Internal Quality Assurance Applied by Asian Universities Associate Professor Tan Kay Chuan Director, Office of Quality Management

Drivers of Internal Quality Assurance International Quality Standards Regional Quality Standards Professional Bodies National Quality Standards The drivers of quality assurance in Asian universities are influenced by international, regional, national and professional bodies quality standards, the university’s strategies and the needs to comply with national policies on quality in university education. There is no single internal quality system adopted by Asian Universities considering the maturity and diverse development of quality in university education and the varied frameworks introduced by their education agencies.

International Quality Standards ISO 9001:2008 is the standard that provides a set of standardized requirements for a quality management system Output (5) Management Responsibility - (8) Measurement, Analysis, Improvement (7) Product Realization (6) Resource Management C U S T O M E R Q I N A F Product (4)Continual improvement Quality Management System (QMS) Input The ISO 9001 quality management system standard is an example of the international quality standard adopted by some Asian universities in Malaysia and Indonesia. The International Workshop Agreement (IWA) provides guidance to educational organisations for implementing an effective quality management system in conjunction with and based on ISO 9001 standard. Source: http://www.iso.org, IWA 2:2007 - Quality Management Systems - Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001:2000 in education

International Quality Standards IWA 2:2007 - Quality Management Systems - Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001:2000 in education Principles Description Process approach Identify the degree to which each operational process creates learner value Customer focus Enablers like technology, skill, expertise and culture that lead to the creation of learner value System approach Each operational process to achieve its objectives from an administrative standpoint Leadership Establishes vision, creates policy and leads the organization in responding to changes in the environment Factual approach Decisions based on facts and not on convenient speculation Supplier relationship Collaboration with partners to obtain optimal wisdom, skill and creativity to achieve learner value Involvement of people Maximizes the use of its people competence, wisdom, skill and creativity Continuous improvement Improvement in learning process and learner’s personal learning to create values The guidance to management offered in this International Workshop Agreement and ISO 9001 to lead organizations toward improved performance is based on the eight quality management principles. An example for educational organizations follows. Process approach: educational organizations should adopt a process approach when developing and implementing a quality management system. The organization should identify the degree to which each operational process creates learner value. For this reason IT should include the processes related to the aim of the organization. Understanding interactions among processes is important for the educational organization to improve processes while balancing the system at large. Understanding core competence (customer focus) includes various enablers to ensure competitive advantage of the educational organization. These enablers include technology, skill, expertise and educational organization's culture. The collective strength specific to the educational organization leads to creation of learner value. The educational organization's core competence should support innovation by adapting to changes in the education environment to maintain ITS competitive advantage. Total optimization (systems approach to management) enables each operational process to achieve its objectives from an administrative standpoint. Visionary leadership (leadership) in educational organizations establishes vision, creates policy to realize the vision, and leads the educational organizatiOn in responding promptly to change in the education environment. Factual approach (factual approach to decision making) ensures administrative decisions based on clearly understood facts and not on convenient speculation. To this end, information and wisdom are combined with analysis, logical thinking, and the scientific approach. Collaboration with partners (mutually beneficial supplier relationships) is important to obtain optimal wisdom, skill, and creativity to achieve learner value. Involvement of people is the most effective and efficient way for an educational organization to achieve ITS objectives, to facilitate involvement of all people in the educational organization, and to make a maximum use of its people's competence, wisdom, skill, and creativity. Continuous improvement of the educational organization's learning process and the learner's personal learning enables educational organizations to keep creating values. This enables sustained growth in the external educational environment. It increases learning, personal wisdom, and the educational organization'S wisdom in an innovative and constructive way.

