PARADIGM SHIFT FROM PROGRAM TO INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION: THE PHILIPPINE STATE INSTITUTIONS

1
PARADIGM SHIFT FROM PROGRAM TO INSTITUTIONAL
ACCREDITATION THE PHILIPPINE STATE INSTITUTIONS
EXPERIENCE
Nilo E. Colinares, Ed.D.ConsultantAccrediting
Agency of Chartered Colleges and Universities in
the Philippines (AACCUP), Inc.
2
Presentation in Six Parts

1. Introduction (from Conceptualization to
   Concretization)
2. The Launch and the Hoped-For-Advantages
3. 2009 The Year of Implementation
4. Possible Future Development
5. Implications to Progressive Implementation
6. Conclusion (from INQAAHE 2001 to INQAAHE 2009)

3
INTRODUCTION

• The Conceptualization of the Schema
• INQAAHE Biennial Conference 2001, Bangalore
• Authority cum Accountability in Accreditation
• Dr. Manuel T Corpus,
• Founding President, Executive Director, AACCUP

4
The Philippine HEIs Scenario

• 1,726 higher education institutions
• 203 (12) public institutions, the AACCUP
  clientele
• 1,523 private or 88 of the total HEIs population

5
The Philippine Education Budget Vis-à-vis the
Asian Countries
Malaysia 6.2 of gross domestic product
Thailand 4.2
Indonesia 3.6
Japan 3.5
Korea 3.1
Philippines 2.5
6
The AACCUP Environment

1. Membership in AACCUP

Total Number of SUCs 110
Number of SUC Members 101 92
Members with Accreditation 95
Members w/o Accreditation 6
Number of Non-Member SUCs 9 8
Number of Local Colleges 2
7
The Rise of Program Accreditation1992 to Present
The Rise of Program
Accreditation
Year Number of Programs Number of Programs Number of SUCs Number of SUCs
1992 11 6
2000 132 39
2008 488 63
488
500
400
300
132
200
63
39
100
11
6
0
1992
2000
2008
Number of Programs
Number of SUCs
8
Global Influences
9
The 1,310 Programs (as of 2008)
Status (Level) Number of Programs
Candidate 349
Level I Accredited 336
Level II Reaccredited 383
Qualified for Level III 125
Level III Reaccredited 117
Total 1,310
10
Continuation of Accreditation by Program
Strength

• It is focused

• Basis is the grant of some benefits

Limitations

• Not appropriate in countries with many HEIs.

• Relatively slow.

11
Consistency in Pursuit of Institutional
Accreditation
2001 Toward A Relevant Model of Quality Assurance Redesigning the Current System
2002 Institutional Accreditation A Shift to a more Relevant Model for SUCs
2003 Institutional Accreditation top Agenda Item
2004 Institutional Accreditation Past, Present and Trends
2005 Go for Institutional Accreditation
12
consistent themes. . . consistent themes. . .
2005 Go for Institutional Accreditation
2006 Be Institutional, Go Global
2007 Twenty Years of Accreditation Trials, Tribulations and Triumph followed by a Seminar-Workshop on the preparation of Institutional Accreditation Evaluation Instruments
2008 Institutional Accreditation Enhancing the Quality of Institutions
2009 Push forward the AACCUP drive for Inst. Accred.
13
The Launch and the Hoped-for Advantages

• In the 21st Annual National Conference of 2008,
  AACCUP launched the adoption of Institutional
  Accreditation amidst the cheers of participating
  SUCs, now partially convinced of the advantages
  that follow

14
Usefulness and Relevance to Stakeholders

1. the government, state-funded institutions, SUCs
   in legislative budgetary hearings
2. students- claims for rights, privileges
3. employers- referrals from institutions, not
   individual programs
4. aid-granting institutions, donors, foundations-
   commitment and accountability demanded from
   recipient the INSTITUTION, not from individual
   programs

15
More Accurate Indicator of Quality of Education

• Entry requirements
• For a school to be qualified for institutional
  accreditation, at least 75 of its programs
  should be accredited
• Unaccredited programs may be evaluated during the
  institutional accreditation visit.

16
More Appropriate for

1. countries with many HEIs
2. more advanced educational systems

17
Faster

1. the institution concerned has had its programs
   already evaluated
2. the institution is taken as a whole with no more
   details assessed, having been taken care of
   during program accreditation

18
Encourages Institutions to Demonstrate -

• continuous improvement in-
• all programs offered
• services offered
• activities undertaken and
• the whole system rather than just a few pockets
  of entire unit

19
Enables Institutions to Achieve Recognition and
Enhanced Status along-

1. General administration and services
2. Instruction
3. Research
4. Extension
5. Resource generation and management and to profit
   from the synergism of each.

1. Motivates institutions in their respective
   totality to aspire for and work towards global
   competitiveness

20
2009 Year of Implementation

• 22nd AACCUP Annual National Conference theme
  Push Forward the 2009 Drive for Institutional
  Accreditation.
• Review of dynamics-
• Pre-accreditation requirements, criteria,
  instruments,procedures

21
Pilot Survey Visit and Workshop

• The Conference will be followed by a hands-on
  experience in conducting a pilot accreditation
  survey visit. The pilot-testing of the new
  scheme will be conducted in one of the five SUCs
  which have submitted their intent t embrace
  institutional accreditation and volunteered to
  act as an academic guinea pig, for the new
  experiment. The visit will also serve as part of
  the workshop for the core group of institutional
  Accreditors.

