COPIA 2nd Edition

8/8/2019 COPIA 2nd Edition

1/160

i

Second Edition


2/160

ii

Code of Practice for Institutional Audit

First Published June 2008Second Edition February 2009

ISBN 978-983-44015-0-4

2009 Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia (Malaysian Qualifcations Agency, MQA)

Level 14B, Menara PKNS-PJNo. 17, Jalan Yong Shook Lin46050 Petaling JayaSelangor Darul EhsanMalaysia

Tel: +603 7968 7002Fax: +603 7956 9496

www.mqa.gov.my

[email protected]


3/160

iii

Foreword to the First Edition vii

Glossary ix

Abbreviations xiList o Tables xii

Section 1: An Overview o Quality Assurance o Malaysian

Higher Education

INTRODUCTION 3

1. The Malaysian Qualications Agency 3

2. The Council o Malaysian Qualications Agency 3

3. Committees 4

3.1 The Accreditation Committees3.2 The Institutional Audit Committee

3.3 The Equivalency Committee

3.4 The Standards Committees

4. The Malaysian Qualications Framework 5

5. Approaches to Quality Assurance 6

6. The Malaysian Qualications Register 6

7. The Quality Assurance Guidelines 7

7.1 Quality Assurance Documents

7.2 Areas o Evaluation

8. Programme Accreditation 8

8.1 The Accreditation Report

8.2 The Accreditation Summary Report

9. Institutional Audit 9

9.1 Report to the Higher Education Provider: Continual Quality

Improvement

9.2 Report to the Ministry o Higher Education

9.3 Report or the Public

Section 2: Guidelines on Criteria and Standards or Higher

Education Providers

INTRODUCTION 13

Area 1: Vision, Mission, Education Goals and Learning Outcomes 15

1.1 Statement o Vision, Mission and Educational Goals

1.2 Participation in the Formulation o Vision, Mission and

Educational Goals

1.3 Academic Autonomy

1.4 Learning Outcomes

Area 2: Curriculum Design and Delivery 182.1 Curriculum Design and Teaching-Learning Methods

List of Contents


4/160

iv

2.2 Curriculum Content and Structure

2.3 Management o Programmes

2.4 Linkages with External StakeholdersArea 3: Assessment o Students 21

3.1 Relationship Between Assessment and Learning

3.2 Assessment Methods

3.3 Management o Student Assessment

Area 4: Student Selection and Support Services 23

4.1 Admission and Selection

4.2 Articulation Regulations, Credit Transer and Credit Exemption

4.3 Transer o Students

4.4 Student Support Services and Co-Curricular Activities4.5 Student Representation and Participation

4.6 Alumni

Area 5: Academic Sta 28

5.1 Recruitment and Management

5.2 Service and Development

Area 6: Educational Resources 30

6.1 Physical Facilities

6.2 Research and Development

6.3 Educational Expertise

6.4 Educational Exchanges

6.5 Financial Allocation

Area 7: Programme Monitoring and Review 34

7.1 Mechanisms or Programme Monitoring and Review

7.2 Involvement o Stakeholders

Area 8: Leadership, Governance and Administration 36

8.1 Governance

8.2 Institutional and Academic Leadership

8.3 Administrative and Management Sta

8.4 Academic Records

8.5 Interaction with External Sectors

Area 9: Continual Quality Improvement 39

9.1 Quality Improvement

Section 3: Submission or Institutional Audit

INTRODUCTION 43

3.1 The Documentation Required 43

Part A: General Inormation About the Higher Education Provider 45

Part B: Inormation on the Nine Areas o Evaluation or Quality Assurance 50Part C: Sel-Review Report 77


5/160

v

Section 4: The Institutional Audit

INTRODUCTION 81

4.1 The Internal Quality Audit 81

4.1.1 The Internal Quality Audit Task Force

4.1.2 Data Collection

4.1.3 The Sel-Review Portolio (SRP)

4.2 Institutional Audit: The External Audit 83

4.2.1 The Role Players

4.2.2 Support Facilities

4.2.3 The Audit Timeline

4.2.4 The Audit Management Meeting

4.2.5 The Preparatory Meeting4.2.6 The Planning Visit

4.2.7 The Audit Visit

4.2.8 The Oral Exit Report

4.2.9 The Drat Institutional Audit Report

4.2.10 The Institutional Audit Report

4.2.11 Findings and Judgments

4.2.12 Appeal

4.2.13 Follow Up

Section 5: The Panel o Auditors

INTRODUCTION 99

5.1 Appointment o the Members o an Audit Panel 99

5.1.1 Personal and General Attributes o Auditors

5.1.2 Responsibilities o the Auditors

5.2 Confict o Interest 101

5.3 The Audit Panel 102

5.3.1 The Chairperson

5.3.2 The Secretary

5.3.3 The MQA Ocer

5.4 The Audit Trail 104

5.4.1 Beore the Audit Visit

5.4.2 Preparatory Meeting

5.4.3 During the Audit Visit

5.4.4 Ater the Audit Visit

5.5 The Institutional Audit Report 109

Section 6: Guidelines or Preparing the Institutional Audit Report

INTRODUCTION 1131. The Cover Page 113


6/160

vi

2. Table o Contents 113

3. Memorandum 113

4. Introduction and Composition o the Audit Panel 1145. Abstract 114

6. Summary o Panel o Auditors Findings 115

7. Previous Quality Assurance or Accreditation Assessments and Progress 117

Reports

8. The Sel-Review Portolio 117

9. Background o the Higher Education Provider 117

10. Report on the Higher Education Provider in Relation to the Nine Areas 117

o Evaluation

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: The Quality Assurance Process: An Overview 141

Appendix 2: General Comparison o Programme Accreditation and 143

Institutional Audit Process

Appendix 3: Flow Chart or Institutional Audit Process 145


7/160

vii

Foreword to the First Edition

The National Accreditation Board (Lembaga Akreditasi Negara, LAN) was established in

1997 to quality assure private higher education in Malaysia. Quality assurance o public

higher education institutions was entrusted to the Quality Assurance Division (QAD) othe Ministry o Higher Education. In 2005, the Malaysian Cabinet decided to merge LAN

and QAD into a single quality assurance body. Thus, the Malaysian Qualications Agency

(MQA) was born under the Malaysian Qualications Agency Act 2007. Concurrently, the

Malaysian Qualications Framework (MQF) was developed to uniy and harmonise all

Malaysian qualications.

This development is in line with Malaysias long term development plans as well as the

Ministry o Higher Educations aspiration or the transormation o higher education

in the country. These refect a maturing Malaysian higher education system that

encourages providers to adopt a more systematic and holistic approach in the provision oquality education.

Assigned the task to ensure quality in higher education in the spirit o the MQF, the MQA

has developed a series o guidelines, standards and codes o practice to assist the higher

education providers enhance their academic perormance and institutional eectiveness.

Key among these are the Code o Practice or Programme Accreditation (COPPA) and

Code o Practice or Institutional Audit(COPIA).

COPPA and COPIA are intended to be useul guides or providers o higher education,

quality assurance auditors, ocers o the MQA, policy makers, proessional bodiesand other stakeholders engaged in higher education. The Codes, not only contain an

overview o the Malaysian quality assurance system or higher education, they also guide

the reader on the nine areas o evaluation or quality assurance as well as the two levels

o standards -- benchmarked and enhanced standards -- that underline them. In addition,

the two documents provide guidance or internal quality review to be conducted by the

institution and external audit to be conducted by the MQAs panel o assessors. They also

include site visit schedules as well as guidelines on report writing.

COPPA and COPIA have been developed by bringing together the good practices adopted

by the QAD and LAN, with inputs rom experts and stakeholders via a series o ocus group

discussions. They were also benchmarked against international best practices. In doing

this, reerences have been made to quality assurance practices o MQAs counterparts,

which include the Quality Assurance Agency or Higher Education (QAA) o the United

Kingdom, Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA), the New Zealand Qualications

Authority (NZQA), Hong Kong Council or Accreditation o Academic and Vocational

Qualications (HKCAAVQ), South Arican Qualications Authority (SAQA) and National

Accreditation and Assessment Council (NAAC) o India.

