Standard 3. Management of Program Quality Assurance (Overall Rating ** * Stars)
Teaching and other staff involved in the program must be committed to improving both their own performance and the quality of the program as a whole. Regular evaluations of quality must be undertaken within each course based on valid evidence and appropriate benchmarks, and plans for improvement made and implemented. Central importance must be attached to student learning outcomes with each course contributing to the achievement of overall program objectives.
Provide an explanatory report
Quality Assurance Management Committee (QAMC) was established and developed by the Department of Computer Science & Information in the continuously University's vision improvement of its programs and the academic and administrative units for institutional accreditation.
The Committee assessed the compliance of the requirements with the third standard of the National Assessment and Accreditation NCAAA. To manage and develop quality assurance , the Commission will accomplish the following:
1. Evaluation of the documents and evidence of quality assurance and development.
2. A proposal of unfinished requirements plan.
3. Submit a report to assess of the standard requirements.
Comment and General Description of Quality Assurance
A high quality institution should regard itself as a learning organization, one that systematically studies the quality of its own activities on a continuing basis and uses what it learns from that study to improve its operations.
The central focus in these assessments should be the quality and extent of students' learning considered as outcomes; what students understand and can do as a result of their studies whether that learning is appropriate to their field, and how well has it been learned. Other important outcomes are research (for institutions with that responsibility) and broader contributions to the community.
A wide range of other activities that provide supporting infrastructure must also be evaluated and progressively improved, and the relative emphasis on these will vary over time in response to the institution’s mission, the circumstances in which it finds itself, and its strategic priorities for development.
A senior member of College should be given responsibility for leading the quality assurance processes, and a committee drawn from all parts of the organization should be appointed to provide advice and assistance, and oversee what is done. An office should be established within the central administration to coordinate and lead quality assurance activities. Self-assessment and planning for improvement should occur regularly in all parts of the institution, with benchmarks for comparisons of performance selected for the various programs and administrative units. The objectives for each administrative unit should be demanding, but appropriate and achievable.
Quality improvement should be integrated into the institution’s normal planning processes in a continuing cycle of planning, implementation, evaluation and review.
The system should involve continuous monitoring of evidence about performance and independent advice on interpretations of that evidence, with adjustments made in activities to ensure that quality of performance meets the benchmarks that have been established. Internal reporting of performance and adjustments in strategies should take place at regular times, normally at least once each year, with more extensive reviews of programs and broader institutional activities at least once every seven years.
While rigorous standards should be applied, the institution should have an atmosphere of encouragement and support in which weaknesses are openly acknowledged and assistance provided to overcome them.
The QAMC Unit Tasks
The core tasks of the Committee are:
1. Determine the nature and sources of information.
2. Inventory of components, measurement instruments and associated subsidiary criteria.
3. Preparation of action plan to achieve the objectives referred to above.
4. Design and collect information forms from different sources.
5. Check the practice field which related to the third standard requirements.
6. Collect the information from Responsible authorities and analysis.
7. Introduce the evidence of finished requirements.
8. Restriction on the unfinished requirements.
9. Introduce the Plan process which enables the University to finish the requirements.
10. Preparation of the reports.
11. Follow-up the implementation of the recommendations of unfinished requirements and collect the evidence.
Contact officials and information sources
1. The senior managements of the University.
2. The Deans of faculties.
3. Heads of departments.
4. Deans of deanships and specialized centers.
5. Managers and staff.
6. College members.
7. Quality faculties units.
8. Students.
The nature of the data and information
The Committee gathers information and documents for assessing response to quality management standard.
Methods and tools to collect data and information: This will be done through 1. Interviews
2. Questionnaires 3. Collection of reports
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) involved:
The following key performance indicators are used for the purpose of assessing performance, to verify quality interpretations:
1. The average rating of the final year of graduate students on the quality of the program.
2. Proportion of the courses in which student evaluations were conducted during a year time.
3. Proportion of the course reports conducted within a year time.
The basic components of the third standard:
1. Commitment to quality improvement in our program.
2. The scope of quality assurance processes.
3. Manage the quality assurance processes.
4. Using of indicators performance and Comparison between reference points.
5. Independent verification of the estimation.
3.1 Commitment to Quality Improvement in the Program Comment:
All of the university administration, College and staff have the will to improve the quality of the program, but they need to provide all means of necessary human and technical resources taking into consideration along with transparency in reporting and the inclusion of College to participate in the process of the evaluation and planning in addition to providing incentives for outstanding achievements.