22
The Strategy

1. Select and invite 50 participants starting with
   those already trained on institutional
   accreditation. They will form the core of
   AACCUP Institutional Accreditors.
2. Submit the workshop for APQN sponsorship or
   assistance in the form of engaging the
   services of 2 consultants and sponsoring 10
   participants from among APQN members.
3. Seek the assistance of the British Council, the
   World Bank and the Columbo Plan Staff
   College for possible assistance in the form
   of speakers.
4. Enlist CHED technical and financial assistance.

23
The Strategy continued
A select group of 50 accreditors and 10
foreign participants are expected to attend.
The exercise will focus AACCUP as the first
accrediting agency in the Philippines to
have fully implemented institutional
accreditation as a unit of assessment in
government and other institutions.
24
The Hoped-for Result

• With all activities successfully carried out, it
  is hoped that the transition from program to
  institutional accreditation among SUCs in the
  country, will prove to be a dynamic tool for the
  propagation of an effective, efficient and
  sustainable unit of assessment to be appreciated,
  and emulated by all accrediting agencies in the
  country.

25
Possible Future Development

• As AACCUP goes about the initial steps in the new
  scheme, current events in both the national and
  regional academic zones of Asia, augur well for
  the progressive implementation of institutional
  accreditation, specifically, these are

26
CHEDs IQUAME

• Institutional Quality Assurance through
  Monitoring and Evaluation (IQUAME) for-
• grant of Autonomous and Deregulated Status for
  private HEIs
• inputs to CHED Policies, Standards and Guidelines
  (PSG) for grant of University Status
• a supporting push towards AACCUPs drive.
• Through IQUAMEs approach to institutional
  monitoring and evaluation, AACCUPs institutional
  accreditation drive for 2009, finds more
  relevance
• and appropriateness in the HEI universe.

27
The Coordinating Council on Accreditation (CCA)

• Task to formulate a common set of standards,
  procedures and instruments for accreditation.
• Composition representatives from the five
  existing accrediting agencies.

• Implications to AACCUP Drive.
• It is opined that if CHED will pursue a common
  set of standards, such commonality will find more
  meaning in institutional accreditation.

28
The ASEAN Quality Assurance Network (AQAN)

• Collaborate on capacity building
• Facilitate recognition of qualifications and
  cross -border mobility

• SEAMEO RIHED and Malaysian Quality Assurance
  (MQA) project of Harmonization of Higher
  Education and Quality Assurance with quality
  assurance as key element which resulted in the
  Kuala Lumpur Declaration to
• Share best practices
• Develop an ASEAN QA framework

1. Relevance of to Institutional Accreditation to
   Kuala Lumpur Declaration. It is believed that
   the concretization of the Declaration would be
   more possible of fulfillment in a single-shot
   institutional accreditation schema, rather than
   in a multi-faceted program evaluation.

29
Implications to Progressive Implementation

1. IQUAME and AACCUP

1. Identical Approaches

• IQUAME approach is complementary to program, but
  is concerned with the overall strategic
  operation of an institution in its entirety.
• AACCUP Accreditation by program will continue
  but I.A. is the most appropriate in countries
  with many HEIs, like the Philippines.

30
Identical Criteria

• AACCUP has the same indicators of Gov. and Mgt.,
  Support to Students and Mgt. of Resources
• AACCUP similarly assesses Extension, Consultancy
  and Linkages, Research and Teaching and
  Learning.

• IQUAMEevaluates Governance and Management,
• Support to Students, Management of
  Resources.
• IQUAME looks into Relations with Community,
  Quality Research and Teaching

1. Professional Partnership

31
The CCA Objective and Existing Common Standards

• The five accrediting agencies are currently
  following common set of standards such as
• Levels of Accreditation
• CHED recognition through federation
• validity/duration of levels of accreditation.
• More commonality will ensue if they adopt
  Institutional Accreditation as unit of
  assessment.

32
AQANs Project

• SEAMEO RIHEDs and MQAs AQAN spells out among
  other roles, sharing of best practices in the
  Kuala Lumpur Declaration.
• This will necessarily reveal that for countries
  with numerous HEIs, such as the US, Russia,
  India, Institutional Accreditation is the most
  practical unit of assessment to utilize.

33
The themeNew Approaches to Quality Assurance in
the Changing World,and the Sub-theme,
DifferentApproaches to QA and their impact on
efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability

1. This INQAAHE Conference 2009

1. Quality assurance bodies will present theories
   and practices. many of which will border on
   institutional accreditation

34
Presentations and Discussions will Enhance
Chances for Success of AACCUP 2009 Drive

• The world-wide expositions on the scheme will
  surely enhance the chances for success of the
  recent adoption and subsequent implementation of
  the complementary unit of assessment by the state
  institutions of the Philippines through the
  AACCUP.

35
Conclusion
From INQAAHE 2001 to

• What began for AACCUP as an INQAAHE-inspired/motiv
  ated concept in 2001, has materialized,has become
  concrete, more enriched and flourished,

36
to INQAAHE 2009

• .again, through the sharing of experiences, of
  world-wide best practices in quality assurance
  strategies, in this INQAAHE 2009 assembly of
  world quality assurance leaders, the worlds
  whos who in quality education advocacies