Transcript QUALITY ENHANCEMENT CELL

SEQUENCE OF MEETING





Welcome Note by the Rector
Confirmation of Minutes of 1st
Meeting
Progress on Agenda Items of 1st
Meeting
Discussion on Fresh Agenda Items
Working Lunch at 1400 hrs
QUALITY ENHANCEMENT CELL
Director Quality Assurance
The Quality Enhancement Cell has been established at Bahria
University Islamabad with the objective of significant enhancement
of quality in higher learning. The major function of the QEC is to
integrate the concepts of quality in the higher learning systems and
to develop practical guidelines and policies for uplifting the
standard of education.

QEC is to be headed by a Director reporting directly to
Rector. He / She is to be the correspondent with the outside
bodies.
Following is the hierarchy of QEC officials
Rector
Director QEC
Deputy Director
Data
Analysts
Office
Assistant
Naib Qasid
Following are the functions / responsibilities of QEC
1. Promoting public confidence that the quality and standards of
the award of degrees are enhanced and safeguarded.
2. Review of quality standards and the quality of teaching and
learning in each subject area.
3. Review of academic affiliations with other institutions in
terms of effective management of standards and quality of
programs.
4. Develop qualifications framework by setting out the attributes
and abilities that can be expected from the holder of a
qualification, i.e. Bachelors, Bachelor with Honors, Master’s,
M.Phil, Doctoral.
5. Develop program specifications. These are standard set of
information clarifying what knowledge understanding, skills
and other attributes a student will have developed on
successfully completing a specific program.
6.
To develop quality Assurance process and methods of
evaluation to affirm that quality of provision and standards
of awards are being maintained and to foster curriculum,
subject and staff development, to gather with research and
other scholarly activities.
7. Ensure that the university’s quality assurance procedures are
designed to fit in with the arrangements in place nationally for
maintaining and improving the quality of Higher education.
8. QEC is responsible to develop procedures for the
following:
 Approval of new programs
 Annual monitoring and evaluation including program
monitoring, faculty monitoring and student’s perception.
 Departmental review
 Student feedback
 Employer feedback
 Quality assurance of Master’s, M.Phil and Ph.D. degree
program.
 Subject review
 Instructional assessment
 Program specifications
 Qualification framework
One of the basic component of Quality Assurance process is the
Self assessment for the university Programs.
What is Assessment?
Assessment is a systematic process of gathering, reviewing and
using important quantitative and qualitative data and information
from multiple and diverse sources about educational programs,
for the purpose of improving student learning, and evaluating
whether academic and learning standards are being met.
What is self assessment?
Self assessment is an assessment conducted by the institution
itself to assess whether programs meet the educational
objectives and outcomes with the purpose to improve
program’s quality and enhancing students learning.
Following are the objectives:
Maintain and improve academic standards
2. Enhance student’s learning
3. Verify that the existing programs meet their objectives and
institutional goals
4. Provide feedback for quality assurance of academic programs
1.
Each academic program shall undergo a self assessment every
year. The Quality Enhancement Cell is responsible for the
planning, coordinating and following up on the self
assessment(SA) activities.
The steps for the procedure of self assessment are as follows:
The QEC initiates the SA one semester prior to the end of the
assessment cycle through the Rector office in which the
program is offered. If the program is undergoing the SA for the
first time , the department will be given one academic year for
preparation.
2. Upon receiving the initiation letter the department shall form a
program team(PT). The PT will be responsible for preparing a
self-assessment report(SAR) about the program under
consideration over a period of one semester.
1.
1.
2.
3.
4.
The department shall submit the SAR to the QEC
through the concerned Dean/HOD. The QEC reviews
the SAR within one month to ensure that it is prepared
according to the required format.
The Rector forms a program assessment team (AT) in
consultation with the QEC recommendations within one
month. The AT comprises of 2-3 faculty members from
within or outside the university. The AT must have at
least one expert in the area of the assessed program.
The QEC plans and schedules the AT visit period in
coordination with the department that is offering the
program.
The AT conducts the assessment, submits a report and
presents its findings in an exit meeting that shall be
attended by the QEC, Dean, and PT and faculty
members.
7.
8.
9.
The QEC shall submit an executive summary on the AT
findings to the Rector.
The department shall prepare and submit an implementation
plan to QEC based on the AT findings. The plan must include
AT findings and the correct actions to be taken, assignment of
responsibility and the time frame for such actions.
The QEC shall follow up on the implementation plan to ensure
departments are adhering to the implementation plan.The
academic department shall inform the QEC each time a
corrective action is implemented. QEC shall review the
implementation plan once a semester to access the progress of
implementation.
Self Assessment Procedure
QEC initiates SA through the Rector office one
semester prior to the assessment
Department forms the PT that will be
responsible for preparing SAR
QEC reviews the Documentation within
one month
No
SAR
Complete
Yes
Complete SAR
The Rector forms the AT in consultation with the concerned dean
based on the recommendation of the QEC
QEC plans and fixes AT visit
The AT conducts assessment and presents its findings to QEC,
Dean, PT and dept. faculty
The QEC submits an executive summary to the Rector
Department prepares implementation plan
Follow up of the implementation plan by QEC
COMPONENTS OF THE SELF ASSESSMENT
PROCESS
Self assessment is based on following eight criteria. To meet each
criterion a number of standards must be satisfied.
1: PROGRAM MISSION, OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES
2: CURRICULUM DESIGN AND ORGANIZATION
3: LABORATORIES AND COMPUTING
4: STUDENT SUPPORT AND ADVISING
5: PROCESS CONTROL
6: FACULTY
7: INSTITUTIONAL FACILITIES
8: INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT

Criterion 1: PROGRAM MISSION,
OBJECTIVES AND MISSION:
Each program must have a mission, measureable objective and
expected outcomes for graduates. Outcome includes
competency and tasks graduates are expected to perform after
completing the program. A strategic Plan must be placed to
achieve program objectives.
Following associated standards are :
 Standard 1.1: The program must have documented
measureable objectives that support departmental and
institution mission statements.
 Standard 1.2: The program must have documented outcomes
for graduating students. It must be demonstrated that the
outcomes support the program objectives and that graduating
students are capable of performing these outcomes.


Standard 1.3: The results of program’s assessment and
the extent to which they are used to improve the
program must be documented.
Standard 1.4: The department must assess its overall
performance periodically using quantifiable measures.
Criterion 2: CURRICULUM DESIGN AND
ORGANISATION
Curriculum must be designed and organized to achieve the
program’s objectives and outcomes.

Standard 2.1:The curriculum must be consistent and supports
the program’s documented objectives.

Standard 2.2:Theoretical background, problems analysis and
solution design must be stressed within the program’s core
material.

standard 2.3:The curriculum must satisfy the core
requirements for the program, as specified by the respective
accreditation body.

Standard 2.4: The curriculum must satisfy the major
requirements for the program as specified by the
respective accreditation body .
Criterion 2: Curriculum Design & Organization
(continued)

Standard 2.5: The curriculum must satisfy general
education, arts, professional and other discipline requirements
for the program as specified by the respective accreditation
body.

Standard 2.6: Information technology component of the
curriculum must be integrated throughout the program.

Standard 2.7: Oral and written communication skills of the
student must be developed and applied in the program.
Criterion 3: LABORATORIES AND COMPUTING
FACILITIES
Laboratories and computing facilities must be adequately
available and accessible to faculty members and students to
support teaching and research activities. To meet this criterion the
standards must be satisfied.

Standard 3-1: Laboratory manuals / documentation /
instructions for experiments must be available and readily
accessible to faculty and students.

Standard 3-2: There must be adequate support personnel for
instruction and maintaining the laboratories.

Standard 3-3: The University computing infrastructure and
facilities must be adequate to support program’s objectives.
CRITERION 4: STUDENT SUPPORT AND
ADVISING
Student must have 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. To meet this criterion the standards in this section
must be satisfied.
Criterion 4: Student Support and Advising
(continued)
STANDARD 4-1 Courses must be offered with sufficient
frequency and number for students to complete the program in a
timely manner
STANDARD 4-2 Courses in the major area of study must be
structured to ensure effective interaction between students,
faculty and teaching assistants:
STANDARD 4-3 Guidance on how to complete the program
must be available for all students and access to advising must be
available to make course decisions and carrier choices.
Criterion 5: Process Control
The process by which major functions are delivered must be
in place, controlled, periodically reviewed, evaluated and
continuously improved . To meet this criterion a set of
standard must be satisfied.

Standard 5.1:The process by which students are admitted
to the program must be based on quantitative and qualitative
criteria and clearly documented. This process must be
periodically evaluated to ensure that it is meeting its
objectives.
Criterion 5: Process Control

(continued)
Standard 5-2: The process by which students are registered
in the program and monitoring of students progress to ensure
timely completion of the program must be documented. This
process must be periodically evaluated to ensure that it is
meeting its objectives.