Regional Quality Standards ASEAN University Network AUN recognises the importance of quality in higher education, and the need to develop a holistic quality assurance system to raise academic standards and enhance education, research and service among AUN member universities. In 1998, it mooted the AUN-QA initiative which led to the development of AUN-QA models. Following that, manuals and guidelines at institutional, IQA system and programme level were developed. At the end of 2010, AUN had successfully completed 10 actual quality assessments at programme level involving 23 undergraduate programmes in 7 AUN member universities within a 3-year period. Source: AUN QA Network

Regional Quality Standards ASEAN University Network Strategic (QA at Institutional Level) Systemic (Internal QA System) Tactical (QA at Programme Level) The AUN-QA Models comprise strategic, systemic and tactical dimensions and are subjected to both internal and external QA including accreditation.   Internal QA ensures that an institution, system or programme has policies and mechanisms in place to make sure that it is meeting its own objectives and standards. External QA is performed by an organisation or individuals outside the institution. The assessors evaluate the operation of the institution, system or programme in order to determine whether it meets the agreed upon or predetermined standards.   Source: AUN QA Network

Institutional QA Model Regional Quality Standards ASEAN University Network Stakeholder Satisfaction Quality Assurance and (Inter)national Benchmarking A C H I E V M N T S Educational Activities Research Community Service Policy Plan Management Human Resources Funding Mission Goals Aims Strategic QA at institutional level starts with the requirements of the stakeholders which are translated into the university’s vision, mission, goals and aims or objectives. This means that quality assurance and quality assessment will always start with the question as to the mission and goals (Column 1) and end with the achievements (column 4) to fulfill stakeholder satisfaction.   The second column shows how the university is planning to achieve the goals: translation of the goals into a policy document and policy strategy; the management structure and management style of the university human resource management: input of staff to achieve the goals funding to achieve the intended goals The third column shows the core activities of a university: the educational activities of teaching and learning research activities the contribution to society and to the support and development of the community. For continuous improvement, the institution should implement an effective QA system and benchmark its practices to achieve educational excellence. Institutional QA Model Source: AUN QA Network

Internal Quality Assurance Regional Quality Standards ASEAN University Network Internal Quality Assurance Follow up Student Progress Pass Rate Drop-out Rate Feedback from the Labour Market and Alumni Research Performance Evaluation Course and Curriculum Service Assurance Assessments Quality Staff Facilities Student Support SWOT Analysis Inter-Collegial Audits Information System Handbook Monitoring Instruments Special QA Processes Specific QA An IQA system is the totality of systems, resources and information devoted to setting up, maintaining and improving the quality and standards of teaching, student learning experience, research, and service to the community. The AUN-QA model for an IQA system (see Figure 4) consists of 11 criteria covering the following areas:  internal quality assurance framework; monitoring instruments; evaluation instruments; special QA-processes to safeguard specific activities; specific QA-instruments; and follow-up activities for making improvements IQA System Model Source: AUN QA Network

QA at Programme Level (Original) Regional Quality Standards ASEAN University Network Stakeholders Satisfaction Quality Assurance and (Inter)national benchmarking Programme Specification Programme Content Programme Organisation Student Assessment Academic Staff Quality Support Staff Quality Student Quality Facilities & Infrastructure Quality Assurance Teaching/ Learning Student Evaluation Curriculum Design Stakeholders Feedback Graduate Profile Pass Rates Drop Out Rates Employability Expected Outcomes A c h i e v m n t s Didactic Concept Student Advice & Support Staff Development Activities Graduation Time The AUN-QA Model for programme level focuses on teaching and learning with regard to the following dimensions:  quality of input quality of process quality of output  At the end of 2010, AUN had successfully completed ten actual quality assessments at programme level involving twenty-three undergraduate programmes in seven AUN member universities within a 3-year period. To further enhance and sustain quality assurance practices and quality in higher education, AUN established an AUN-QA Documentation Review Committee and Procedure to keep its documents updated and relevant. The original AUN-QA for programme level was revised to enhance implementation and assessment efficiency and effectiveness QA at Programme Level (Original) Source: AUN QA Network