Quality assurance is an ongoing process and it is the responsibility o all parties involved.

Thus, it is o utmost importance or MQA to continuously review its quality assurance

practices to ensure their relevancy, reliability, adaptability and eectiveness to address


8/160

viii

the ever changing environment within which higher education operates. The MQA hopes

that both COPPA and COPIA would assist institutions to enhance their quality provisions

through the sel-review and internal assessment processes as well as the external auditconducted by the MQA. In the spirit o shared responsibility and balancing the demands

o autonomy, fexibility and accountability, the MQA looks orward to continuous

collaboration with all stakeholders in enhancing the quality o higher education

in Malaysia.

On behal o the MQA, I wish to extend our sincere appreciation and gratitude to all

those who have contributed towards the preparation o these Codes o Practice. It is

our hope that these Codes will serve the purpose o our common endeavour to achieve

higher education o the highest quality.

Tan Sri Dato Dr. Muhammad Rais Abdul Karim

Chairman, Malaysian Qualifcations Agency

1 June 2008


9/160

ix

Glossary

Benchmark Data

Benchmark data are inormation collected rom other relevant sources to determine how

others achieve their levels o perormance.

Formative Assessment

Formative assessment is the assessment o student progress throughout a course, in which

the eedback rom the learning activities is used to improve student attainment.

Good Practices

Good practices are a set o internationally accepted norms which are expected to be

ullled to maintain high quality.

Higher Education Provider (HEP)A higher education provider is a body corporate, organisation or other body o persons

which conducts higher education or training programmes leading to the award o a

higher education qualication.

Institutional Audit

Institutional Audit is an external evaluation o an institution to determine whether it

is achieving its mission and goals, to identiy strengths and areas o concern, and to

enhance quality.

Internal Quality AuditAn internal quality audit is a sel-review exercise conducted internally by a higher

education provider to determine whether it is achieving its mission and goals; to identiy

strengths and areas o concern, and to enhance quality. It generates a Sel-Review Report

or Institutional Audit.

Learning Outcomes

Learning outcomes are statements on what students should know, understand and can

do upon the completion o a period o study.

Longitudinal Study

A longitudinal study involves repeated observations o the same items or phenomena

over a long period o time.

Malaysian Qualifcations Framework (MQF)

The Malaysian Qualications Framework is an instrument that classies qualications based

on a set o criteria that are approved nationally and benchmarked against international

best practices.

Modules

Modules are components o a programme. The term modules is used interchangeably

with subjects, units, or courses.


10/160

x

MQF Level

An MQF level, as described in the Framework, is an award level described with

generic learning outcomes and qualication descriptors which characterises atypical qualication.

Programme

A programme is a set o modules that are structured or a specied duration and learning

volume to achieve the stated learning outcomes which usually leads to an award o

a qualication.

Programme Accreditation

Provisional accreditation is an assessment exercise to determine whether aprogramme has met the minimum quality requirements prior to ull accreditation.

Full accreditation is an assessment exercise to ascertain that the teaching, learning

and all other related activities o a programme provided by a higher education provider

has met the quality standards and in compliance with the MQF.

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 specied standards o teaching,scholarship and research as well as student learning experience.

Quality Enhancement

Quality enhancement is steps taken to bring about continual improvement in quality.

Sel-Review Portolio (SRP)

A Sel-Review Portolio is a portolio generated by an Internal Quality Audit, which is

submitted to the MQA or the purpose o an Institutional Audit.

Sel-Review Report (SRR)A Sel-Review Report is a report submitted by a higher education provider to the MQA or

the purpose o an Institutional Audit that demonstrates whether the higher education

provider has achieved the quality standards as required in the areas that are evaluated.

Student Learning Experience

Student learning experience comprises the entire educational experience o a student

whilst studying or a Programme.

Summative Assessment

Summative assessment is the assessment o learning, which summarises the progress o

the learner at a particular time and is used to assign the learner a course grade.


11/160

xi

1. HEP Higher Education Provider

2. COPIA Code o Practice or Institutional Audit

3. COPPA Code o Practice or Programme Accreditation

4. MOHE Ministry o Higher Education

5. MQA Malaysian Qualications Agency

6. MQF Malaysian Qualications Framework

7. MQR Malaysian Qualications Register

8. SRP Sel-Review Portolio

9. SRR Sel-Review Report

Abbreviations


12/160

xii

1. Table 1 A typical timeline prior to the audit visit

2. Table 2 A typical timetable or an audit visit

3. Table 3 A typical timeline ater the audit visit

List of Tables


13/160

Section 1An Overview of Quality Assurance of

Malaysian Higher Education


14/160

2


15/160

3

Section 1 An Overview o Quality Assurance

o Malaysian Higher Education

INTRODUCTION

Malaysias vision o its uture advocates the development o a human capital o highestquality. The Ministry o Higher Education (MOHE) has incorporated this vision as one o

its primary objectives under its Strategic Plan, in line with the national agenda to make

Malaysia as a preerred centre to pursue higher education.

1. THE MALAYSIAN QUALIFICATIONS AGENCY

In December 2005, the Malaysian Cabinet decided to merge the National Accreditation

Board (Lembaga Akreditasi Negara, LAN) and the Quality Assurance Division (QAD) o

the MOHE. This merger created the Malaysian Qualications Agency (MQA), the single

quality assurance agency in the country, whose scope now covers both the public and

private Higher Education Providers (HEP).

The Malaysian Qualications Agency Act 2007 (MQAA 2007) assigns the responsibility

or quality assuring higher education in Malaysia to the MQA. The responsibilities o the

MQA are:

toimplementtheMalaysianQualicationsFramework(MQF)asareference

point or Malaysian qualications;

todevelop,withthecooperationofstakeholders,standardsandcriteriaandinstruments as a national reerence or the conerment o awards;

toqualityassurehighereducationprovidersandprogrammes;

toaccreditprogrammesthatfullasetofcriteriaandstandards;

tofacilitatetherecognitionandarticulationofqualications;

toestablishandmaintaintheMalaysianQualicationsRegister(MQR);and

toadvisetheMinisterofHigherEducationonanymatterrelatingtoquality

assurance in higher education.

2. THE COUNCIL OF MALAYSIAN QUALIFICATIONS AGENCY

The MQA is headed by a Council. It comprises o a Chairman and 16 members. The

unctions o the Council are:

toapproveplansandpoliciesforthemanagementoftheAgency;

toapproveamendmentsandupdatesoftheMQF;

to approve policies and guidelines relating to audit processes and the

accreditation o programmes, qualications and higher education providers;

toreceiveandmonitorreports,returns,statementsandanyotherinformationrelating to accreditation, institutional audit and evaluation; and


16/160

4

tocontinuouslyguidetheAgencyinitsfunctionasaqualityassurancebody

and do all things reasonably necessary or the perormance o its unctions

under the Act.

3. COMMITTEES

Fromtimetotime,theAgencymayestablishcommitteesforvariouspurposes,including

to provide input or policy decisions. These committees consist o resource persons who

possess in-depth and specialised knowledge and experience in their respective disciplines

to perorm such duties as prescribed under the MQAA 2007.

The committees that have been established are:

3.1 The Accreditation Committees

There are ve Accreditation Committees covering the major areas o study, i.e.,

Science and Medicine, Engineering and Built Environment, Inormation Technology

and Multimedia, Arts and Humanities, and the Social Sciences. The Accreditation

Committees have the ollowing unctions:

Toevaluateandanalyseaccreditationreports;and

To make decisions on an HEPs application for provisional or fullaccreditation o programmes and qualications, i.e., to grant, deny,

maintain or revoke provisional accreditation or ull accreditation o

programmes and qualications.

3.2 The Institutional Audit Committee

One o the main unctions o the Agency is to conduct institutional audits or a

variety o purposes: the procedures o institutional audits may dier according to

their respective purposes.

Among the main unctions o the Institutional Audit Committee are:

toevaluateandmakerecommendationsoninstitutionalauditreports;

tomakethenalrecommendationontheawarding,orotherwise,of

institutional sel-accreditation status; and

tomakerecommendationsforthemaintenance,suspensionorrevocation

o sel-accreditation status.


