SESSION 2 EVALUATION INSTRUMENT FOR ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMME ACCREDITATION

OUTLINE Objectives Of The Session The Nine Areas Of Evaluation Based On Standards In COPPA Grading Scale Uses Of The Scale Explanatory Notes Evaluation Instrument (Sample of Area 9) Evaluation Instrument (Sample of Area 9) Recommendations For Decisions: Performance By Levels List Of Records Obtained And Verified For Provisional Or Full Accreditation Summary Of Findings By Area Summary Of Attainment Level By Areas Of Evaluation Summary Of Attainment Level By Areas Of Evaluation

OBJECTIVES OF THE SESSION To review the MQA-01 or MQA-02 of a given programme using the Evaluation Instrument based on the Code of Practice for Programme Accreditation (COPPA) To determine the grading on the specified areas of evaluation assigned to the group To determine the result on the level of achievement of the specified areas of evaluation

USES OF THE RATING SCALE To identify areas of strength and concerns To identify areas that need further information or attention of institutions concerned To refine the areas of strengths and concerns after gathering and verifying information To achieving objectivity in collective judgment To determine the outcome of the specified purpose of the provisional accreditation/ accreditation.

EXPLANATORY NOTES The Code of Practice provides benchmarked standards and enhanced standards which are defined by the use of terms that indicates the quality expected in those standards. These terms are expressed by descriptors such as consistent, clear, sufficient, appropriate, variety, comprehensive, continually, regularly, continuously, periodically, abundant, optimum, conducive, high degree, adequate, extensive, sufficient, etc. They generally denote an achievement of an appropriate size, level or degree in compliance with the standards.

THE NINE AREAS OF EVALUATION BASED ON STANDARDS IN COPPA 1.Vision, Mission, Educational Goals and Learning Outcomes 2.Curriculum Design and Delivery 3.Assessment of Students 4.Student Selection and Support Services 5.Academic Staff 6.Educational Resources 7.Programme Monitoring and Review 8.Leadership, Governance, and Administration 9.Continual Quality Improvement

…cont… There are further sub-descriptors such as highly, fully, clearly, widely, extensively, very, most, etc which indicate the degree of attainment of a higher level of compliance of the benchmarked standards and the enhanced standards. These sub-descriptors are dependent on the quality of the documentation and the evidence obtained upon evaluation during the institutional audit visit of institutional audit. The interpretation of the attainment of the levels should be reached by consensus of the panel of auditors based on best evidences and sound judgment in line with the good practices of institutional audit.

…cont… The benchmark standards indicate a minimal level of pract ice (e. g 5.1.1: adequate staff) while enhanced standards refer to advanced, higher, complex, better level of the practice(i.e : good mix of staff). Low ratings for benchmark standards cannot be followed by similar or higher ratings of related enhanced standards. The attainment levels (AL1 to AL5) for benchmark standards and the enhanced standards within an area of sub-area are connected and therefore, must be consistent.

EVALUATION INSTRUMENT (Example) AREA 1 AL 5AL 4AL 3AL 2AL 1 BM-Std Programme aims, objectives and learning outcomes are very clearly defined. Programme aims, objectives and learning outcomes clearly defined Programme aims, objectives and learning outcomes are defined. Programme aims, objectives and learning outcomes incoherently stated Programme aims, objectives and learning outcomes are not defined. Programme aims, objectives and learning outcomes are defined. (COPPA:1.1) Panel’s Collective Findings MQA-01/MQA- 02 and the evidence gathered during audit show the above mentioned is clear, connected and compelling MQA-01/MQA- 02 and the evidence gathered during audit show the above mentioned is stated showing the linkages between these elements. MQA- 01/MQA-02 and the evidence gathered during audit show the above mentioned is stated and can be understood. MQA-01/MQA- 02 and the evidence gathered during audit show the above mentioned to be present but disorganised and confused. Nothing in the MQA-01/MQA- 02 and the evidence gathered show the above mentioned not present. Description of the practice and evidence that could support the assignment of the attainment level

EXCEL-based Scoring Instrument

Summary of Rating (Benchmarked)

Summary of Rating (Enhanced)

GRADING SCALE Level 5 Level 5 Excellent - Minimally achieved attainment Level 3 or above of all benchmarked standards and enhanced standards Level 4 Level 4 Good - Minimally achieved attainment Level 3 of all benchmarked standards and at least 50% of the Level 3 enhanced standards Level 3 Level 3 Satisfactory - Minimally all benchmarked standards at Attainment Level 3 Level 2 Level 2 Less Than Satisfactory – Achievement of at least 70% of benchmarked standards at Attainment Level 3 in each of the 9 areas Level 1 Level 1 Unsatisfactory – Achievement of less than 70% of benchmarked standards at attainment Level 3 in each of the 9 areas

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DECISIONS OVERALL PROGRAMME PERFORMANCE LEVELS Benchmarked At AL 3 (%) Enhanced At AL 3 (%) FIVEExcellent100 FOURGood10050 THREESatisfactory100- TWOLess Than Satisfactory70- ONEUnsatisfactory< 70-

No.Name of ItemSource of Information Checked by Remarks List of Records Obtained and Verified for Provisional or Full Accreditation

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS BY AREA Area Aspect Level Strengths (Commendations - Strengths that are unique or different from others) Affirmations (Opportunities for Improvement) – Areas of Concern identified by HEP and Plan of Action Areas of Concern (not identified by HEP in Self Review Report but discovered by Assessors) Recommendations

SUMMARY OF ATTAINMENT LEVEL BY AREAS OF EVALUATION (e.g: Area 2) NO.AREACRITERIA ATTAINMENT LEVEL BENCHMARKED STANDARDS ENHANCED STANDARDS 2 Curriculum Design and Delivery 2.1 Curriculum Design and Teaching-Learning Methods /3/2 2.2 Programme Design and Teaching and Learning Methods /6/4 2.3 Curriculum Content and Structure /3/1 2.4 Management of the Programmes /6/3 2.5 Linkages with External Stakeholders /1/2 Total /19/12

Note : Area 2 Total number of benchmark standards – 19 Total number of enhanced standards - 11 i.Scores at benchmark standards at attainment level is based on number of standards achieved at Level 3 in each sub-area ii.Overall attainment score is based on total number of standard achieved in all sub-areas upon the total number of standards in all sub-areas. Standards in sub-areas which are not applicable are not counted.

End of Session 2