session 1 introducing the code of practice for programme acceditation (coppa)

SESSION 1

Introducing the Code of Practice for Programme Acceditation

(COPPA)

SESSION 1

Introducing the Code of Practice for Programme Acceditation

(COPPA)

Introducing the (Malaysian) Code of Practice for Programme Acceditation

(COPPA)

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ahmad Hj Mohamad Director, Quality Centre

Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang

Tel: +604 653 2451 E-mail: ahmadhaj2@gmail.com

Outline of the Session• What is Quality Assurance?• What is COPPA?• The 9 Quality Domains/Areas• A Process Based View of COPPA• Distribution of the standards• The Standards - explanation, illustrations and issues

• Area 1: Vision, Mission, Educational Goals and Learning Outcomes• Area 2: Curriculum Design and Delivery• Area 3: Assessment of Students• Area 4: Student Selection And Support Services• Area 5: Academic Staff• Area 6: Educational Resources• Area 7: Programme Monitoring And Review• Area 8: Leadership, Governance And Administration• Area 9: Continual Quality Improvement

4

Quality assurance (QA) refers to the systematic activities

implemented in a quality system so that quality requirements for a product or service will be fulfilled. It is the systematic measurement, comparison with a standard, monitoring of processes and an associated feedback loop that confers error prevention. Two principles included in QA are: "Fit for the Purpose", and "Right the First Time.” [WIKIPEDIA]

QUALITY ASSURANCE

Quality assurance comprises planned and systematic actions (policies, strategies, attitudes, procedures and activities) to provide adequate demonstration that quality is being achieved, maintained and enhanced, and meets the specified standards of teaching, scholarship and research as well as student learning experience. [COPPA]

5

MQA; professional accreditation bodies such as Malaysian Medical Council, Board of Engineers, Board of Architects Malaysia, Malaysian Institute of Accountants, etc. [Dr., Ir., Ar., Sr.]

EXTERNAL QUALITY ASSURANCE (EQA)

Collaborating in enhancing the commonality in quality assurance framework e.g. ASEAN Quality Assurance Network (AQAN) ..

REGIONAL QUALITY ASSURANCE NETWORK

6

INTERNAL QUALITY ASSURANCE (IQA) Group of Experts, Faculty Board, Board of Studies, Senate, Industy Advisory Panel, Market Survey Consultants

What is COPPA?• It is a code that explains the rationale, the quality domains and the standards within it, the audit process and the outcomes.

• The 9 quality domains and the standards are instrumental to quality assurance of academic programmes. The nine domains of evaluation assist universities/programme providers to attain at least the benchmarked standards for:

» Provisional Accreditation» Full Accreditation» Continual improvement programmes

7

About COPPA Standards Benchmarked Standards

Standards that must be met and its compliance described in the portfolio and demonstrated during programme accreditation exercise. BM standards expressed as a ‘must’ in COPPA

Enhanced StandardsStandards that should be met as the institution strives to

improve itself and is expressed as a ‘should’ in COPPA

8

9

Distribution of Benchmarked & Enhanced Standards

No. Domain/Areas of Evaluation Benchmarked Standards

Enhanced Standards

Area 1 Vision, Mission, Educational Goals and Learning Outcomes

7 4

Area 2 Curriculum Design and Delivery

19 11

Area 3 Assessment of Students 11 5

Area 4 Student Selection & Support Services 21 13

Area 5 Academic Staff 11 4

Area 6 Educational Resources 12 10

Area 7 Programme Monitoring and Review 5 4

Area 8 Leadership, Governance and Administration 11 6

Area 9 Continual Quality Improvement 3 2

Total 100 5910

Approach & Attitude in Accreditation Process• COPPA addresses all of higher education - private and public colleges and universities

of all shapes and sizes

• Understand the purpose and principle underpinning a “must” as much the explicit requirement

• Be open and flexible about practices - there are many ways to meet the requirements. Do not be dogmatic

• Documentation vs. practice, espoused vs. actual, planned vs. enacted – keep a keen eye on the actual

• Designed (managers), enacted (staff) & experienced system (students, parents, employers)

• Most importantly, the process is not about trying to fail someone. It is a partnership

whereby one party is trying to help the other achieve an acceptable level of competence in conducting an academic programme.

11

VISION, MISSION, EDUCATIONAL GOALS & LEARNING OUTCOMES [1.1]

• State aims, objectives & programme learning outcome

• Reflect national and global elements in HE.• Principal stakeholders involved in setting aims,

objectives and LO• Consistent with HEP’s vision and mission.• Aims, objectives and outcome should be stretched

– social consciousness, scholarly endeavour, ethics and values and value creation.

• Consult outside stakeholders – employers, alumni, professional bodies etc.

• Periodic review involving outside stakeholders

12

VISION, MISSION, EDU. GOALS & LEARNING OUTCOMES [1.2]

• Define the competencies – knowledge, skills, attitudes based on the Malaysian Qualification Framework – eight learning outcome domains.