Standard 5-3: The process of recruiting and retaining highly
qualified faculty members must be in place and clearly
documented. Also processes and procedures for faculty
evaluation, promotion must be consistent with institution
mission statement. These processes must be periodically
evaluated to ensure that it is meeting its objectives.
Criterion 5: Process Control
(continued)
 Standard 5-4 : The process and procedures used to ensure
that teaching and delivery of course material to the students
emphasizes active learning and that course learning outcomes
are met. The process must be periodically evaluated to ensure
that it is meeting its objectives.

Standard 5-5: The process that ensures that graduates have
completed the requirements of the program must be based on
standards, effective procedures and clearly documented. This
process must be periodically evaluated to ensure that it is
meeting its objectives.
Criterion 6: Faculty
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. To meet this criterion the standards in this
section must be satisfied.
Criterion 6: Faculty

(continued)
Standard 6-1: There must be enough full time faculty who are
committed to the program to provide adequate coverage of the
program areas/courses, with continuity and stability. The
interests and qualifications of all faculty members must be
sufficient to teach all courses, plan, modify and update courses
and curricula. All faculty members must have a level of
competence that would normally be obtained through graduate
work in the discipline. The majority of faculty must hold a
Ph.D./MS in the discipline.
Criterion 6: Faculty

Standard 6-2: All faculty members must remain current in
the discipline and sufficient time must be provided for
scholarly activities and professional development. Also,
Effective programs for faculty development must be in place.

Standard 6-3: All faculty members should be motivated and
have job satisfaction to excel in their profession.
Criterion 7: INSTITUTIONAL FACILITIES
Institutional facilities, including library, computing facilities,
classrooms and offices must be adequate to support the
objective of the program. To satisfy this criterion a number of
standards must be met.
Criterion 7: Institutional Facilities
(continued)
Standard 7-1 : The institution must have the infrastructure to
support new trends in learning such as e-learning.
 Standard 7-2: The library must possess an up-to-date
technical collection relevant to the program and must be
adequately staffed with professional personnel.
 Standard 7-3: Class-rooms must be adequately equipped and
offices must be adequate to enable faculty to carry out their
responsibilities.

Criterion 8: INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT
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.
Criterion 8: Institutional Support
(continued)

Standard 8-1: There must be sufficient support and financial
resources to attract and retain high quality faculty and provide
the means for them to maintain competence as teachers and
scholars.

Standard 8-2: There must be an adequate number of high
quality graduate students, research assistants and Ph.D. students.