17/160

5

3.3 The Equivalency Committee

Allprogrammesoffered inMalaysiamust establishtheir level vis-a-vistheMQF.However, there are qualications, within Malaysia or without, whose level in

theMQFisunclearandneedstobedetermined.Thus,theestablishmentofthe

Equivalency Committee. The equivalency statement o a qualication is generally

used or purposes o admission, employment and recognition, although it is not

necessarily legally binding on the authorities responsible or these.

The key unction o the Equivalency Committee is to make decisions on the

equivalency o qualications or their placement in the level o qualications in

theMQF.

3.4 The Standards Committees

Standards is an essential component in a quality assurance system to determine

the expected level of attainment of quality. From time to time, theMQAwill

establish standards committees, both permanent and ad hoc, consisting o experts

in the various disciplines o study. The members o the committees come rom the

academe, proessional bodies and industry. The guidelines, standards and criteria

are developed in consultation with principal stakeholders and various ocus groups

and approved by the Council o the MQA.

The main unctions o the Standards Committees are:

to develop and review the guidelines, standards and criteria for

programme accreditation and institutional audit;

todevelopandreviewstandardsforspecicdisciplines;and

todevelopandreviewguidestogoodpractices.

4. THE MALAYSIAN QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORK

TheMalaysianQualicationsFramework(MQF)servesasabasisforqualityassuranceof

higher education and as the reerence point or national qualications. It is an instrument

that classies qualications based on international best practices and on a set o criteria

that are approved nationally. These agreed upon criteria are used or all qualications

awardedbyahighereducationprovider.TheFrameworkclariestheacademiclevels,

learning outcomes and credit systems based on student academic load. The MQF

integrates all national qualications and provides educational pathways through which

it links qualications systematically. These pathways will enable the individual learner to

progress through credit transers and accreditation o prior experiential learning in thecontext o lielong learning.


18/160

6

5. APPROACHES TO QUALITY ASSURANCE

The work o the MQA revolves around two major approaches to quality assure highereducation in Malaysia. The rst approach is to accredit programmes and qualications.

The second is to audit institutions or their components. The two are distinct approaches

but highly interrelated.

There are two levels in programme accreditation. The rst level is Provisional Accreditation

which indicates that the programme has ullled the minimum requirement or it to be

oered. This level is connected to seeking approval rom the MOHE to conduct a new

programme.ThesecondlevelisFull(orFinal)Accreditation,i.e.,aconfermenttodenote

that a programme has met all the criteria and standards set or that purpose and in

compliancewiththeMQF.

Institutional Audit takes many orms. It could be comprehensive or thematic; it could be

by aculty or across aculties. It could take the orm o a periodic academic perormance

audit on institutions o higher learning or an assessment to determine the continuation or

maintenance o programme accreditation status. It could take the orm o an exercise or

purposes o veriying data, or purposes o public policy input or or rating and ranking

o institutions and programmes.

The highest orm o institutional audit is the sel-accreditation audit, which can lead

to a conerment o a sel-accreditation status or the institution so audited, whereby

the institution can accredit its own programmes. Sometimes called a system audit,

the institutional audit or purposes o sel-accreditation ocuses on the capacity and

capability o the internal quality assurance system o an institution to evaluate academic

programmes that it oers. In a sense, a sel-accreditation audit is an exercise in accrediting

the internal quality assurance system o the institution.

The various approaches to quality assurance processes include periodic monitoring to

ensure that quality is maintained and continuously enhanced.

6. THE MALAYSIAN QUALIFICATIONS REGISTER

The Malaysian Qualications Register (MQR) is a registry of all higher education

qualicationsaccreditedbytheMQA.TheMQRcontains,amongothers,informationon

programmes, providers, levels and validity periods o accreditation o these qualications.

It is meant to provide students, parents, employers, unding agencies and other related

stakeholderswiththenecessaryinformation.TheMQRisaccessibleat.


19/160

7

7. THE QUALITY ASSURANCE GUIDELINES

7.1 Quality Assurance Documents

The quality assurance evaluation conducted by the MQA would be guided by:

TheMalaysianQualicationsFramework(MQF);

TheCodeofPracticeforProgrammeAccreditation(COPPA);

TheCodeofPracticeforInstitutionalAudit(COPIA);

ProgrammeDisciplineStandards;and

GuidestoGoodPractices.

The Code o Practice or Institutional Audit(COPIA) is adapted rom the Code o

Practice or Quality Assurance in Public Universities o Malaysia (2002) published by

the Quality Assurance Division o the Ministry o Higher Education. In addition, the

Lembaga Akreditasi Negara (National Accreditation Board) -- the predecessor to the

MQA -- had a series o guidelines or programme accreditation and good practices

which MQA will continue to utilise to complement COPIA. MQA will continue to

develop programme standards and guides to good practices to cover the whole

range o disciplines and good practices. It will also review them periodically to

ensure their relevance and currency.

This Code o Practice or Institutional Audit(COPIA), guides the HEP and the MQA in

auditing higher education institutions. Unlike the Code o Practice or Programme

Accreditation (COPPA), COPIA is dedicated to review institutions o higher learning

or specic purposes through comprehensive institutional and thematic audits. Both

COPPA and COPIA utilise a similar nine areas o evaluation or quality assurance.

7.2 Areas o Evaluation

The quality evaluation process covers the ollowing nine areas:

Vision,mission,educationalgoalsandlearningoutcomes;

Curriculumdesignanddelivery;

Assessmentofstudents;

Studentselectionandsupportservices;

Academicstaff;

Educationalresources;

Programmemonitoringandreview;

Leadership,governanceandadministration;and

Continualqualityimprovement.


20/160

8

Each o these nine areas contains quality standards and criteria. These standards

and criteria have two distinct levels, i.e., benchmarked standards and enhanced

standards. The degree o compliance to these nine areas o evaluation (and thestandards accompanying them) expected o the HEP depends on the type and level

o assessment.

Generally,theMQAsubscribestotheshiftfromatnessofpurposetoatnessfor

specied purpose. However, in the current stage o the development o Malaysian

higher education and its quality assurance processes, there is a need to ensure that

the HEPs ull all the benchmarked standards. Nevertheless, the diversity o the

institutions and their programmes call or fexibility wherever appropriate. Where

necessary, when preparing their documents or submission to the MQA, the HEPs

may need to provide additional inormation to explain why certain standards arenot applicable to their case.

8. PROGRAMME ACCREDITATION

Programme accreditation is an assessment exercise, conducted by peers, to ascertain

whether a programme has satised the expected quality standards.

Therearetwolevelsofprogrammeaccreditation,i.e.,ProvisionalAccreditationandFull

(orFinal)Accreditation.

The purpose o Provisional Accreditation is to establish whether a programme has met

the minimum requirements in respect o the nine areas o evaluation or it to be oered

by the HEP. Where necessary, a visit may be conducted to conrm the arrangement or the

suitability o the acilities at the HEP premises.

The evaluation is conducted by MQAs Panel o Assessors (POA) and its ndings are tabled

at the respective Accreditation Committee or its decision. The HEP uses the Provisional

Accreditation report as one o the requirements to seek approval rom the MOHE to oer

the programme, and, on obtaining it, to commence the programme.

ThepurposeofaFull(orFinal)Accreditationistoensurethattheprogrammehasmetthe

setofstandardsforFullAccreditationasstipulatedintheCode o Practice or Programme

Accreditation,andincompliancewiththeFramework.FullAccreditationisequallyan

external, peer and independent assessment conducted by MQA through its POA, who

would evaluate the Programme Information and Self-Review Report submitted by

the HEP.

The panel would also make an evaluation visit to the institution. This site visit is to validate

and veriy the inormation urnished by the HEP.


21/160

9

The panel will then submit the nal report to the MQA, to be then tabled to the respective

Accreditation Committee or its nal decision.

