
INTERNAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
QEC initiates Assessment one semester prior to
the assessment through the dean.
Department forms Performance Team that will be
responsible for preparing Self Evaluation.

QEC reviews the Documentation within one month
No
Is Self Assessment Report Complete
Yes
VC/Dean QEC forms Assessment Team in consultation
with the dean based on the recommendation of QEC
63
QEC plans and fixes Assessment Team visit
Assessment Team conducts assessment and presents
its findings to QEC, Dean, Performance Team and
Dept. Faculty
QEC submits an executive summary to V.C.
Department prepares implementation plan summary
Follow- up of the implementation plan by QEC
64
Assessment Results Implementation Plan Summary
65
Concluding Remarks

• Establishing measurable objectives and
  evaluating their outcomes are sophisticated
  activities that are essential to assess if
  programs meet their educational objectives.
• Conducting self assessment is expected to
  enhance learning.

66
Concluding Remarks

• Self assessment will provide feedback from
  employers and Alumni and will enable Universities
  to improve quality and respond effectively to
  market needs.
• Assessment will require dedication from faculty
  members and commitment from University
  Administration.

67
Concluding Remarks

• Assessing academic programs must be supported by
  other types of assessment.
• The Dean QEC should take the lead in making
  faculty members and Administration aware of the
  big role assessment plays in Education.

68
Conclusion

• Achieving Quality
• and Enhancing it
• by
• Continuous Improvement
• Through
• Self Assessment Which Forms The Basic for
  External Assessment.

69
Thank you Any questions/Comments