1 / 20

MALAYSIAN QUALIFICATIONS AGENCY

TAKLIMAT AUDIT PRESTASI AKADEMIK (ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AUDIT) SECTION 3 : THE INTERNAL QUALITY AUDIT SECTION 4 : THE INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT. MALAYSIAN QUALIFICATIONS AGENCY. Content. Internal Quality Audit Internal Quality Audit Task Force Self-Review Portfolio (MQA-03) Institutional Audit

raleigh
Télécharger la présentation

MALAYSIAN QUALIFICATIONS AGENCY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TAKLIMAT AUDIT PRESTASI AKADEMIK (ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AUDIT)SECTION 3 : THE INTERNAL QUALITY AUDITSECTION 4 : THE INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT MALAYSIAN QUALIFICATIONS AGENCY

  2. Content Internal Quality Audit Internal Quality Audit Task Force Self-Review Portfolio (MQA-03) Institutional Audit The Audit Visit The Audit Report Findings & Judgments

  3. Internal Quality Audit (IQA) Self review conducted by HEP. Concern with HEP own objectives & its success in achieving them. Based on: guidelines on good practices 9 areas of evaluation

  4. Self-Review Activities Data collection accurate & consistent Data review Analyse data to identify HEPs strength, areas of concern & opportunities. Develop strategies to ensure: strengths maintained problems addressed Make recommendations for quality enhancement 4

  5. Focus of the Self Review Self-questioning on each area can be structured as follows: i. What actions are we taking in relation to this area? ii. Why were these actions chosen? iii. How do we check their effectiveness? What performance indicators do we have? iv. Are the indicators effective? v. What do we do as a result of the review? Can we measure the degree of achievements? What are the actual outcomes? Can we improve on the existing actions, even on those that are already effective? 5

  6. Effective Quality Management HEP policy & procedures should be in writing Approved through institutional processes Published & accessible Implemented by HEP

  7. Internal Quality Audit Task Force HEP forms a self-review task force. Coordinator Members: Administrators Heads of departments and programmes Senior or junior academics Students Alumni Other stakeholders 7

  8. Consists of: Part A: General Information on HEP Part B: Information on 9 areas of evaluation May use template provided in Section 3 Part C: Self Review Report Should include the following: Strengths of HEP in meeting its goals; Areas of concern that need to be addressed; Strategies for maintaining and enhancing the strengths; Steps that have been taken to address the problem areas; and Conclusions and recommendations for change. The Self-Review Portfolio (MQA-03) 8

  9. The Institutional Audit External independent audit Assess institutional effectiveness Variety of purposes: comprehensive assessment of HEP specific aspects of HEP 9

  10. The Role Players The Liaison Officer (from HEP) Link between HEP & MQA Representatives of the HEP (Auditees) Audit panels Selection guided by characteristics of HEP, type of audit, expertise & experience of the panel MQA Officer Coordinator & resource person 10

  11. The Audit Visit The purpose: To verify HEP’s Self Review Portfolio to acquire further insight into HEP’s operations Qualitative assessment of factors not easily documented 11

  12. THE AUDIT TIMELINE 12

  13. The Audit Report The Oral Exit Report The report is presented by the Chairperson at the end of the visit – Exit Meeting -HEP areas of strengths; -Areas of Concern; -Opportunities for improvement The Draft Report Draft Report prepared by chairperson with the help of panel members Draft Report is sent to HEP for verification of facts and feedback 13

  14. The Audit Report The Final Audit Report Conclusions made through interpretations of specific evidences and observed facts. The report will assist HEP in continual quality improvement. Will include commendation, affirmation and recommendation

  15. FINDINGS AND JUDGMENT The panel may propose one of the following:- For Academic Performance Audit (APA) Highlight affirmation, commendation and areas of concern. Indicate the performance of institution on all 9 areas of evaluation. No specific decision (pass or fail). For continuation or cessation of Programme Accreditation Maintain Accreditation. Cease Accreditation. For Self-Accreditation Status Grant Self-Accreditation status Not granted Self-Accreditation Status MQA Institutional Audit Committee will make decisions base on proposal by the panel of assessors.

  16. Appeal All appeals can be made in relation to: factual contents of the reports; substantive errors within the report; or any substantive inconsistency between the oral exit report, the final audit report and the decision of the MQA.

  17. Follow Up The purpose is: To get feedback on the report and the audit process, and on the extent to which the HEP considers the Report to be authoritative, rigorous, fair and perceptive; To ensure corrective actions are taken if required; and To have a dialogue with those responsible for follow up action as to how the recommendations will be integrated into the HEP and department’s continual quality improvement plan.

  18. INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT PROCESS 18

  19. COMPARISON OF PROGRAMME ACCREDITATION AND INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT PROCESSES 19

  20. Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) 14 B, Menara PKNS-PJ 17, Jalan Yong Shook Lin 46050 Petaling Jaya, Selangor Tel: 03-7968 7002 www.mqa.gov.my

More Related