Standard 8-3: Financial resources must be provided to acquire
and maintain Library holdings, laboratories and computing
facilities.
IMPLEMENTATION STATUS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE MECHANISM
Awareness/conference/ workshops arranged at Bahria University
S. No
Title of the event
Date
Target group
Purpose of the
event
1
A Guest Speaker Session on Quality Assurance
aspects of “Training & Development”
By: Dr. Awais Siraj
(Faculty of BU)
2nd June 2010
Students of BBA
(VI) C
Educate target Group on
Quality Assurance in
Training & Development
2
A Guest Speaker Session on Quality Assurance
aspects of “Sales Management”
By: Mr. Sajjad Pasha
(Visiting faculty)
9th
Students of BBA
(VII) C (Visiting
Faculty)
To Educate Target Group
about Sales Management &
Quality Assurance
3
Workshop on “Total Quality Management”
By: Dr. Nawar Khan
(Visiting faculty)
Students of EMBAIV
To teach target group
about“Total Quality
Management”
5th July to 5th
August 2010
25 faculty members
from BU and 10
from AU
To improve the standard of
Teachers and Training
Course on “Professional
Enforcement Program for
Teacher”
2 August 2010
All HOD & Faculty
of BU
Awareness about Quality
Assurance in Higher
Education
4
Workshop on Training Course on “Professional
Competency Enhancement Program for
University Teachers”
By: QEC of Bahria University
& Higher Education Commission (HEC)
A one day workshop on “Higher Education
Quality Assurance paradigm”. The resource
persons for the workshop were:
Prof. Dr. Naheed Zia Khan
Ms. Farina Iqbal
from
Fatima Jinnah Women University Rawalpindi.
June 2010
19 July 2010
Awareness/conference/ workshops arranged at Bahria University ( continued)
5
6
7
One day workshop on “ International Practices of
Quality Assurance” & Establishment of Quality
Enhancement Cell (QEC) at BU, its scope and
purpose, its collaboration and networking with
National & International bodies.
Conducted by: Dr. M. Abdul Wahid Usmani,
Director QEC
Dow University of Health Sciences
Karachi
A workshop on “ Working of QA Cells------Introduction to Quality Assurance Measures such as
Programme Evaluation through Self- Assessment
Approach”
Conducted by: Dr. M. Abdul Wahid Usmani,
Director QEC
Dow University of Health Sciences
Karachi
Workshop on Quality Assurance aspects of
“Awareness Raising Strategy on National Impact
Assessment Program”
By: International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN)
Marriot Hotel Islamabad
16 August 2010
Top management of
BU Karachi Campus
all Deans & HODs &
Senior Faculty
Members of Program
Teams
To Educate Target Group on
Quality Assurance
26 August 2010
HOD’s & faculty
members of BU
Karachi campus.
Members of Program
Teams
To educate the target group
about Quality Enhancement
Measures through Program
Evaluation & Self-Assessment
Approach
03 Nov 2010
8
Two days International Conference on Quality
Assurance aspects of “Geotechnical Engineering”
Conducted By: NESPAK
UET Lahore
5-6 Nov 2010
9
Two days Annual Technical Conference
Conducted By: Pakistan Association of Petroleum
Geoscientists- Society of Pakistan Engineers.
Serena Hotel Islamabad
10-11 Nov 2010
Two days Nepal Geological Conference
Dr. M Zafar
(Associate Professor)
HOD
E & ES senior faculty
member of BU
attended the workshop
Ms. Tayyaba Mateen
(Lecturer)
faculty member of BU
attended the
conference
Dr. M Zafar (Associate
Professor) HOD
E & ES & senior
faculty member of BU
attended the
conference
Dr. Shahina Tariq
(Associate Prof)
Awareness Raising Strategy
on National Impact
Assessment Program and
Quality Assurance
To apprise the students /
researcher s about importance
of QA in Geotechnical
Engineering
To educate the target group
about importance of QA in
R&D
Geological Studies and
Awareness/conference/ workshops arranged at Bahria University ( continued)
5
6
One Day Seminar on Impact of Various Assessment Tools
on Teacher’s Training Assessment at Learning Innovation
Division
HEC.
By: Prof. Dr. Norman Reid
(University of Glasgow)
Higher Education Commission
LI Division.
Professional Competency Enhancement Program for
University Teachers (PCEPT) Course organized by
National Academy of Higher Education
(NAHE), HEC at PIEAS
13th December 2010
29 Dec to 29 Jan 2011
Following faculty
members of BU attended
the seminar;
Mr. Muhammad Pervez
Dy. Director
Exam-1
Mr. Ghulam Yasin
Dy. Director
Exam-II
Mr. Nasir Mahmood
Dy. Director
Academics
Mr. Fazal-e-Raziq
Teaching Assistant
Following faculty
members of BU attended
the course.
Mr. Abdul Rauf
(Lecturer)
Ms. Malika Farah Deeba
(Lecturer)
Mr. Adil Naseer
(Teaching Assistant)
One Day Seminar on Impact of
Various Assessment Tools on
Teacher’s Training Assessment
at Learning Innovation Division
HEC
To improve the standard of