8.1 The Accreditation Report

In the whole accreditation exercise, the eedback processes between the Agency

and the HEP are communicated through the panels oral exit report and written

reportinthespiritoftransparencyandaccountability.TheAccreditationReport

will be made available to the HEP concerned. The most important purpose o the

ReportisforcontinualqualityimprovementoftheHEP.

TheAccreditationReportisanarrativethataimstobeinformative.Itrecognises

context and allows comparison over time. It discerns strengths and areas o concern

as well as provides specic recommendations or quality enhancement in the

structure and perormance o the HEP, based on peer experience and the consensus

on quality as embodied in the standards.

I the HEP ails to achieve the accreditation o a programme, the MQA will inorm the

relevant authority accordingly or its necessary action. In the case o a maintenance

audit or programmes already accredited, the cessation date shall be eected on

theMQRtoindicatetherevocationoftheaccreditation.

8.2 The Accreditation Summary Report

A summary o the nal evaluation report o the Panel is accessible to the public.

The report contains inormation that would be helpul to prospective students,

parents, unding agencies and employers.

Accreditation adds value to a programme and qualication. It enhances public

condence and can become a basis or recognition nationally and internationally.

The accreditation reports can be used or benchmarking and or revising quality

standards and practices. Benchmarking ocuses on how to improve the educationalprocesses by exploiting the best practices adopted by institutions around

the world.

9. INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT

Therearetwomaincomponentsofaninstitutionalaudit:theHEPSelf-Review(internal

quality audit) and the MQA Institutional Audit (external quality audit).

The sel-review is done by the institution and is the key component o the documentsubmitted to the MQA or evaluation by the Audit Panel.


22/160

10

The institutional audit is an external and independent peer audit conducted by MQA

through a panel o auditors, who would evaluate the sel-review as well as visit the

institution to validate and veriy inormation given by the HEP and submit the nal reportto the MQA.

In programme accreditation, there is an element o auditing in the orm o Programme

Maintenance Audit, whose purpose is to ensure the continuous maintenance and

enhancement o programmes that have been accredited. The Programme Maintenance

Audit is crucial given that the accredited status o a programme is perpetual, i.e., without

an expiry provision. Programme Maintenance Audit, which applies to all accredited

programmes and qualications, must be carried out at least once in three years.

9.1 Report to the Higher Education Provider: ContinualQuality Improvement

ThemostimportantpurposeoftheInstitutionalAuditReportiscontinualquality

improvement o the HEP. The eedback processes in the orm o the oral exit reports

and written reports promote accountability and reinorce the continual quality

improvement process by validating the HEPs strengths and areas o concern.

The written report is narrative and aims to be inormative. It is contextual to allow

comparison over time. It highlights strengths and concerns as well as provides

recommendations or quality improvement.

9.2 Report to the Ministry o Higher Education

TheInstitutionalAuditReportismadeavailabletotheMinistryofHigherEducation

where it can be used or policy decisions to assist HEPs improve their quality and

standards, and, in the case o sel-accrediting application, or granting sel-

accreditation status.

9.3 Report or the Public

A summary report is made accessible to the public. The report contains inormation that

would be helpul to prospective students, parents, unding agencies and employers.

The quality assurance reports can be used or benchmarking and or revising quality

standards and practices. Benchmarking ocuses on how to improve the educational

processes through adopting the best approaches practised by renowned institutions

o higher education around the world. Adopting best practices provides the HEP the

opportunity to gain strategic, operational and nancial advantage.


23/160

Section 2Guidelines on Criteria and Standards

for Higher Education Providers


24/160


25/160

13

Section 2 GuidelinesonCriteriaandStandards

or Higher Education Providers

INTRODUCTION

The guidelines on criteria and standards or higher education recommend practices thatare in line with internationally recognised good practices. These guidelines are aimed

at helping Higher Education Providers (HEP) attain at least benchmarked standards in

each aspect o higher education and to stimulate them to continuously improve their

programmes. All these are in support o the national aspiration o making Malaysia the

centre or educational excellence.

The guidelines are designed to encourage diversity o approach that is compatible with

national and global human resources requirements. The guidelines dene standards or

higher education in broad terms, within which individual HEPs can creatively design their

programmes o study and to appropriately allocate resources in accordance with their

stated vision, mission, educational goals and learning outcomes.

Like COPPA, COPIA also utilises the nine areas o evaluation, i.e.:

1. Vision,mission,educationalgoalsandlearningoutcomes;

2. Curriculum design and delivery;

3. Assessment o students;

4. Student selection and support services;

5. Academic sta;

6. Educational resources;

7. Programme monitoring and review;

8. Leadership, governance and administration; and

9. Continual quality improvement.

ThesenineareaswillbeadjustedaccordinglytotthedistinctpurposeofCOPIA.For

example, the item on the larger vision o the institution is crucial at the institutional level,

as compared to its t when conducting a programme accreditation in which it is more

directed to see how a specic programme supports the larger institutional vision. Similarly,

when COPIA talks about curriculum design its perspective is largely about institutionalpolicies, structures, processes and practices related to curriculum development across

the institution. In COPPA, it reers specically to description, content and delivery o a

particular programme.

The standards in each o these nine areas dene the expected level o attainment or

each criterion within them, and serve as a perormance indicator. Standards are specied

at two levels o attainment: benchmarked standard and enhanced standard.

Benchmarked standards are standards that must be met and its compliance demonstrated

during an institutional audit. These are minimum standards expected o an institution ohigherlearning.Generally,institutionsofhigherlearningareexpectedtofullallthe


26/160

14

benchmarked standards. However, some o these standards may not be applicable to

certain institutions or in certain situations, or which the institution involved must justiy

this exception. Benchmarked standards are expressed as a must.

Enhanced standards are standards that should be met as the institution strives to

continuously improve itsel. Enhanced standards refect international and national

consensus on good practices in higher education. HEPs should be able to demonstrate

achievement o some or all o these or that initiatives toward the achievement o these

standards are underway. Achievement o these standards will vary with the stage o

development o the HEPs, their resources and policies. Enhanced standards are expressed

by a should.

The use o two levels o standards recognises the act that HEPs are at dierent stages odevelopment and emphasises that quality improvement is a continual process. Enhanced

standards, in particular, allow fexibility and recognise diversity to acilitate the creative

growth o education.

In the remaining pages o this chapter, specic criteria o the standards are spelt out or

each o the nine areas o evaluation. These serve as perormance indicators o quality.


27/160

15

AREA 1: VISION, MISSION, EDUCATIONAL GOALS ANDLEARNING OUTCOMES

The vision, mission and goals o education set the direction o an HEP, guide academic

planning and implementation as well as bring together all members o the institution to

strive towards a tradition o excellence.

The vision and mission o an HEP direct and guide all aspects o the institutional existence

and its uture progress. The larger vision and mission o the HEP provides the oundation

or the development o all its academic programmes; one must be guided by them when

designing such programmes.

The educational goals describe the crucial characteristics o the outcomes and processes

o higher education that are in keeping with national aspirations and global importance.

The general goal o higher education is to produce broadly educated individuals

through the:

provisionofknowledgeandpracticalskillsbasedonscienticprinciples;

inculcation of attitudes, ethics, sense of professionalism, and leadership

and citizenship skills or societal advancement within the ramework o the

national vision;

nurturingoftheabilitytoanalyseandsolveproblemsaswellastoevaluateand

make decisions critically and creatively based on evidence and experience; developmentofthequestforknowledgeandlifelonglearningskillsthatare

essential or continuous upgrading o knowledge and skills that parallel the

rapid advancement in global knowledge; and

consideration of other issues that are relevant to the local, national and

international context.

STANDARDS FOR AREA 1

1.1 Statement o Vision, Mission and Educational Goals

1.1.1 Benchmarked Standards

The HEP must ormulate educational goals consistent with its vision

and mission.

Themissionstatementandeducationalgoalsmust refect the crucial

elements o the processes and outcomes o higher education that is in

line with national and global developments.

The vision, mission, and educational goals must be approved by a

governing board or other appropriate body whose membership is madeup o those competent to discharge such duties and responsibilities.


28/160

16

EveryHEPmust disseminate its vision, mission and educational goals to

its internal and external stakeholders.

