2. QEC initiates SA through the
dean one semester prior to the
assessment
Department forms the PT that
will be responsible for
preparing SAR
QEC reviews the
Documentation within one
month
SAR Complete
The Vice Chancellor / Rector
forms the AT in consultation
with the concerned dean
based on the recommendation
of the QEC
YES
NO
Fig. 1 Self Assessment Procedure
3. QEC plans and visit the
concerned department
The AT conducts assessment
and presents its findings to
QEC, Dean, PT and dept.
faculty
The QEC submits an executive
summary to the Vice
Chancellor / Rector
Department prepares
implementation plan as in
table A.2
Follow up of the
implementation plan by QEC
Legend
· QEC: Quality Assurance Committee
· PT: Program Team
· SA: Self Assessment
· SAR: Self Assessment Report
4. SELF ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
1. Program Mission Objectives and Outcomes
2. Curriculum Design and Organization
3. Laboratories and Computing Facilities
4. Student Support and Guidance
5. Faculty
6. Process Control
7. Institutional Facilities
8. Institutional Support
5. Criterion-1: Program Mission, Objectives & 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.
Criterion-2: Curriculum Design & Organization
Intent: The curriculum must be designed and organized to
achieve the program’s objectives and outcomes. Also
course objectives must be in line with program outcomes.
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 of fifteen weeks.
6. Criterion-3: Laboratories & Computing Facilities
Intent: Laboratories and computing facilities must be
adequately available and accessible to faculty members
and students to support teaching and research activities.
In addition departments may benchmark with similar
departments in reputable institutions to identify their
shortcomings if any.
Criterion-4: Student Support & Advising
Intent: Student must have an adequate support to
complete the program in a timely manner and must have
ample opportunity to interact with their instructors and
receive timely advice about program requirements and
career alternatives.
7. Criterion-5: Process Control
Intent: The processes by which major functions are
delivered must be in place, controlled, periodically
reviewed and continuously improved. To meet this
criterion a set of standards must be satisfied.
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.
8. Criterion-7: Institutional Facilities
Intent: Institutional facilities, including library,
computing facilities, classrooms and offices must be
adequate to support the objective of the program.
Criterion-8: Institutional Support
Intent: The institution’s 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.
9. REVIEW
Meeting for Expediting Self Assessment Activities of Faculty of
Engineering & Technology held on 20-12-2010 (Monday) in the
committee room Faculty of Engineering & Technology, University
of the Punjab.
PROGRESS:
Follow up with the Faculty of Engineering & Technology for the
submission of their SARs is done but response rate from some
departments is very slow and dismal.
10. 10
Latest Status of Faculty of Engineering & Technology
Department Program Teams SAR
received
Sent
back
for
changes
SAR
received
after
improvement
Audit
completed
Executive
Summary
Implement
ation Plan
Institute of
Chemical
Engineering
&
Technology
√
Dr. Syed Nadir Hussain
(Team Leader)
Dr. Amir Shafiq
Dr. Hafiz Muhammad
Anwar Asghar
Dr. Arshad Mehmood
Ali
Engr. Bilal Haider
√ √ √ √ √ √
Institute of
Quality &
Technology
Management
√
Dr. Nasir Saeed Butt
Dr. M. Usman Awan
Ms. Faryal Jalil
Ms. Sana Hassan
√ √ √ √ √ √
Department
of Metallurgy
& Materials
Engineering
√
Prof. Dr. Abdus Salam
Dr. M. Kamran
√ √ √ √ √ √
11. 11
Latest Status of Faculty of Engineering & Technology
Department Program Teams SAR
received
Sent back
for
changes
SAR
received
after
improvement
Audit
completed
Executive
Summary
Implementa
tion Plan
Department of
Electrical
Engineering
√
Mr. Murad Habib
Mr. Zeeshan Azmat
x x x x x x
Centre for
Coal
Technology
√
Mr. Khurram
Shahzad
Ms. Sumaira
Kanwal
√ √ √ √ √ √
Department of
Polymer
Engineering &
Technology
x x x x x x x
Department of
Textile
Engineering &
Technology
x x x x x x x
12. SURVEY FORMS
Teacher & Course Evaluation Form
Proforma - 1 Student Course Evaluation Questionnaire
Proforma - 2 Faculty Course Review Report
Proforma - 3 Survey of Graduating Students
Proforma - 4 Research Student Progress Review Form
Proforma - 5 Faculty Survey
Proforma - 6 Survey of Department Offering Ph.D. Programs
Proforma - 7 Alumni Survey
Proforma - 8 Employer Survey
Proforma - 9 Faculty Resume
Proforma - 10 Teacher Evaluation Form
Teaching / Learning Process Survey Form
13. TEACHERS & COURSES EVALUATION
In order to enhance the quality of education, QEC has already
circulated newly developed survey forms related to the teachers
and courses evaluation.
HODs will interact & coordinate with QEC staff to conduct survey
at the end of each semester and also bring any change if required.
