GRADING HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS – Some Technical Issues

APQN CONFERENCE ON QUALITY ASSURANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION: EXPECTATIONS AND ACHIEVEMENTS GRADING HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS – Some Technical Issues PRESENTED BY: Dr.M.S.Lalitha Head & Dean School Of Education Pondicherry University

Observations by IIEP- Explaining factors Great demand for HE & rapid expansion in terms of diverse providers Globalization – increasing level of academic fraud Economic constraints & shift in priority to basic education No compromise on quality because of quantitative expansion QUALITY ASSURANCE- a global trend

QA INVOLVES EQA & IQA • Aim of EQA is accountability for external stake holders • Aim of IQA- institutional development and assessment of internal accountability through its programme, policies & mechanisms • Both contribute mutually to each other • Quality assurance(QA) is both a national & institutional responsibility

QA OF HEIs IN INDIA • Quality assessment organization-UGC, NAAC, AICTE, NBA, DEC, ICAR- Need for coordinated effort • NAAC- Main objective -A&A of HEIs

NAAC'S MISSION • Grading institutions and programmes • stimulate academic environment and quality of teaching and research • Help institutions realize their academic objectives • Promote necessary changes, innovations and reforms in all aspects of the institutions working for the above purpose • Encourage innovations, self-evaluation and accountability in higher education.

PROCESS OF ASSESSMENT & ACCREDITATION STEPS: • Self assessment process by institution on a set of criteria defined by accrediting body • Site visit by peer team or panel – reviews the evidence & interviews stake holders • Peer team prepares an assessment report • Accrediting body communicates its decision

ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLYING ACCREDITATION AND ASSESSMENT PROCESS • Quality is definable • Characteristics of a model higher education institutions of each type can be listed • Differential weightages can be assigned to different criteria and different types of HEIs • quantitative measurement and assessment of quality is possible;

Contd.. • Grades can be aggregated and the CGPA represents the quality of HEI • Knowledge of one’s grade leads to working of the institutions towards improving the same • The stakeholders within the institution have the professional skills themselves & have capability to reflect • Peer team members have the professional skills to assess the institution objectively.

DEFINING QUALITY OF HEIs • Multi- dimensional, multi-level and dynamic concept relating to the contextual settings of an educational model • Quality as : • Exceptionality • Zero errors • Fitness for purpose • Transformation, reshaping • Threshold • Enhancement • Quality as value for money

Contd… • Student outcomes – an important criterion & difficult to estimate • Value addition – difference an HEI makes in students’ education • Can be used to justify variations in output produced by different institiutions in different context

CRITERIA FOR QUALITY OF HEIs • Can be defined similar to defining criteria for teacher effectiveness • Input process & output variables as defining criteria

FOUR TYPES OF FACTORS • Type I factors (quality predictors): • Teacher related – personality (attitudes, interest and abilities) • Teacher Professional Competencies – content mastery, pedagogic skills, professional commitment and ethics • Curriculum related – relevance to life and world of work, to total personality development of students, etc. and such others.

Type II factors (contingency factors): • Environmental factors in the institution – physical, socio-cultural and economic; • Nature of students – attitudes, interest, abilities, etc; • Students perception on institutional environment and such others.

Type III factors (curriculum transaction / teaching-learning process): • Curricular and Co-curricular activities; • Activities to promote students’ mental health; • Nature / extent of participation of teacher and students in the classrooms, within the institution • In relating institution to community outside, and such others.

Type IV factors (ultimate criteria for quality): Institution’s effects on – • Students’ achievement and success in life • Students’ achievement in further education • Students’ achievement of course objectives • Students’ satisfaction with the teachers and the institution as a whole, and such others.

ASSESSMENT OF MACRO AND MICRO INDICATORS • Macro-indicators refer to the broad criteria • Micro-indicators refer to the specific articulations of the macro-indicators. • Assessment of these micro-indicators require evidences - quantitative or qualitative in nature. • Explicit definitions improves objectivity • Word of caution-over looking significant but difficult to assess.

CONTEXTUALITY AND UNIFORMITY IN CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT • Contextual variations due to • Nature of course • Type of management • Geographical location • Justification for uniform criteria • Justification for differential weightages

STATISTICAL VALIDITY OF GRADING INSTITUTIONS • Subjectivity in assessment – inter-peer team variations (operational definitions, professional training to assessors ) • Slight variation in weightages given to criteria can influence overall grade point • Error due to reducing multi-dimensional quality aspect into a linear scale as CGPA (profile of institution)

FORMATIVE vs. SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT • Two approaches in QA

DOMINANCE OF EXTERNAL QUALITY ASSURANCE • Rapid expansion of HEIs of different types • EQA difficult with one agency • Move from EQA to IQA • Agency should facilitate IQA with minimum control • QA’s focus on process than criteria • HEIs & agency joint responsibility

Conclusion • Grading integral part of QA • Effectiveness of accreditation process depends on how well criteria of quality defined for different contexts • Profile instead of CGPA • Prepare & validate tools & techniques for assessing criteria

CONCLUSION CONTD.. • NAAC should play facilitator role to support HEIs • Accreditation process continuous & for longer duration • Establish local level management systems to monitor quality with responsibility

THANK YOU!

GRADING HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS – Some Technical Issues