Accreditation and Quality Assurance in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Professor Abdullah A. Almusallam Secretary General, NCAAA Roundtable Meeting- Bahrain 27-29 October, 2013
Overview The Saudi Arabian Context The NCAAA • Objectives • Main Functions • Principles Underlying the System • Development Strategy Phased QA Implementation • Procedures, Standards, Materials • Transition to the new system • Accreditation Process
Saudi Arabian Context
Saudi Arabian Context Higher Education • HE providers are Responsible to Several different ministries MOHE Technical & Vocational Training Corporation (TVTC) Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu (RCJY) Etc. • Rapid growth over the past 7 years • 8 to 25 public universities • 5 to 29 private universities and colleges • 136,723 to 240,470 new enrolments in all Higher Education Sectors
Saudi Arabian Context Higher Education • Structural changes merger of 102 girls colleges,18 teachers colleges and 50 health colleges and institutes into universities • Limited and varied experience with QA processes • Traditional emphasis on rote memory • Shortages of experienced and qualified faculty • Expatriate teaching staff from many countries broad experience base but diverse QA backgrounds
Higher Education Profile* Saudi Arabia INSTITUNSTION 2003 2010 GROWTH 8 24 200% PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES 199 445 124% COLLEGES IN PUBLIC UNIV 1 8 700% PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES 4 21 425% PRIVATE COLLEGES 7 22 214% MEDICAL COLLEGES 3 17 467% DENTAL COLLEGES 3 17 467% PHARMACEUTICAL COLLEGES 16 56 250% HEALTH AND APPLIED MEDICAL SCIENCES 0 13 100% NURSING 7 33 371% ENGINEERING 7 38 443% SCIENCE 3 23 666% COMPUTER 3 12 300% UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS 20 45 164% COMMUNITY COLLEGES TOTAL 281 744 165% *Unpublished National Higher Education Record
Enrollment Growth 2003 – 2010 Unpublished National Higher Education Record
UNIVERSITY/COLLEGE GROWTH 2003 - 2010 2003 2010 500 400 300 200 100 0 PUBLIC PRIVATE COLLEGES UNIVERSITIES Unpublished National Higher Education Record
Professional College Growth PROFESSIONAL COLLEGE GROWTH 2003 – 2010 Unpublished National Higher Education Record
Community College Growth COMMUNITY COLLEGES 2003 – 2010 Unpublished National Higher Education Record
National Commission for Academic Accreditation & Assessment (NCAAA)
Objectives • The Government of SA has recognized the need to provide a national mechanism to ensure that educational standards are – Equivalent to high international standards. – Consistent throughout the country. – Appropriate for academic, professional and vocational skill requirements, – Appropriate to the particular requirements of Saudi Arabian culture and economic development.
NCAAA • Independent body responsible to the Council of HE • Responsible for supporting quality improvement, • Responsible for accreditation of all postsecondary education except military (public and private, HE and technical training) • Accreditation of both institutions and programs • Board of Directors drawn from government, institutions, and industry
MAIN FUNCTIONS • Establish standards and processes for QA and accreditation • Planning, training and support for quality improvement • Accrediting institutions • Accrediting programs • Provisional accreditation of new institutions and programs • Linking and coordination with regional and international agencies
Principles Underlying the System for Accreditation and QA in the KSA 1. Q relates to all functions of institutions 2. Emphasis on Q improvement, not just meeting minimum standards 3. Q assessments based on evidence and verified 4. Diversity encouraged 5. Stakeholder involvement 6. System designed for the KSA context 7. Responsibility for Q rests with institutions 8. Trust, support and cooperation are essential 9. Learning outcome standards consistent for all institutions 10. Improvement requires leadership and widespread involvement
Development Strategy • Staged development over a five year period. • Our approach to QA is to draw on good international practice but insist on developing our own system to meet our own requirements. • Strong opposition to copying any particular international system.
Development Strategy • Inexperience in institutions and involvement of people from many systems has required detailed explanations and standardized requirements for processes and reports • Development has involved wide consultation (local and international) • Development has required extensive training, trials, and developmental reviews.
Stages of Development
Stage One Three overlapping stages Stage 1: Development of procedures, standards and materials. Stage 2: Transitioning to the new system Stage 3: Full Implementation:
Stage 1: Development of procedures, standards and materials.
Stage One Stage 1: Development of procedures, standards and materials. • Key documents – National Qualifications Framework – Standards for Institutions (and Self Evaluation Scales) – Standards for Programs (and Self Evaluation Scales) – Handbook (three parts) Overview of the system, Internal Processes, External Processes – KPIs, Student Surveys, – Draft Standards (Distance Education, Technical Training) – Draft Learning outcomes and specialized standards for Teacher Education, Engineering, Business, Dentistry, Nursing, Pharmacy, Medicine)
Standards
Stage One Quality Standards In Saudi Arabia Eleven standards in five groups have been identified, relating to broad areas of activity in post secondary institutions.
Standards Institutions Programs • • Mission and Objectives Mission and Objectives • • Governance and Administration Program Administration • Management of QA and • Management of Program QA Improvement • Learning and Teaching • Learning and Teaching • Student Administration and • Student Administration and Support Services Support Services • Learning Resources • Learning Resources • Facilities and Equipment • Facilities and Equipment • Financial Planning and • Financial Planning and Management Management • Employment Processes • Employment Processes • Research • Research • • Relationships With the Relationships With the Community Community
Levels of Detail in Statements of Standards • These standards are described with several levels of detail. – General statements describing expectations for each of the eleven standards. – Sub standards that explain what is expected in each area- for example processes for governance and administration include a number of different components including effective leadership, delegation of responsibility, and learning and teaching has many expectations that need to be considered. – In addition there are many detailed practices that are normally followed in good quality institutions.
Levels of Detail in Statements of Standards (Cont.) Standard 1. Mission, Goals and Objectives General statements of the mission: The mission of the institution must clearly and appropriately defines its principal purposes and priorities and be influential in guiding planning and action within the institution. Sub standards that explain what is expected in each area Main components in this standard: 1.1 Appropriateness of the Mission 1.2 Usefulness of the Mission Statement 1.3 Development and Review of the Mission 1.4 Use Made of the Mission 1.5 Relationship Between Mission, Goals and Objectives
Levels of Detail in Statements of Standards (Cont.) Standard 1. Mission, Goals and Objectives Good practices that are normally followed in good Q institutions 1.3 Development and Review of the Mission The mission statement must be developed through consultative processes and formally adopted and periodically reviewed. To satisfy this requirement: 1.3.1 The mission should be defined in consultation with and with the support of major stakeholders in the institution and its community. 1.3.2 The mission should be formally approved by the governing body of the institution. 1.3.3 The mission should be periodically reviewed and reaffirmed or amended as appropriate in the light of changing circumstances. 1.3.4 Stakeholders should be kept informed about the mission and any changes in it.
Self-evaluation rating scales
Self Evaluation Scales • In an experienced QA system most of these practices are known and understood (and generally followed) In a new system with widely varying levels of understanding that cannot be assumed and the system must build in reminder and prompts. • To address this issue an alternative presentation of the standards are presented as self evaluation scales.
Stage One Form of Presentation of Standards • Institutions (or groups within them) indicate whether these practices are followed, and if they are, how well they are done. • The templates then call for – an indication of priorities for improvement, – with space for comment by an independent person.
Recommend
More recommend