• Map the courses outcomes to the programme outcomes (Note: MoHE has templates and requirements for mapping LOs to POs and PEOs)

• Show how assessments indicate attainment of course/programme outcomes.

• State the link between programme outcomes and programme educational objectives – 1.2.2 (Note: this is a requirement for public universities).

13

CURRICULUM DESIGN AND DELIVERY[2.1]

• Departments have adequate autonomy to design programmes and allocate resources to achieve LO.

• The autonomy to design and allocate resources must extend to programmes franchised to other or from others(HEPs have no control over franchised programmes)

• Staff have autonomy to focus on their areas of expertise – teaching, supervision, research, publication, management, community engagement etc.

• Policy on conflict of interest – private practice and “moonlighting” (Note: Item in the wrong place. Should be in Area 5 and/or Area 8)

14

CURRICULUM DESIGN AND DELIVERY[2.1]

• Documented curriculum development and review process

• Process must encompass academic and non-academic staff

• Programme development only after needs assessment

• Programme developed only after identifying resources required

• Programme must be internally consistent – content, approach, teaching method, assessment consistent with outcomes

• Variety of TL methods appropriate to the outcomes

15

CURRICULUM DESIGN AND DELIVERY[2.2]

• Encourage multi-disciplinary curriculum – electives, minor or different pathways

• Needs analysis should involve feedback from multiple parties and rigorous

• Should provide for co-curricular activities (Note: it is mandatory in public universities)

16

CURRICULUM DESIGN AND DELIVERY[2.3]

• Programme content (spread & width issue) and must be adequate to support the outcomes

• Programme must meet professional, disciplinary and international standards, norms and good practices

• Programme content reviewed to ensure currency• Department has mechanisms (means formalised) to

identify and incorporate new developments in the programme

17

CURRICULUM DESIGN AND DELIVERY[2.4]

• Provide programme information to students• There is person/team to plan, implement, evaluate

and improve the programme• Programme team has authority to plan and

monitor• Must have resources (includes authority) to deliver

programme including quality improvement• Regular reviews to improve quality including the

use of external examiners for bachelors• Must create challenging environment

18

CURRICULUM DESIGN AND DELIVERY[2.4]

• Innovations to improve TLA is supported• Innovation should involve internal and external

stakeholders• Review of programme should include stakeholders

and experts

19

CURRICULUM DESIGN AND DELIVERY[2.5]

• Department must have linkages with stakeholders for planning, implementation and review

• Department should get feedback from employers and used for improvement

• Students encouraged to develop links with stakeholders

20

ASSESSMENT OF STUDENTS [3.1, 3.2]

• Alignment between assessment and programme outcomes

• Assessment consistent with MQF levels• Review the alignment periodically• Inform students of the method, criteria and

frequency of assessment• Summative and formative assessment a must• Variety of assessment tools reflecting learning

outcomes and competencies• Have mechanisms to ensure validity, reliability,

currency & fairness of assessment• Assessment system reviewed periodically

21

ASSESSMENT OF STUDENTS [3.2, 3.3]

• Assessment methods comparable to international best practices

• Review of assessment system in consultation with experts

• Timely communication of assessments• Controlled changes to assessment methods• Security and safety of assessment documents• All policies and procedures on assessment, grading

& appeal must be publicised• Staff and dept have autonomy to manage

assessment• External review of assessment system

22

STUDENTS SELECTION & SUPPORT SERVICES [4.1]

• Criteria and process of student admission including transfers

• The above documents and published• Prerequisite KSA must be stated• Interview (if applicable) systematic• Free from discrimination & bias• Policy and processes for appeal• Remedial support for weak students• Student intake and capacity to delivery effectively• Admissions policy reviewed periodically• Admission policy & processes review with

stakeholders• Relationship between admission, programme and

LOs.

23

STUDENTS SELECTION & SUPPORT SERVICES [4.2, 4.3]

• Have defined and publicised policies and procedures on articulation, transfer & exemptions

• Aware of latest thinking in transfers, articulation, exemptions.

• Clear policies & procedures on internal transfers• Inbound transfer students must have comparable

achievement• Policies that facilitate mobility between

programmes, institutions and countries thru’ exchange, joint programmes & advanced standing

24

STUDENTS SELECTION & SUPPORT SERVICES [4.4]

• Student have ACCESS to adequate financial, social, physical, recreational & counselling facilities.