1.1.2 Enhanced Standards

The mission and educational goals should encompass leadership

qualities in the areas o social responsibility, research and scholarly

attainment, community engagement, ethical values, proessionalism, and

knowledge creation.

TheHEPshould demonstrate that its planning and evaluation processes,

educational programmes, educational support services, nancial and

physical resources, and administrative processes are adequate and

appropriate to ull its stated goals.

1.2 Participation in the Formulation o Vision, Mission andEducational Goals


Thevision,missionandgoalsmust be developed in consultation with

principal stakeholders which include departments, schools or aculties,

research centres, governing boards, academic sta, student organisations,

and administration and management sta.


The vision, mission and goals should be periodically reviewed in

consultation with a wider range o stakeholders that may include the

community, civil society, international peers, alumni, industry, proessional

bodies, unding agencies, and the government.

1.3 Academic Autonomy

An academic institution is expected to have sucient autonomy over academicmatters. Such autonomy should be refected in its oerings, its scholarly activities

and its decision-making processes.


The HEPmust have sucient autonomy to design the curriculum o

the qualications that it is conerring and to allocate the resources

necessary or their implementation to ensure the achievement o their

learning outcomes.

(Where applicable, this provision must also cover programmes and

activities conducted in collaboration with others within or outside


29/160

17

the country in accordance with national interest and international

best practices.)

Theacademicstaffmust be given sucient autonomy to ocus on areaso his expertise, such as curriculum development and implementation,

academic supervision o students, research and writing, scholarly activities,

academically-related administrative duties, and community engagement.


TheHEPshould strive to expand the boundaries o academic autonomy

to refect the progression o its intellectual maturity.

1.4 Learning Outcomes

The quality o the HEP is ultimately assessed by the ability o its graduates to

carry out their expected roles and responsibilities in society. This requires a clear

denition o the competencies that are expected to be achieved by students upon

completion o a period o study. The ability o the graduate should demonstrate the

level o competencies as dened by the expected learning outcomes outlined in the

MalaysianQualicationsFramework(MQF).


The HEP must ormulate learning outcomes and educational goals

consistent with its vision and mission.

The HEPmust dene the specic competencies that students should

demonstrate upon completion o the period o study.

(The competencies include mastery o the body o knowledge; practical

skills; social skills and responsibility; ethics and proessionalism; scientifc

method, critical thinking and problem solving; communication skills

and teamwork; inormation management and lielong learning; and

entrepreneurship and management.)


The HEP should speciy the link between competencies expected

at completion o studies and those required or career undertakings,

urther studies and good citizenship.


30/160

18

AREA 2: CURRICULUM DESIGN AND DELIVERY

A curriculum denes the body o knowledge and the area o specialisation. The dynamismo the HEP is refected by it keeping abreast with the latest development in the various

disciplines through an eective relationship between curriculum content and current

practices in these disciplines as well as by it taking into consideration the current needs

o an ever changing society.


2.1 Curriculum Design and Teaching-Learning Methods


TheHEPmust have a clearly dened process to establish, review and

evaluate the curriculum in which the aculty, the administration and the

governing board plays an active role.

Allprogrammesmust be considered only ater their needs assessment

has indicated that there is a need or them to be conducted.

Allprogrammesmust be considered only ater the resources to support

them have been identied.

Theaimsandobjectivesofallprogrammesmust be consistent with, andsupportive o, the HEPs vision and mission.

TheHEPmust show that the content, approach, and teaching-learning

methods o the curricula are consistent with, and supportive o, their

learning outcomes.

Theremust be a variety o teaching-learning methods in order to achieve

the eight domains o the learning outcomes and to ensure that students

take responsibility or their own learning.

The teaching and learning activities must be consistent with

the curriculum.


The curriculum should encourage multi-disciplinary approaches to

enhance personal development through electives, study pathways and

other means which should be monitored and appraised.

Theneedsanalysis forallprogrammesshould involve eedback rom

external sources including the market, students, alumni, peers, and

international experts whose commentaries are utilised or purposes o

curriculum improvement.

There should be co-curricular activities that will enrich students

experiences, and oster personal development and responsibility.


31/160

19

2.2 Curriculum Content and Structure


All academic programmes must incorporate the core content o the

discipline that are essential or understanding the concepts, principles

and methods that support the programme outcomes.

Allacademicprogrammesmust ull the requirements o the discipline

and incorporate topics o local, national and international importance,

taking into account the appropriate discipline standards and international

best practices or the eld, as well as changes in them.


TheHEPshould establish mechanisms -- through the use o the latest

technology and through global networking -- to access to real time

inormation and to identiy up-to-date topics o importance or inclusion

in the curriculum and its delivery.

2.3 Management o Programmes


Studentsmust be provided with the most current written inormation

about the aims, outline, learning outcomes, and methods o assessment

o programmes oered by the HEP.

Allprogrammesmust have a coordinator and a team o appropriate

academic sta (e.g., programme committee or team) that is responsible

or the planning, implementation, evaluation and improvement o

the programme.

Allprogrammeteamsmust have authority and established procedures

or programme planning and monitoring.

All programme teams must be given resources to implement the

teaching-learning activities, and to conduct programme evaluation orquality improvement.

Allprogrammes--inparticulartheir contentanddelivery --must be

regularly reviewed and evaluated and the results utilised to assure

quality. (At level 6 and above of theMQF, the review must involve

external examiners.)

TheHEPmust provide a conducive learning environment or its students

in which scholarly and creative achievements are nurtured.

TheHEPmust have eective structures and processes when ullling the

necessary criteria and standards o qualications awarded.


32/160

20


Innovationstoimproveteachingandlearningshould be continuously

developed, adequately supported, and critically evaluated, in consultationwith principal stakeholders and experts, internally and externally.

The review and evaluation of programmes should involve external

expertise nationally and internationally.

2.4 Linkages with External Stakeholders

At the operational level, linkages with stakeholders outside o the HEP are crucial

or identiying, clariying and improving key aspects o programmes and their

interrelationships in the planning and implementation process. The linkages arebest developed and maintained at local, national, regional and global levels.


The HEP must have linkages with all external stakeholders at the

local, national, regional or global levels or the purposes o planning,

implementing and reviewing its programmes.


The HEP should obtain eedback rom employers and utilise the

inormation or curriculum improvement as well as or purposes o

student placement, training and workplace exposure.

The HEPshould acilitate students to develop linkages with external

stakeholders.


33/160

21

AREA 3: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENTS

Student assessment is a crucial aspect o quality assurance because it drives studentlearning and it is one o the most important measures to show the achievement o

learning outcomes. The result o assessment is also the basis in awarding qualications.

Hence, the methods o assessing students have to be clear, consistent, eective,

reliable and in line with current practices and must clearly support the achievement

o learning outcomes.


3.1 Relationship Between Assessment and Learning


Theprinciples,methodsandpracticesof studentassessmentmust be

aligned with learning outcomes and the curricula.

AssessmentmustbeconsistentwiththelevelsdenedintheMQF,the

eight domains o learning outcomes and the programme standards.


Thelinkbetweenassessmentandprogrammelearningoutcomesshouldbe reviewed periodically to ensure its eectiveness.

3.2 Assessment Methods


A varietyofmethodsandtoolsmust be used appropriately to assess

learning outcomes and competencies.

Assessmentmust be summative and ormative.

Theremust be mechanisms to ensure the validity, reliability, consistency,currency and airness o the student assessment system.

Theassessmentmethodsmust be reviewed at appropriate scheduled

intervals to ensure currency.

Themethodsofstudentassessment--includingthegradingcriteria --

must be documented and communicated to students on commencement

o a programme.


The methods of assessing should be comparable to internationalbest practices.


34/160

22

Thereviewoftheassessmentmethodsshould incorporate current global

developments and best practices in the discipline.

The reviewof theassessment systemshould be done in consultationwith external experts, both locally and internationally.

3.3 Management o Student Assessment

The management o the assessment system is directly linked to the HEPs responsibility

as a body that coners qualications. The robustness and security o the processes

and procedures related to student assessment are important in inspiring condence

in the quality o the qualications awarded by the HEP.


