Qaep management system pwp

311 views
187 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
311
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Qaep management system pwp

  1. 1. QUALITY ASSURANCE, ENHANCEMENT AND PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 1 Definition of QA : “The means of ensuring that informed by its mission, academic standards are defined and achieved in line with equivalent standards nationally and internationally, and that the quality of learning opportunities, research and community involvement are appropriate and fulfill the expectations of the range of stakeholders” – Higher Education Funding Council, UK or : “The means by which an institution can guarantee with confidence and certainty, that the standards and quality of its educational provision are being maintained and enhanced”, - NQAAC,2004 or : “Quality Assurance is the planned and systematic review process of an institution or programme to determine whether or not acceptable standards of education, scholarship and infrastructure are being met, maintained and enhanced “. - Fred M. Hayward Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  2. 2. QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY ENHANCEMENT 2  Quality assurance (QA) Quality assurance refers to a range of review procedures designed to safeguard academic standards and promote learning opportunities for students of acceptable quality.  Quality enhancement (QE) Quality enhancement is taking deliberate steps to bring about continual improvement in the effectiveness of the learning experience of students. - (Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education) Quality Assurance,Enhancement and Perfomance, 2012
  3. 3. Contrast between “Quality Assurance” approaches and “ Quality Enhancement” approaches 3 Quality Assurance Quality Enhancement Focus on teaching Focus on learning Teaching as individual “performance” Learning as “Social practice” “Top down” implementation by managers not active in teaching Active engagement of senior staff and teachers during implementation Inflexible, non-negotiation approach based on “standards” Flexible context-sensitive approach base on building professional knowledge Little acknowledgement of the link between teaching and research Seeks to establish links between teaching and research, through reflection on practice May undermine professional autonomy through monitoring and surveillance activity Respects and values professional autonomy Focuses on the teacher as individual practitioner Seeks to increase collaboration between teachers and across disciplines Emphasis on documentation Emphasis on discussion Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  4. 4. Academic Standards & Academic Quality 4  Academic standards : Academic standards are a way of describing the level of achievement that a student has to reach to gain an academic award (for example, a degree).  Academic quality : Academic quality is a way of describing how well the learning opportunities available to students help them to achieve their award. It is about making sure that appropriate and effective teaching, support, assessment and learning opportunities are provided for them. Quality Assurance,Enhancement and Perfomance, 2012
  5. 5. PURPOSE 5  USBI aspires to become a premier private university in Indonesia achieving international standards. All aspects of the university’s operation shall develop internationally benchmarked Quality Assurance, Enhancement & Performance management systems to deliver excellence & to build reputation. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  6. 6. The Business Process Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012 6
  7. 7. Quality Assurance Approach PROCESS •Curriculum •Student intake •Human resources (Academic & Non-Academic staff) •Facilities & Infrastructure •Financial •Curriculum implementation (syllabus, lesson plan & course material) •teaching and learning process •research •community enpowerment •internal management OUTPUT INPUT Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012 •quality of graduates •result of research •scientific publications •community services •networking with industry & community 7
  8. 8. The level of Quality Audit External Audit External audit period by accreditation/ certification body Internal Audit Internal audit period by Institution, followed by Management Review Period of making the EPSBED (study program evaluation based on the self evaluation) report by each Study Program, may be preceded by the audit by the Faculty Self Evaluation (EPSBED reporting) Self Control Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012 Every staff is accountable for his/her works 8
  9. 9. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance Cycle Implementation of standards Benchmarking Enhancement Monitoring Improved formulation SelfEvaluation Internal Audit Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012 9
  10. 10. Three key principles underpin all quality assurance and enhancement activities: 10  Quality culture;  High quality learning; and  Student engagement. - (QAA) Quality Assurance,Enhancement and Perfomance, 2012
  11. 11. The remit of the QAEPU is to ensure 11         Continuing compliance with national regulations & international benchmarks Application for or maintenance of licensing & accreditation development, documentation & review of USBI policy & procedures Compilation & updating of the USBI Quality Manual Management of the annual Quality Assurance & Enhancement work-cycle & periodic review of systems Evidence & Data collection, collation, analysis & reporting Preparation of Quality Assurance & Enhancement action plans by all units, monitoring progress & closing quality loops Preparation of all internal & external data returns, Quality reports & submissions Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  12. 12. The remit of the QAEPU is to ensure (Cont’d) 12       Liaison with external bodies Appointment of external assessors/evaluators/examiners Operation of the externally benchmarked Quality system (ISO/SACS or similar) for support & administrative services Staff development & training internal auditors Liaison with national & international partners about quality matters including credit recognition & awards Reporting annually & as instructed to University Executive & Senate, & preparation of reports to be submitted to UC by the Rector Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  13. 13. Model of USBI’s QAEP 13  The internal evaluation is the corner stone of quality assurance in higher education.  The external evaluation is a condition of the credibility of the results of the internal evaluation.  External evaluators are accountable for the quality of USBI activities.  