QA at Programme Level (Revised) Regional Quality Standards ASEAN University Network Stakeholders Satisfaction Quality Assurance and (Inter)national benchmarking Programme Specification Programme Structure & Content Student Assessment Academic Staff Quality Support Staff Quality Student Quality Facilities & Infrastructure Quality Assurance of Teaching & Learning Stakeholders Feedback Pass Rates Drop Out Rates Employability Expected Learning Outcomes A c h i e v m n t s Teaching & Learning Strategy Student Advice & Support Staff Development Activities Graduation Time Research The revised AUN-QA model for programme level starts with the expected learning outcomes (1st Column). There are four rows in the middle of the model and the first row addresses the question of how the expected learning outcomes are translated into the programme; and how they can be achieved via teaching and learning strategy and student assessment.  The second row considers the "input" into the process including academic and support staff; student quality; student advice and support; and facilities and infrastructure.  The third row addresses the quality assurance process of teaching and learning, staff development and stakeholders feedback.  The fourth row focuses on the outcomes of the learning process including pass rates and dropout rates, the average time to graduate, employability of the graduates, and research activities.  The final column addresses the achievements and ends with the fulfillment of stakeholders and the continuous improvement of the quality assurance and benchmarking. QA at Programme Level (Revised) Source: AUN QA Network

Qualification Framework National Quality Standards Country QA Body/Agency Qualification Framework Brunei Darussalam Brunei Darussalam National Accreditation Council (BDNAC) Brunei National Qualifications Framework (BNQF, in Progress) Cambodia Accreditation Committee of Cambodia (ACC) Nil China Ministry of Education Hong Kong the Hong Kong Council for Accreditation of Academic and Vocational Qualifications (HKCAAVQ) The Hong Kong Qualifications Framework India The National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) National Qualification Framework in Technical Vocational Education and Training Indonesia National Accreditation Board for Higher Education BAN-PT Japan Japan University Accreditation Association JUAA University Standards The national quality standards in Asia are at different stages of development and maturity. The accreditation bodies are administered by the education ministry or its appointed agencies. Separate accreditation systems are also adopted for public and private universities in some Asian countries like the Phillippines and Singapore.

Qualification Framework National Quality Standards Country QA Body/Agency Qualification Framework Lao PDR Quality Assurance Centre, Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education Nil Malaysia Malaysian Qualifications Agency Malaysian Qualifications Framework Myanmar Philippines CHED, PAASCU Philippine National Qualifications Framework Singapore Higher Education Quality Assurance Section, Ministry of Education Quality Assurance Framework of Universities Thailand Commision on Higher Education Office for National Educatioin, Standard & Assessment National Qualification Framework Vietnam General Department for Education Testing and Accreditation (GDETA), Ministry of Education and Training

Professional Bodies International Professional Bodies Regional Professional Bodies Quality accreditation could also be driven by the need to meet professional bodies (such as the institute of Engineers) requirements especially in terms of programme content and learning outcomes. Accreditation or compliance to such international and national professional agencies such as ABET or the national representation of engineers, medical doctors, architecture, accountancy, etc is available.

Internal Quality Assurance in General Stakeholders’ Requirements Input Process Output Students Curricula Faculty staff Non-faculty staff Facilities & Infrastructure Teaching resources Teaching & Learning Staff development Student support & evaluation Research Administration Skilled and employable graduates Research publications & output Contribution to community From the drivers of the various QA initiatives, internal QA of Asian universities covers stakeholders requirements and satisfaction, input, process and output. A systems approach to quality assurance requires a focus on the requirements and satisfaction of stakeholders and the quality dimensions of input, process and output. The input segment includes students, teachers, curricula and facilities. Regarding process, the emphasis is on teaching, learning interactions, research, student support and evaluation, staff development, administrative practices. Output includes the quality of graduates, research output and service to the community. Stakeholders’ Satisfaction

Characteristics of QA in Asia Most countries have established QA bodies Uneven development in national capacity Core standards and criteria are quite similar QA framework varies: institution, programme, or both Applicable to public or private universities or both Generally, most countries in Asia have established QA bodies or guided by some international and regional quality standards and professional bodies. Due to the various degree of economics development, Asia tends to have uneven development of QA at the national level. As such, regional QA like the AUN QA becomes attractive as an alternative to QA accreditation for countries like Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam. Nevertheless, standards adopted are almost similar to those adopted by AUN QA. QA frameworks are applicable to institutional and programme level to both public and private universities.