TheHEPmust provide sucient autonomy to the relevant departments

in the management o student assessment.

Studentassessmentresultsmust be communicated to the student within

reasonable time.

Changes to student assessment methods must ollow established

procedures and regulations and communicated to students prior to

their implementation.

The programme grading, assessment and appeal policies must

be publicised.

There must be mechanisms to ensure the security o assessment

documents and records.


Thereshould be independent external scrutiny to evaluate and improve

the management o student assessment, including ormal certication

o the processes.


35/160

23

AREA 4: STUDENT SELECTION AND SUPPORT SERVICES

Student admission is governed by policies ormulated by the Ministry o Higher Education(MOHE). There are varying views on the most appropriate way to select students into

a higher education institution; there is no one best method o student selection.

Whatever method is selected, the HEP must be able to deend it consistently. Appropriate

developmental or remedial support must be made available to assist students. The number

o students to be admitted is determined by the resources and capacity o the HEP as well

as the number o qualied applicants. The admission and retention policies o the HEP

must not be compromised or the sole purpose o maintaining a desired enrolment. I an

HEP operates geographically separated campuses, or i a programme is a collaborative

one, the selection and assignment o all students must be equally consistent with

national policies.


4.1 Admission and Selection


The HEPmust have clear criteria and processes o student admission

-- including those aecting transer and exchange students -- and

select students whose capabilities are consistent with these criteria

and processes.

Thecriteriaandprocessesofselectionmust be published, disseminated

and publicly accessible, especially to students.

Prerequisiteknowledgeandskillsforpurposesofstudententryintoeach

programme must be appropriate and clearly stated.

If a selection interview is utilised, the process must be structured,

objective and air.

Studentselectionmust be air and transparent.

There must be a clear policy on, and appropriate mechanism

or, appeal.

TheHEPmust oer appropriate developmental or remedial support to

assist students who need such support.

Thenumberforeachstudentintakemust be related to the resources,

capacity and capability o the HEP to eectively deliver its programmes.

Visiting, exchange and transfer students must be accounted or to

ensure the adequacy o the HEPs resources to accommodate them.

Theadmissionpolicymust be monitored and reviewed periodically to

continuously improve the selection processes.


36/160

24


Studentperformanceshould be monitored as a eedback mechanism to

assist in improving selection processes.

Thereviewoftheadmissionpolicyandprocessesshouldbe in consultation

with relevant stakeholders, nationally and internationally.

Student intake should incorporate social responsibility by privileged

consideration or people with special needs.

Thereshould be a relationship between student selection, programmes,

and the desired learning outcomes.

4.2 Articulation Regulations, Credit Transer and Credit Exemption


HEP must have well dened and eectively disseminated policies,

regulations and processes concerning articulation practices, credit

transers and credit exemptions.


TheHEPshould be in touch with the latest development and thinking

about the processes o articulation, credit transers and credit exemptions

including cross-border collaborative provisions.

4.3 Transer o Students

In this age o increased cross-border education and student mobility, nationally and

globally, the question o the transer o students and credits and the articulation

o accumulated learning has become a very important aspect o higher education.

Thus, sucient attention must be given to ensure that transer students are

smoothly assimilated into the institution without undue disruption to his studies.


The HEP must have a well-disseminated policy with clear criteria,

mechanisms and processes, both academic and non-academic, to enable

qualied students to transer to another programme, within it or in

another HEP.

Incomingtransferstudentsmust have comparable achievement in their

previous institution o study.


TheHEPshould have in place policies and mechanisms that acilitatestudent mobility between programmes and institutions, within the


37/160

25

country or cross-border, through articulation arrangements, joint

degrees, exchange semesters, advanced standing arrangements, and

the like.

4.4 Student Support Services and Co-Curricular Activities

Student support services and co-curricular activities acilitate learning and

wholesome personal development and contribute to the achievement o learning

outcomes. It includes physical amenities and services such as recreation, arts

and culture, accommodation, transport, saety, ood, health, nance, academic

advice and counselling. Students with special needs and those acing personal,

relationship or identity problems can be helped through special-purpose acilities

and proessional counselling. By examining a students career inclination, career

counselling can help students make more inormed programme and career choices.


The HEP must make available appropriate and adequate support

services, such as physical, social, nancial and recreational acilities, and

counselling and health services.

Studentsupport servicesmust be evaluated regularly to ensure their

adequacy, eectiveness and saety.

Theremust be a mechanism or students to air grievances and makeappeals relating to student support services.

TheHEPmust designate an administrative unit responsible or planning

and implementing student support services, staed by individuals who

have appropriate experience consistent with their assignments.

Academic and career counselling must be provided to students by

adequate and qualied sta.

Inductionprogrammesmustbe made available to students and evaluated

regularly with special attention given to out o state and international

students as well as students with special needs.


Student support services should be given prominent organisational

status in the HEP and a dominant role in supplementing programme

learning outcomes.

An equippedandadequatelystaffedunitdedicated to academic and

non-academic counselling should be established.

Studentacademicandnon-academiccounsellingshould include ongoing

monitoring o the students progress to measure the eectiveness o,

and to improve, the counselling services.


38/160

26

There should be a structured training and development plan

to enhance the skills and proessionalism o the academic and

non-academic counsellors.

4.5 Student Representation and Participation

The participation o students in various institutional activities inculcates sel-

condence or leadership, and provides experience in education and related

matters. By involving students, it will also be easier or the HEP to obtain their

eedback. Student publications can also contribute to an atmosphere o responsible

intellectual discourse.


TheHEPmusthave a widely disseminated policy on student representation

and participation in line with national policies and laws.

TheHEPmust publish a statement o student rights and responsibilities

and make it available to the campus community.

Thejurisdictionofjudicialbodies,thedisciplinaryresponsibilitiesofHEP

ocials, and all disciplinary procedures must be clearly dened and

broadly disseminated.

Theremust be a policy and programmes or active student participation

in areas that aect their welare, or example, peer counselling, co-

curricular activities, and community engagement.


Students and student organisations should be acilitated to gain

managerial and leadership experience, to encourage character building,

to inculcate a sense o belonging and responsibility, and to promote

active citizenship.

Wherestudentpublicationsorothermediaexist,theHEPshould provide

a clear, ormal and well-publicised policy regarding such publications. Thereshould be appropriate channels to allow student participation in

the ormulation, management and evaluation o the curriculum, and in

academic matters relevant to them.

TheHEPshould have adequate acilities to encourage students to be

involved in publication activities.


39/160

27

4.6 Alumni

4.6.1 Benchmarked Standards TheHEPmust encourage active linkages and continuous relationship

between it and its alumni.


The views of the alumni should be incorporated in curriculum

development, the achievement o the learning outcomes and the uture

direction o the HEP.

The HEP should encourage the alumni to play a role in preparing

students or their proessional uture, and to provide linkages withindustry and the proessions.


40/160

28

AREA 5: ACADEMIC STAFF

The quality o the academic sta is one o the most important components in assuringthe quality o higher education and thus every eort must be made to establish proper

and eective recruitment, service, development and appraisal policies that are conducive

to sta productivity. It is important that every programme has appropriately qualied

and sucient number o academic sta in a conducive environment that encourages

recruitment and retention.

Teaching, research, consultancy services and community engagement are the core

interrelated academic activities. Nevertheless, the degree o involvement in these areas

varies between academic sta and between academic institutions.

Work and its equitable distribution is one o the ways the HEP recognises meritorious

contribution or the purpose o promotion, salary determination and other incentives. It

is crucial or the HEP to provide training or its academic sta. The equitable distribution

o work helps ensure that such training can be done airly and systematically.


5.1 Recruitment and Management


TheHEPmust have a clear and documented academic sta recruitment

policy where the criteria or selection are based on academic merit.

The staff tostudentratiofor each programmemust be appropriate

to the teaching-learning methods and comply with the programme

discipline standards.

TheHEPmust have an adequate number o ull-time academic sta or

each programme.

TheHEPmust clariy the roles o the academic sta in teaching, research

and scholarly activities, consultancy, community services and administrative

unctions to show a balance o unctions and responsibilities in line with

academic conventions.