Priorities for improvement : 1. Transparency of reporting.
2. Acknowledging the staff with policies and process of quality improvement and goals of the University plan.
3. Provide incentives for outstanding achievements.
3.2 Scope of Quality Assurance Processes
In the report, when studying the weaknesses which needed to be improved are:
1- Quality assurance operations must cover all aspects of planning program and implementation, including activities and resources offered by other departments in the institution.
2- Quality assessment processes must give an overview of the quality aspects in the program as a whole and in each of its components (including all scheduled courses) 3- Operations to ensure quality performance of all activities, routines and strategic goals.
4- Ensure quality assurance processes interpolation the standards required, and ensure that there is a continuous improvement of performance.
Comment:
Although the university is considered as an emerging, however it tries hard to ensure the quality level of all faculties and departments in accordance with the University program of the quality assurance.
Priorities for improvement: “A program of institutional research on quality issues is carried out to investigate and report to the Rector or Dean and the governing body, and inform the institution as a whole on the quality of the institution’s activities and achievement of its objectives”:
Continuous evaluation of the quality assurance processes and ensure coverage of all aspects of the program in accordance with its strategic objectives and careful reporting of precise criteria to help in the university evaluation of policy planning
3.3 Administration of Quality Assurance Processes
In the report, when studying the weaknesses which that need to be improved are:
1. Storing the statistical data for indicators, involving the distribution of grades, progress and completion rates, in a central database can be accessed and reviewed regularly, are set out in the annual and periodic program reports.
2. One of the College members in the program is responsible for leading and supporting the quality assurance processes management and involve teaching staff and other staff in the quality assurance activities.
3. Putting quality assurance program procedures for improvement and exclude unnecessary requirements as part of this review to simplify the system and avoid any unnecessary thing.
Comment:
Recently a storing facility is adopted to store academic qualifications and certifications of the College members in a centralized database, which helps quality assurance processes through the adoption of the specialization of each member and qualifications in the teaching process and policy development of the university. But the process still needs to greater efforts to automate the quality assurance processes.
Priorities for improvement : “Evaluations are (i) based on evidence, (ii) linked to appropriate standards, (iii) include consideration of predetermined indicators, and (iv) take account of independent verification of interpretations”:
1. Automating quality assurance processes, thereby helping the process of collecting data and build statistical analysis for operations to suit the evaluation program and policy planning at the university.
2. Do regular self-evaluations to improve quality assurance processes.
3.4 Use of Performance Indicators and Benchmarks
In the report, when studying the weaknesses which that need to be improved , we get:
1. Provide information about the basic performance indicators required by the educational institution.
2. Selected performance indicators (criteria) and additional reference to compare program which used in program evaluation and reporting.
3. To be standardized wording and form of indicators (criteria) used in the program and throughout the institution.
3.5 Independent Verification of Evaluations
In this report, when studying the weaknesses which needed to be improved as follows:
1. Self-evaluation processes are depending on multiple sources of evidence, including feedback through surveys of users and (stakeholders) such as students, College and staff, alumni, employment (for graduates of the program).
2. The explanations are validated evidence for quality by independent advice from persons who are familiar with the type of activity concerned and impartial mechanisms are used to removing the incompatibility between the different views.
3. Checking levels (standards) of the students learning outcomes compared to the requirements of "national qualifications framework" and the levels achieved in similar programs in educational institutions.
Comment:
Users rely on opinion polls and the surveys the beneficiaries such as Students, College, Staff, Alumni, and Employers, but there is a lack of consultation with respect to independent parties, including help in giving credence to the quality assurance processes.
Priorities for improvement : “Interpretations of evidence of quality of performance are verified through independent advice from persons familiar with the type of activity concerned and impartial mechanisms are used to reconcile differing opinions.”:
1. The involvement of independent parties with experience in the evaluation of quality assurance processes.
2. Check the credibility of the learning outcomes achieved by students compared to the requirements of the "National Qualifications Framework" and the levels achieved in similar programs in similar educational institutions.