QA Challenges in Asia Different phases of Asian QA development and maturity Harmonization of Asian QA standards Recognition of Asian QA standards Different phases of Asian QA development and maturity may impede the objectives of harmonizing and recognition of Asian QA standards. It is for this reason that the AUN initiated the CLMV training in the early part of this year under the Japan ASEAN Cooperation. Harmonizing of Asian QA standards would bring about greater efficiency as compliance to various QA requirements result in assessment fatigue and separate reports and documentations. Harmonization increases recognition of Asian Universities and student mobility across borders. The cooperation with the APQN and DAAD is the step forward for ASEAN to move closer to this objective.

Closing the Quality Gap Education systems in ASEAN countries are different. While ASEAN-6 has a long experience of building its own QA system, CLMV countries have just begun their journey on the QA standard. Quality improvement is significant in leading universities in ASEAN towards a harmonisation in education. The AUN realises that QA is bedrock for maintaining, improving and enhancing teaching, research and the overall academic standards. Source: AUN QA Network

Harmonization of Asian QA Standards ASEAN University Network – Quality Assurance (AUN - QA), established in 1998 Asia-Pacific Quality Network (APQN), established in 2005 ASEAN Quality Assurance Network (AQAN), established in 2008 APQN: ‘To enhance the quality of higher education in Asia and the Pacific region through strengthening the work of quality assurance agencies and extending the cooperation between them.’ AQAN: The aims and purposes of the AQAN are: To promote and share good practices of quality assurance in higher education in the Southeast Asia region; To collaborate on capacity building of quality assurance in higher education in the region; To share information on higher education and facilitate mutual recognition of qualifications throughout the region; and To develop a regional quality assurance framework for Southeast Asia. AUN-QA: To be a focal point for coordinating activities in order to move forwards the harmonisation of educational standards and continuous improvement quality of universities in ASEAN

Harmonization of Asian QA Standards Chiba Principle, 2008 To provide guidance to higher education providers and QA agencies in enhancing QA policies and practices Chiba Principle Quality Framework Internal Quality Assurance: key principles guiding institutions in assuring their own institutional quality Quality Assurance Agencies: principles guiding the QA agencies and their management Quality Assurance Assessment: guiding principle for the assessment of institution and programmes by the institution themselves or the QA agency The reference point for quality assurance in Asian Countries are the “Chiba Principles” which have been drafted under the Brisbane Communiqué in Chiba, Japan in 2008 during the APQN Annual Conference. Based on the acknowledgement of the diversity in quality assurance, they provide guidance for higher education institutions and quality assurance agencies in enhancing quality assurance policies and practices. Emphasis is on a generic approach, applicable and relevant to all higher institutions and quality assurance agencies. The breadth of the principles allows for the different roles of quality assurance agencies, i.e. accreditation, audit or both and also for different levels of assessment, institution, programmes and/or both. The underlying view is that the prime responsibility for quality assurance lies with the individual higher education institutions. Ton Vroeijenstijn, 2009, “Quality Assurance in Asian and European Higher Education – Opportunities for Inter- and Intra- Regional Cooperation”

QA Collaboration Beyond Asia Regional cooperation in QA - allows for mutual learning, increases transparency of and trust in higher education systems and thus enables that degrees and study periods are recognized and mobility of students and academic staff is improving. - promotes independent external assessments, because the credibility of the institution is higher, internationally and nationally, when peers do not come from the home country. - raises efficiency and cost-effectiveness, especially for small and medium sized university systems.