TheHEPpolicymust refect an equitable distribution o responsibilities

among the academic sta.

Recognition and reward through promotion, salary increment or

other remuneration must be based on equitable work distribution

and meritorious academic roles using clear and transparent policies

and procedures.


41/160

29

The HEPmust have clear policies, criteria and processes in academic

appointment and promotion exercise -- or example, that o Proessors

and Associate Proessors -- guided by considerations which are in linewith national policy and international best practices.


The recruitment policy should seek a balance between senior and

junior academic sta, between academic and non-academic sta,

between academic sta with dierent approaches to the subject,

and between local and international academic sta with multi-

disciplinary backgrounds.

TheHEPshould have national and international linkages to provide or

the involvement o renowned academics and proessionals to enhance

its scholarly activities.

5.2 Service and Development


The HEP must provide or an eective academic sta

development programme.

Thepolicyontheacademicstaffmust address matters related to service,

development and appraisal.

The HEP must provide mentoring and ormative guidance or new

academic sta as part o its sta development programme.

The academic staff must be provided with the necessary training,

tools and technology or sel-learning, access to inormation and

or communication.

The HEP must provide or a suitable environment or the student

appraisal o the academic sta.

5.2.2 Enhanced Standards TheHEPshouldprovide opportunities -- including unding -- or academic

sta participation in proessional, academic and other relevant activities,

national and international. It should appraise this participation and

demonstrate that it utilises the results o this appraisal or improvement

o the student experience.

The HEP should have appropriate provision to allow or advanced

enhancement or its academic sta through research leave, sabbatical,

and sponsored participation in, and organisation o, conerences.


42/160

30

AREA 6: EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES

Adequate educational resources are necessary to support teaching-learning activitieso a programme. These resources include nance, expertise, physical inrastructure,

inormation and communication technology, and research acilities.

The physical acilities o a programme are largely guided by the needs o the specic eld

o study. These acilities include the space and the necessary equipments and acilities

or administration, or large and small group learning (e.g., libraries, resource centres,

lecture halls, auditoriums, tutorial rooms), or practical classes (e.g., science and computer

laboratories, workshops, studios), and or clinical learning (e.g., hospitals, clinics).

Where appropriate, research acilities are included as part o educational resourcesbecause a research-active environment improves the quality o higher education.

A research culture attracts high calibre academics that engender critical thinking

and enquiring mind, contributing urther to knowledge advancement. Active

researchers are best suited to interpret and apply current knowledge or the benet

o academic programmes and the community. They also attract grants that increase

the number o sta and their morale. Interdisciplinary research has positive eects on

academic programmes.

A research-active environment provides opportunities or students to observe and

participate in research through electives or core courses. Exposure to an environment

o curiosity and inquiry encourages students to develop lasting skills in problem solving,

data analysis and continuous updating o knowledge. Some students may develop an

interest in research as a career choice.

Educational experts are specialised sta rom various disciplines who have been trained

or who have considerable experience in eective teaching-learning methodologies

and related matters o higher education. They would deal with problems and provide

training as well as advice on teaching-learning processes and practices. The expertise

can be provided by an education unit or division at the HEP or acquired rom an

external source.

Other acilities, which are essential or supporting teaching-learning activities such as

dormitories, transport, security, recreation and counselling, are equally important. A

balanced and proportional increase in the direct and indirect educational resources

supports eective teaching-learning.

Adequate quantity o physical and nancial resources and services is crucial. Equally

important, i not more so, is the quality, relevance, accessibility, availability and delivery

o such resources and services, and their actual utilisation by learners and teachers alike.

These considerations must be taken into account in evaluating the eectiveness o

educational resources.


43/160

31


6.1 Physical Facilities


The HEP must have sucient and appropriate resources, including

equipments and acilities or training, to ensure eective delivery o

the curriculum.

Educationalresources,includinginfrastructureandresourcesinsupport

o academic sta development programmes, must be distributed

according to the educational needs.

The physical facilitiesmust comply with the relevant laws, and withhealth and saety regulations.

The library and resource centre must have adequate and current

reerences, qualied sta and other acilities -- including appropriate

inormation and communication technology-mediated reerence

materials -- to support academic programmes and research activities.

The HEP must provide adequate and suitable acilities to promote

research activities.

TheHEPmust have a policy regarding access to inormation and external

linkages or eective teaching and learning, or example, through the

use o the most current electronic devices, library databases, networks

and linkages and other eective means o using inormation and

communication technology.


Thephysicallearningenvironmentshould be periodically reviewed to

assess its quality and appropriateness or current education and training,

and regularly improved through renovations, building new acilities and

the acquisition o the latest and appropriate equipment to keep up with

the development in educational practices and changes.

Studentsandfacultyshould be provided with adequate and continual

support to learn how to utilise new equipments and to access inormation

in the various and ever changing mediums and ormats.

Thefacilitiesshould be user riendly to those with special needs.

6.2 Research and Development(These standards are largely directed to universities and university colleges)


TheHEPmust have a policy and planning that identies the priorities,

acilities and development in research and commercialisation.


44/160

32

TheHEPmust acilitate and provide incentives or the academic sta

and the departments to conduct research.

Theinteractionbetweenresearchandeducationmust be refected inthe curriculum, inorm current teaching, and encourage and prepare

students or engagement in research, scholarship and development.


There should be a link between research, development and

commercialisation.

TheHEPshould periodically review research resources and acilities and

take appropriate action to enhance its research capabilities and to keep

up with latest technology. TheHEPshould provide incentives, including unding, to academic sta

to engage in publication, including in reputable reereed journals.

6.3 Educational Expertise


The HEP must have a policy on the use o educational expertise in

planning educational programmes and in the development o new

teaching and assessment methods.


The HEP should have access to educational experts whose expertise

can be utilised or sta development and educational research in the

various disciplines.

6.4 Educational Exchanges


TheHEPmust have a policy on exchanges o students, academic sta

and educational resources, and disseminate it to students and aculty.


TheHEPshould have a clear policy and uture planning on educational

collaboration with relevant international institutions.

TheHEPshould provide appropriate acilities and adequate nancial

allocation or exchanges o academic sta, students, and resources.


45/160

33

6.5 Financial Allocation


TheHEPmust have budgetary and procurement procedures to ensure

that its resources are sucient and that it is capable o utilising its

nances eciently and responsibly to achieve its objectives and maintain

high standards o quality.

The HEP must have a clear line o responsibility and authority or

budgeting and resource allocation that takes into account the specic

needs o each department.

TheHEPmust have a written and well-disseminated policy on tuition

ees, reunds and other related payments.


Those responsible for an academic programme should be given

sucient autonomy to appropriately allocate resources to achieve

the programme objectives and to maintain high educational standards.


46/160

34

AREA 7: PROGRAMME MONITORING AND REVIEW

Quality enhancement calls or programmes to be regularly monitored, reviewed andevaluated. This includes the monitoring, reviewing and evaluating o institutional

structures and processes (administrative structure, leadership and governance, planning

and review mechanisms), curriculum components (syllabi, teaching methodologies,

learning outcomes) as well as student progress, employability and perormance.

Feedbackfrommultiplesources--students,alumni,academicstaff,employers,professional

bodies,parents--assistsinenhancingthequalityoftheprogramme.Feedbackcanalso

be obtained rom an analysis o student perormance and rom longitudinal studies.

Measures o student perormance would include the average study duration, assessmentscores, passing rate at examinations, success and dropout rates, students and alumnis

report about their learning experience, as well as time spent by students in areas o

special interest. Evaluation o student perormance in examinations can reveal very

useul inormation. I student selection has been correctly done, a high ailure rate in

a programme indicates something amiss in the curriculum content, teaching-learning

activities or assessment system. The programme committees need to monitor the

perormance rate in each course and investigate i the rate is too high or too low.

Student eedback, or example through questionnaires and representation in programme

committees, is useul to identiy specic problems and or continual improvement o

the programmes.

One method to evaluate programme eectiveness is a longitudinal study o the graduates.