BAN-PT ( National Accreditation Body )  Quality Assurance of Higher Education must synergize with Self-evaluation activities (EPSBED) and accreditation we know as the SPM-PT, EBSBED activities are directed into Higher Education Database (PDPT), while the activities of Quality Assurance and Accreditation, respectively called Internal Quality Assurance and External Quality Assurance  SACS ( International Accreditation Body ) Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  14. 14. Accreditation Process by BAN-PT 14  The accreditation process began with the implementation of the study program self-evaluation in the course concerned. Self-evaluation refers to the self-evaluation guidelines that have been issued BAN-PT, however, if deemed necessary, the Head of the program of study (USBI) can add elements that will be evaluated in accordance with the interests of study programs and higher education institutions are concerned. From the results of the implementation of self-evaluation, and made an executive summary ,than the executive summary is attached to the petition for accreditation submitted to the secretariat of the BAN-PT. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  15. 15. SACS ACCREDITATION 15  The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACS) is the regional body for the accreditation of degree-granting higher education institutions in the Southern states. The Commission’s mission is the enhancement of educational quality throughout the region and the improvement of the effectiveness of institutions by ensuring that they meet standards established by the higher education community that address the needs of society and students.  As a partner of the Lone Star College (LCS), then USBI obliged to adopt a system of quality assurance, enhancement and performance are implemented in LCS, of course, adapted to the circumstances in USBI and Indonesian law  Each institution must observe internal and external QA requirements. LSCS must be able to demonstrate to SACS that they have QC of their programs in Indonesia. - USBI Statutes and QA procedures, including criteria for faculty hiring, promotion and evaluation; criteria for student admission, assessment, and graduation; student support systems; and campus facilities, will be adjusted to comply with those of LSCS. --- ( Interim Meeting LCS-USBI) Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  16. 16. SACS ACCREDITATION 16  Accreditation by SACS Commission on Colleges signifies that the institution 1) 2) 3) has a mission appropriate to higher education, has resources, programs, and services sufficient to accomplish and sustain that mission, and maintains clearly specified educational objectives that are consistent with its mission and appropriate to the degrees it offers, and that indicate whether it is successful in achieving its stated objectives.  The Commission on Colleges expects institutions to dedicate themselves to enhancing the quality of their programs and services within the context of their resources and capacities and to create an environment in which teaching, public service, research, and learning occur, as appropriate to the mission. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  17. 17. The Commission on Colleges adheres to the following fundamental characteristics of accreditation: 17 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Participation in the accreditation process is voluntary and is an earned and renewable status. Member institutions develop, amend, and approve accreditation requirements. The process of accreditation is representative, responsive, and appropriate to the types of institutions accredited. Accreditation is a form of self-regulation. Accreditation requires institutional commitment and engagement. Accreditation is based upon a peer review process. Accreditation requires an institutional commitment to student learning and achievement. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  18. 18. The Commission on Colleges adheres to the following fundamental characteristics of accreditation: 18 Accreditation acknowledges an institution’s prerogative to articulate its mission, including a religious mission, within the recognized context of higher education and its responsibility to show that it is accomplishing its mission. 9. Accreditation requires institutional commitment to the concept of quality enhancement through continuous assessment and improvement. 10. Accreditation expects an institution to develop a balanced governing structure designed to promote institutional integrity, autonomy, and flexibility of operation. 11. Accreditation expects an institution to ensure that its programs are complemented by support structures and resources that allow for the total growth and development of its students. 8. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  19. 19. The Commission evaluates an institution and makes accreditation decisions based on the following: 19  Compliance with the Principle of Integrity  Compliance with the Core Requirements  Compliance with the Comprehensive Standards  Compliance with additional Government Requirements  Compliance with the policies of the Commission on Colleges SACS – THE PRINCIPLES OF ACCREDITATION Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  20. 20. Internal Quality Assurance Criteria Adopt from :Bruno Curvale - ENQA 20 a. b. c. Policy and procedures for quality assurance: Institutions should have a policy and associated procedures for the assurance of the quality and standards of their programmes and awards. They should also commit themselves explicitly to the development of a culture which recognises the importance of quality, and quality assurance, in their work. To achieve this, institutions should develop and implement a strategy for the continuous enhancement of quality. The strategy, policy and procedures should have a formal status and be publicly available. They should also include a role for students and other stakeholders. Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards: Institutions should have formal mechanisms for the approval, periodic review and monitoring of their programmes and awards. Assessment of students: Students should be assessed using published criteria, regulations and procedures which are applied consistently. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  21. 21. Internal Quality Assurance Criteria (Cont’d) 21 d. e. f. g. Quality assurance of teaching staff: Institutions should have ways of satisfying themselves that staff involved with the teaching of students are qualified and competent to do so. They should be available to those undertaking external reviews, and commented upon in reports. Learning resources and student support: Institutions should ensure that the resources available for the support of student learning are adequate and appropriate for each programme offered. Information systems: Institutions should ensure that they collect, analyse and use relevant information for the effective management of their programmes of study and other activities. Public information: Institutions should regularly publish up to date, impartial and objective information, both quantitative and qualitative, about the programmes and awards they are offering. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  22. 22. External Quality Assurance Criteria 22  Use of external quality assurance procedures for higher     education: The external quality assurance of agencies should take into account the presence and effectiveness of the external quality assurance processes. Official status: Agencies should be formally recognised by competent public authorities in the Indonesian Higher Education Area as agencies with responsibilities for external quality assurance and should have an established legal basis. They should comply with any requirements of the legislative jurisdictions within which they operate. Activities: Agencies should undertake external quality assurance activities (at institutional or programme level) on a regular basis. Resources: Agencies should have adequate and proportional resources, both human and financial, to enable them to organise and run their external quality assurance process(es) in an effective and efficient manner, with appropriate provision for the development of their processes and procedures. Mission statement: Agencies should have clear and explicit goals and objectives for their work, contained in a publicly available statement. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  23. 23. External Quality Assurance Criteria (Cont’d) 23  Independence: Agencies should be independent to the extent both that they have autonomous responsibility for their operations and that the conclusions and recommendations made in their reports cannot be influenced by third parties such as higher education institutions, ministries or other stakeholders.  External quality assurance criteria and processes used by the agencies: The processes, criteria and procedures used by agencies should be pre-defined and publicly available. These processes will normally be expected to include:  a self-assessment or equivalent procedure by the subject of the quality assurance process;  an external assessment by a group of experts, including, as appropriate, (a) student member(s), and site visits as decided by the agency;  publication of a report, including any decisions, recommendations or other formal outcomes;  a follow-up procedure to review actions taken by the subject of the quality assurance process in the light of any recommendations contained in the report.  Accountability procedures: Agencies should have in place procedures for their own accountability. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  24. 24. EXTERNAL REVIEW ADDING VALLUE 24  The provision of independent judgments on the quality of the learner experience and the production of published reports that are a rich source of learning for Faculty and University ; and  Professional engagement with staff in the course of external evaluation has a direct impact on promoting reflection and supporting the institution’s quality agenda. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  25. 25. QUALITY ENHANCHEMENT FRAME WORK 25 USBI should developed a Quality Enhancement Framework in order to encourage the cycle of continuous improvement and to support the alignment of resources and effort in the achievement of University intent and objectives. The USBI Quality Enhancement Framework can be developed around a model : Assessment, Deployment, Results and Improvement (ADRI), USBI should interpreted this and developed an enhancement led model of; Governance and Planning; Management and Implementation; Reporting and Review and; Improvement (SOURCES : AUQA) Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  26. 26. QUALITY ASSURANCE, ENHANCEMENT AND PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 26  FUNCTION OF QAEP ( Statute ) ensuring the University achieves its overall vision, mission and goals  demonstrates public accountability for quality of education in keeping with University status,  complies with all current national laws and regulations, has effective organizational structures,  deliberative and consultative mechanisms, and management systems for external and self-evaluation  Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  27. 27. FUNCTION OF QAEP (Statute) 27  ensure continuing compliance with national regulations     and international benchmarks; ensure the application for, or maintenance of, licensing and accreditation; develop, document and review USBI’s quality policy and procedures; compile and updating of the USBI Quality Assurance Manual; manage the annual Quality Assurance and Enhancement work-cycle and periodic review of systems; Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  28. 28. FUNCTION OF QAEP( Statute) 28  provide evidence and data collection, collation, analysis and      reporting on quality; prepare Quality Assurance and Enhancement action plans by all units, monitoring progress and closing quality loops; prepare all internal and external data returns, Quality Assurance reports and submissions; liaison with external quality assurance bodies; appoint external assessors/evaluators/examiners; ensure the operation of the externally benchmarked Quality Assurance System (ISO or similar) for support and administrative services; Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  29. 29. FUNCTION OF QAEP ( Statute) 29  provide staff development for the Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance Unit and training internal auditors;  liaison with national and international partners about quality matters including credit recognition and awards and  provide annual reports as well as provide additional reports as requested by the University Executive and the University Senate, to be submitted to University Council. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012
  30. 30. The Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance Unit , Task & Responsibility 30 Assists the University Council in ensuring the University achieves its overall vision, mission and goals 2. Demonstrates public accountability for quality of education in keeping with University status, 3. Complies with all current national laws and regulations 4. Has effective organizational structures, deliberative and consultative mechanisms, and management systems for external and self-evaluation. 1. Quality Assurance,Enhancement and Perfomance, 2012
  31. 31. Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012 31
  32. 32. broto.mudjianto@sampoernafoundation.org Quality Assurance, Enhancement and Performance, 2012 32

×