• SSS must be regularly EVALUATED – audits• Provisions for APPEALS in SSS• Designated unit for SSS with qualified staff• Academic & career counseling by QUALIFIED STAFF and

confidentiality maintained• INDUCTION programme special attention to non-locals

• SSS must have PROMINENT status in HEP• Counselling services must be EVALUATED and improved• Planned training to enhance professionalism of academic

and non-academic counsellors -CPD

25

STUDENTS SELECTION & SUPPORT SERVICES [4.5, 4.6]

• Depts must adhere to policies on student representation and participation (no autonomy)

• Policy and programmes for active participation of students in non-curricular activities

• Dept to facilitate leadership, personal and citizenship development

• Should provide policy on publications – digital and non-digital media

• Provide facilities to enable student publications

• Foster links with alumni• Encourage alumni to contribute in professional

development of students and assist in programme development

26

ACADEMIC STAFF [5.1]

• HEP must have documented merit-based selection policy• Staff-student ratio meet programme standards and

appropriate to teaching method • Dept must determine and have adequate full time core staff

to run programmes• Staff roles must be clarified• Reward and recognition is transparent and based merit• Appointments & promotion to academic ranks must follow

local and international norms

• Healthy mix of academic staff• Have links with local and international academics to

enhance TL

27

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES [6.1]

• Must have sufficient facilities for programme delivery• Meet all requirements for facilities• Adequate library resources including ICT support for

students and staff• Sufficient equipment for equipment intensive programmes

(including research equipment)• Policy on ICT use in the programme

• Learning environment refreshed in line with latest ideas and developments

• Assess the quality of facilities in a programme• Students have opportunity access information using

different media• Disable friendly facilities

28

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES [6.2, 6.3,6.4]

• Policy and programme on research• Research must be reflected in programmes, teaching and in

graduate attributes• Connection between research, development and

commercialisation• Periodic review to improve research capabilities

• Have a policy on the use of edu. experts in TLA and curriculum development

• The edu. expertise should be used in staff development and edu. research

• Dept must comply with exchange policies of HEP• Dept should develop collaboration with others and plan for

exchanges• Provide support incl. financial, to staff and students on

exchanges

29

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES [6.5]

• HEP provide clear lines of responsibility and authority for budgeting

• Dept must have budgetary and procurement procedures to plan and spend resources to maintain programme standards

• Dept should have autonomy to allocate resources

30

PROGRAMME MONITORING & REVIEW[7.1]

• Student performance & progression analysed against programme objectives & outcomes

• Periodic programme evaluation involving benchmarking, TL method & technologies administration, SSS & stakeholders

• Must have a programme review committee• PMR is shared responsibility in collaborative programmes

• Dept self review must identify concerns and show improvements

31

PROGRAMME MONITORING & REVIEW [7.2]

• Programme evaluation must involve relevant stakeholders

• Stakeholders must have review reports and their views considered.

• Feedback from alumni and employers included in the review

• Professional programmes should involve professional bodies in review

32

LEADERSHIP, GOVERNANCE & ADMINISTRATION [8.1]

• The policies and practices consistent with HEP’s purpose• Must have organisational chart with responsibilities,

authorities and interactions stated clearly and must be made known to all

• Academic decision making body in the Dept.• If multi-site university, must have mechanism to ensure

comparable quality

• Governance should involve staff, students & stakeholders• Formalised and interconnected system of committees to

ensure among other received feedback from all stakeholders

33

LEADERSHIP, GOVERNANCE & ADMINISTRATION[8.2]

• Criteria for appointment and responsibilities of academic leaders must be stated.

• Academic leadership must be qualified and have authority in programme management

• Communication between HEP and Dept on hiring & training staff, student admission and allocation of resources.

• Academic leaders evaluated at suitable intervals• Academic leadership to foster innovation, creativity

34

LEADERSHIP, GOVERNANCE & ADMINISTRATION[8.3, 8.4]

• Adequate SS to ensure effective programme management• Must have regular review of performance of SS• Advanced training for SS

• Dept must have policies on student and staff records consistent with HEP requirements.

• Dept must implement HEP’s policies on confidentiality and privacy

• Dept should review security of records policies in view of technological changes

35

CONTINUAL QUALITY IMPROVEMENT[9.1]

• Dept must observe all CQI policies of the HEP• Dept must have a system of review of the programme –

e.g. programme review committee• Must review programmes and take actions on the

weaknesses• Quality unit should have a role in policy making process• Embrace CQI spirit based on analyses and studies

36

Evaluating MQA-02

As you go through the MQA-02 document that describes the HEP/Department’s approach, system and process in meeting a standard/requirement pay attention to the following;

• Language of ownership – attitude• Describes a process or system rather than a practice• Has all elements that are make for effective system• Has features stated in the enhanced standards• Possible candidate for good system/practice

37

If Y to all above questions – evidence of strengthIf N to all the above questions – evidence of weakness/concernIf it is mixture of Y/N, then benchmark practice is probably present. Nether a strength nor a weakness.

Question about practice Response to question

Is the described practice a process -input – actions – output Y N

Does the process have all the features /characteristics associated with this practice?

Y N

Is the process founded on stable knowledge base? Y N

Does the practice amount to a good system – process with feedback?

Y N

Is there evidence/data on the practice/process/system in the MQA-02?

Y N

38

End of Session 1