The HEP should have mechanisms or monitoring the perormance o its graduates and

or obtaining the perceptions o society and employers on the strengths and weaknesses

o the graduates and to respond appropriately.


7.1 Mechanisms or Programme Monitoring and Review


TheHEPmust have a policy on the reviewing, monitoring and evaluation

o all programmes oered that utilises proper mechanisms and resources,

including benchmark data, teaching-learning methods and technologies,

administration and related educational services, as well as eedback rom

principal stakeholders.

Theremust be a programme review committee or each departmentheaded by a designated coordinator.


47/160

35

In collaborativearrangements, thepartners involved must share the

responsibility o programme monitoring and review.

Theareasofconcernandwaystoimproveprogrammesasidentiedbythe HEP sel-review processes must be brought to the attention o the

highest management level to ensure urther appropriate measures.

Studentperformanceandprogressionmust be analysed to ascertain the

achievement o the learning outcomes o each programme.


Student performance andprogression analysis should be utilised to

provide eedback to committees responsible or student selection,

curriculum planning and student counselling.

7.2 Involvement o Stakeholders


Theevaluationand reviewofprogrammesmust involve the relevant

stakeholders.


Stakeholderfeedback--particularlythatofthealumniandemployers

-- should be incorporated into a programme review exercise.

For a professional programme, the HEP should engage the relevant

proessional bodies and associations in its programme evaluation

exercise.


48/160

36

AREA 8: LEADERSHIP, GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION

There are many ways o administering a higher education institution. Nevertheless,governance that refects the leadership o an academic organisation must emphasise

excellence and scholarship. It is very crucial that leadership at the various levels o the

HEP provides clear guidelines and direction, builds relationship amongst the dierent

constituents based on collegiality and transparency, manages nances and other resources

with transparency and accountability, orge partnerships with signicant stakeholders

in educational delivery, research and consultancy and dedicates itsel to academic and

scholarly endeavours. Whilst ormalised arrangements can protect these relationships,

they are best developed by a culture o reciprocity and open communication.


8.1 Governance


The policies and practices of the HEP must be consistent with its

statement o purpose.

The HEP must clariy its governance structures and unctions, and

the relationships within them, and these must be communicated toparties involved based on principles o transparency, accountability

and authority.

ThegoverningboardoftheHEPmust be an active policy-making body

with an adequate degree o autonomy.

Mechanisms to ensure functional integration and comparability

o educational quality must be established in HEPs which have

geographically separated campuses.

TheHEPmust have a department or unit dedicated to, and responsible

or, the internal quality assurance system.

The HEP must encourage connectivity o its sta and students with

the local community around it, including through cultural, social and

community service activities.


The HEP should have a comprehensive, interconnected and

institutionalised committee system responsible or academic

programmes that takes into consideration, among others, internal

and external consultation, eedback, market needs analysis and

employability projections.


49/160

37

Thegovernanceprinciplesshould refect the representation o academic

sta, students and other stakeholders.

TheChairofthegoverningboardshould exercise non-executive powerso the HEP.

Thegoverningboardshould be ree rom undue external pressures.

The HEP should have a clearly stated policy on confict o interest,

particularly in relation to private practice and part-time employment o

its employees.

TheHEPshould actively participate in socio-economic activities o the

community in which it is located.

8.2 Institutional and Academic Leadership


The selection criteria, selection process, job description, and the

qualication and experience required o members o the institutional

executive management team o the HEP (i.e., the HEP leadership) must

be clearly stated.

The leadership of academic programmes and departments (i.e.,

the academic leadership) must be held by those with appropriate

qualications and experience, and suciently knowledgeable on issueso curriculum design, delivery and review.

Mechanismsandprocessesmust be in place to allow or communication

between the HEP leadership and the academic leadership o

departments and programmes in matters such as aculty recruitment

and training, student admission, allocation o resources, and decision-

making processes.

Theacademicleadershipatthedepartmentandprogrammelevelsmust

be evaluated at dened intervals with respect to perormance and in

relation to the achievement o the mission and goals o the HEP.


The HEP leadership and the academic leadership should take on

the responsibility o creating a conducive environment to generate

innovation and creativity.

The HEP leadership and the academic leadership should undergo

periodic training and sta development programme to enhance their

leadership capabilities.


50/160

38

8.3 Administrative and Management Sta


TheadministrativestaffoftheHEPmust be appropriate and sucient

to support the implementation o the educational programmes and

related activities, and to ensure good management and deployment o

the resources.

TheHEPmust have mechanisms or training and career advancement

or its administrative and management sta.

TheHEPmust conduct regular perormance review o its administrative

and management sta.


TheHEPshould have an advanced training scheme or the administrative

and management sta to ull the specic needs o educational

programmes, or example, risk management, maintenance o specialised

equipment, and additional technical skills.

8.4 Academic Records


TheHEPmust have policies concerning the accessibility and security o

student and academic sta records.

TheHEPmust establish and disseminate policies that respect the rights

o individual privacy and the condentiality o records.


The HEP should continuously review policies on security o

records including increased use o electronic technologies and its

saety systems.

8.5 Interaction with External Sectors


The HEP must have a constructive mechanism or cooperation with

external sectors, including with its external stakeholders.


The collaboration with external sectors should be institutionalised

through ormalised agreements.


51/160


52/160


53/160

Section 3Submission for Institutional Audit


54/160

42


55/160

43

Section 3 Submission or Institutional Audit

INTRODUCTION

This section contains inormation and reerence to assist the Higher Education Provider(HEP) in the preparation o submission or an institutional audit. It is not a prescriptive

tool; it is a general manual meant to assist the provider to understand and interpret the

necessary inormation required or such a submission. The HEP should ollow closely the

requirements ound in Section 3.1 below and clariy with the MQA rom time to time

should the need arise.

Although comprehensive, not all items in this section apply equally to all submissions;

some are more relevant and applicable than others. The HEP should utilise the guidelines

appropriately and customise their submission in accordance to the specic needs o their

institution. They should, however, indicate -- and explain -- items that are not applicableto them.

The guidelines in this section cover all the main dimensions in the nine areas o evaluation.

It also provides illustrative examples. The HEP is expected to provide appropriate

inormation with evidences that support and best illustrate their specic case. The HEP is

also welcomed to urnish additional inormation that may not be specically covered by

these guidelines.

The inormation provided by the HEP or its submission should be brie, concise

and succinct.

3.1 The Documentation Required

HEPsare required to submit the Self-ReviewPortfolio (SRP)orMQA-03, for an

institutional audit in the prescribed ormat below:

- PartA:GeneralInformationAbouttheHEP

This is an institutional prole o the HEP.

- Part B: Inormation on the Nine Areas o Evaluation or Quality

Assurance

This provides the inormation pertaining to the nine areas o evaluation

and the standards in each o them.

- PartC:Self-ReviewReport

In preparing the portolio, HEPs are encouraged to use bullet points, diagrams

and fow charts as much as possible. In support o the inormation provided in the

portolio, HEPs may append relevant and signicant documentations. The HEP maybe requested to provide additional inormation beore or during the institutional


56/160

44

auditvisit.Further,theHEPmayalsoberequiredtoallowtheauditorsaccessto

condential inormation or verication purposes.

The HEP is expected to send to the MQA:

HardcopiesoftheSRPasperrequired;

Hardcopiesofothersupportingmaterialsasperrequired;and

SoftcopiesoftheSRPasperrequired.

UponreceiptoftheSRP,theMQAwillvetthroughthedocumenttoensurethatthe

submissioniscomplete.IncaseswheretheSRPisincomplete,theMQAwillrequest

theHEPtocompletethedocumentation.TheSRPisthenforwardedtothepanel

o auditors.

The remaining pages o this section consist o descriptions o templates or Part A

and Part B, aswellastheguidelinestoaSelf-ReviewReport(PartC).


57/160

45

PART A: GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE HIGHEREDUCATION PROVIDER

PartAoftheSelf-ReviewPortfolioofthisCodeofPracticeforInstitutionalAu

COPIA 2nd Edition

Documents

Transcript of COPIA 2nd Edition