Comment:
Explanatory note. Describe and comment on the quality assurance processes used in the program Particularly relating to indicators and benchmarks of performance and verification of standards.
The department introduces quality assurance processes to deal with all aspects of the program: Courses, College, Students, Graduates, and Employers.
Forms have been designed to conduct surveys about these aspects. The results of these surveys will be used to monitor the quality of the program and its future developments.
The development and quality committee monitors implementation of the eleven standards through certain indicators. Such indicators include questionnaires to the satisfaction of students, graduates and staff.
Description of process for investigation and preparation of report on this standard.
The department has appointed a development and quality committee to be responsible about program quality assurance. Members of the committee have been trained by attending courses and seminars on quality assurance and they use internationally accepted methods for quality assurance. The committee looks at whether improvements are being made by the implementation of the program by checking at earlier and present records.
Evaluation of quality of management of program quality assurance. Refer to evidence about the standard and subsections within it and provide a report including a summary of strengths, areas requiring improvement, and priorities for action.
Strengths:
Course contents and references used are comparable to international standards.
Teaching staff graduated from highly international recognized universities and they are highly experienced both theoretically and practically.
Laboratories are equipped with the appropriate and relevant instruments.
Renew the department equipment when needed.
Reduce number of students in classes especially in practical sessions.
Introducing e-learning.
There is a coordinator for multi section courses.
Unified exams for multi section courses.
Submitting a course report for each group at the end of each semester.
Conducting surveys among students, graduates and employers dealing with the quality the courses and the program.
Submitting an annual program report
Conducting a chain of workshops (4 workshops) for new College members by the Deanship of Skills Development.
Areas requiring improvement:
1- Increasing number of academic and supporting staff.
2- Decreasing the teaching hours of the staff to 40% of the present state (situation) for more time to be spent in Research and self-skills improvement.
3- Effective participation of staff other than teaching staff in Quality improvement.
4- Opinion of independent advice concerning Standards evaluation needs to be regular.
5- Renew the Department equipment.
6- Encourage innovation, appreciation of achievement and evaluation
7-Evaluation and planning for quality improvement should be integrated into normal administrative processes.
Priorities for action:
1- To ensure that the final set of KPIs and benchmarks for the University, academic and administrative units and Departments are finalized.
2- To ensure the use of the statistics and performance data for institutional research and produce proactive action plans based on the performance analysis
1- Purchase modern equipments and simulator facility.
Proof of improvements:
1. Indicators that have been taken into account :
Poll employers and their level of satisfaction with graduates.
The success rate for students and the quarterly average GPA for all students.
Periodic evaluation of the teaching staff members.
2. There are plans to improve the quality indicators include points compared to the level of the program.
3. Percentage of College supporters of the strategies adopted by the program to improve the quality 100 % proof that all members of the department is working on activating quality through the standard that is doing.
4. Percentage of College members who taught the students assessed the 100% evidence that the student not be able to know the degree through the portal of the university only after filling questionnaires Calendar.
5. The degree of compatibility between the form of targets and indicators in the program, and how to perform it to measurable output 80% as the indications on the credibility of the degree program match with the national standard of qualifications.
6. The average level of satisfaction of the students about their experiences in the program that describes the facility questionnaires.
7. The percentage of students who were polled during the year 100% Portal.
8. The proportion of the programs in which they are to independently verify the evaluation criteria (founders only)
9. Graduation Projects Section
10. Registration College scientific projects supported by the University 11. Portal site for University students and college members
Improvement Plans :
To improve the standard 3.1
1- We suggest increasing financial dependence for Scientific Research supported.
2- We identify a clear mechanism and postings support graduation projects for students.
3- We equipped with special labs for the development of innovative and creative skills of students.
4- Automate quality assurance processes, thereby helping the process of collecting data and do statistics and analysis for operations to suit the Calendar program and
policy planning at the university and can use Google documents for it.
5- Make a regular self- evaluation to improve quality assurance processes.
To improve the standard 3.5:
1 . The involvement of independent parties with experience in the evaluation and quality assurance processes within the department and the college boards with outstanding reputation and influence and business owners.
2 - check the credibility of the learning outcomes achieved by students compared to the requirements of the " National Qualifications Framework " and the levels achieved in similar programs in educational institutions similar .