Teachers and Training Course on
“Professional Enforcement
Program for Teacher ”PCEPT
Course organized by National
Academy of Higher Education
(NAHE), HEC at PIEAS
Self-Assessment Exercise --(Scheduled from 17th September to 2nd
December 2010)
QEC Review of the program Teams
report
Program Team Report completed
S.No
1
Departments
Name
1. Engineering
dept Islamabad
Campus
2. Engineering
dept Karachi
Campus
2
1. Management
Sciences dept in
Islamabad
Campus
2. Management
Sciences in
Karachi Campus
No. of
Criteria
covered (out
of 8)
No. of
Standards
covered (out
of 31)
No. & Type
of Surveys
completed
(out of 10)
Date of
submission of
the report by
the PT
08
31
05
18-10-10
Report
returned to
PT and
further
submission
by PT
(Specify
dates)
14 Dec
2010
Report
finalized
(Date)
30-12-10
30-12-10
08
31
05
19-10-10
25 Dec
2010
08
31
05
18-10-10
14 Dec
2010
30-12-10
08
31
05
19-10-10
25 Dec
2010
30-12-10
Contin……
3
1. Dept of Earth
& Environmental
Sciences in
Islamabad
Campus
2. Dept of Earth
& Environmental
Sciences in
Karachi Campus
4
Dept of Applied
Sciences &
Graduate Studies
in Karachi &
Islamabad
Campus
08
31
05
18-10-10
14 Dec
2010
30-12-10
30-12-10
08
31
05
19-10-10
25 Dec
2010
08
31
05
18-10-10
14 Dec
2010
30-12-10
08
31
05
19-10-10
25 Dec
2010
30-12-10
Action plan for the completion of SA process
S.
No
1
Selection of
departments
Formation
of PTs
Submissio
n of SAR
Formation
of ATs
1. Engineering formed by
dept Islamabad 17/9/2010
Campus
16th
October
2010
By
2. Engineering
dept Karachi
formed by
Campus
17/9/2010
2
1.
Management
Sciences dept
in Islamabad
Campus
2.
Management
Sciences in
Campus
formed by
17/9/2010
formed by
17/9/2010
20th
October
2010
16th
October
2010
By 20th
October
2010
16th
October
2010
By 20th
October
2010
16th
October
2010
By 20th
October
2010
ATs visit
Exit
meeting of
Submission
AT with the
of AT report
Dean pt &
Faculty
Submission
of executive
summary to
VC
Submissio
n of
Implement
ation plans
to VC
5th to 7th
Jan 2011
17th Jan
2011
24th to
27th Jan
2011
4th Feb
2011
14th Feb
2011
15th to
17th Jan
2011
24th Jan
2011
2nd to 7th
Feb 2011
14th Feb
2011
24th Feb
2011
5th to 7th
Jan 2011
17th Jan
2011
24th to
27th Jan
2011
4th Feb
2011
14th Feb
2011
15th to
17th Jan
2011
24th Jan
2011
2nd to 7th
Feb 2011
14th Feb
2011
24th Feb
2011
Conti……..
3
4
5
1. Dept of
Humanities and
Social Sciences
in Campus
2. Dept of
Humanities and
Social Sciences
in Campus
formed by
17/9/2010
16th
October
2010
formed by
17/9/2010
16th
October
2010
1. Dept of Earth
& Environmental
Sciences in
Campus
2. Dept of Earth
& Environmental
Sciences in
Karachi Campus
formed by
17/9/2010
16th
October
2010
formed by
17/9/2010
16th
October
2010
Dept of Applied
Sciences &
Graduate Studies
in Islamabad
Campus
formed by
17/9/2010
16th
October
2010
formed by
17/9/2010
16th
Dept of Applied
Sciences &
Graduate Studies
October
2010
20th October
2010
20th October
2010
20th October
2010
20th October
2010
20th October
2010
20th October
2010
5th to 7th
Jan 2011
17th Jan
2011
24th to
27th Jan
2011
4th Feb
2011
14th Feb
2011
15th to
17th Jan
2011
5th to 7th
Jan 2011
24th Jan
2011
2nd to 7th
Feb 2011
14th Feb
2011
24th Feb
2011
17th Jan
2011
24th to
27th Jan
2011
4th Feb
2011
14th Feb
2011
15th to
17th Jan
2011
5th to 7th
Jan 2011
24th Jan
2011
2nd to 7th
Feb 2011
14th Feb
2011
24th Feb
2011
17th Jan
2011
24th to
27th Jan
2011
4th Feb
2011
14th Feb
2011
15th to
17th Jan
2011
24th Jan
2011
2nd to 7th
Feb 2011
14th Feb
2011
24th Feb
2011
Feedback Forms
There are following feedback forms:




Student Course Evaluation Questionnaire (To be filled by
each student at the time of course completion)
Faculty Course Review Report (To be filled by each teacher
at the time of course completion).
Survey of Graduating Students.
Research Student Progress Review Form (To be filled out
by Master / M. Phil / Ph.D Research Students on six monthly
basis).

Faculty Survey (To be submitted on annual basis by each
faculty member).
Survey of Department Offering Ph.D Program.
 Alumni Survey (To be filled by Alumni - after the
completion of each academic year)
 Employer Survey (To be filled in the employer – after
the completion of each academic year)
 Teacher Evaluation Form (To be filled by the student).

What is Assessment Team?
o
o
o
o
A group of three to four senior officials with one chairman of
the team.
One of the members must be a subject specialist from within
or outside university.
Nomination should be proposed by the Director QEC to the
Rector who will finally approve.
Team is responsible for the evaluation of SAR.
Desired Skills:
o
o
o
o
Senior faculty and Dean as Chairman
Having some background of QEC working
Having good drafting analytical skills
With excellent command over written communication
Thank You