Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan Tinggi: Gerakan Internasional

1. Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan Tinggi: Gerakan Internasional Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih Kantor Jaminan Mutu UGM

3. To reflect and... Act. The difference between the poor countries and the rich ones is not the age of the country, the natural resources, the intellectuality, the skin color...

4. What is the difference then?

5. The difference is the attitude of the people, framed along the years by the education & the culture.

6. On analyzing the behavior of the people in rich & developed countries, we find that the great majority follow the following principles in their lives:

7. 1. Ethics, as a basic principle. 2. Integrity. 3. Responsibility. 4. Respect to the laws & rules. 5. Respect to the rights of other citizens. 6. Work loving. 7. Strive for saving & investment. 8. Will of super action. 9. Punctuality.

8. We are not poor because we lack natural resources or because nature was cruel to us.

9. We are poor because we lack attitude.We lack the will to comply with and teach these functional principles of rich & developed societies.

10. In EducationWeTrust ! Picture: Sebastião Salgado

11. Topik Diskusi • Klarifikasi Istilah Penjaminan Mutu, Regulasi dan Akreditasi dalam Pendidikan Tinggi • Prinsip Dasar Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan Tinggi • Aplikasi di UK • Aplikasi di USA • Aplikasi di Australia • Internasionalisasi Penjaminan Mutu

12. Klarifikasi Tiga Istilah

13. Tiga Istilah • Regulasi Akademik (Academic Regulation) • Penjaminan Mutu (Quality Assurance) • Akreditasi

14. Regulasi Akademik adalah… • The act of regulating and being regulated • Making rules (defining principles, procedures, expectation and accepted practices) • Ruling (controlling, directing, governing) • Conforming to rules • Measurement of performance • Adjustment (Jackson, 1997)

15. Penjaminan Mutu (Quality Assurance) adalah • Upaya untuk memastikan bahwa sistem, proses dan prosedur sesuai dengan standar/harapan/rencana/yang dijanjikan (Damrong, 2003)

16. Quality Assurance in Higher Education is…. A systematic management and assessment procedures adopted by a higher education institution or system to monitor performance and to ensure achievement of quality outputs or improved quality (Harman and Lynn Meek, 2000)

17. Akreditasi adalah… Accrediting is the process whereby an organisation or agency recognises a college or university or a programme of study as having met certain pre-determined qualifications or standards (Selden, 1960)

18. Kesamaan (1) • Tujuan: akuntabilitas publik • Rujukan: standar/baku mutu/accepted ‘good’ practices/harapan/peraturan

19. Kesamaan (2) • Penilaian kinerja (performance): kepatuhan (conformance) terhadap rujukan • Dua tahap: mekanisme internal oleh institusi ybs dan mekanisme eksternal oleh badan independen

20. Perbedaan (1) • Organisasi Pelaksana: • Penjaminan Mutu : Pemerintah atau yang ditunjuk Pemerintah atau perwakilan universitas • Akreditasi : Organisasi Profesi • Regulasi Akademik : Pemerintah dan atau Organisasi Profesi

21. Perbedaan (2) • Publikasi Hasil Penjaminan mutu : milik publik Akreditasi : milik pihak yang diakreditasi Regulasi akademik : milik publik • Partisipasi: • Penjaminan mutu : wajib • Akreditasi : sukarela • Regulasi akademik: wajib

22. Regulasi Akademik/ Regulasi Pendidikan Tinggi Penjaminan Mutu Akreditasi Multi-stakeholder Multi-level

23. Multistakeholder in Higher Education…. • How to achieve the balance: Self-Regulation/Institutional Regulation B A C External Regulation (National agencies) Collective Regulation Professional bodies

24. Multistakeholder in Higher Education…. • How to achieve the balance: Government Market Professional bodies

25. Single stakeholder (Pemerintah)…. • Dalam sejarah hanya terjadi di Uni Sovyet (Negara Komunis)

26. Multistakeholder (Pemerintah, Organisasi Profesi, Masyarakat) • Di banyak negara

27. Multilevel… How to achieve the balance Tingkat Internasional Tingkat Nasional Tingkat Regional Tingkat Universitas Tingkat Fakultas Tingkat Jurusan Tingkat Program Studi Tingkat Jurusan Tingkat Individu (Dosen – Karyawan - Mhs

28. If there is no balance… • Over-regulation or Under-regulation

29. Key Principles for QA in Higher Education • Principle of accountability • Principle of self-evaluation • Principle of external peer-review (Stewart, 1998)

30. Principle of Accountability

31. Principle of Accountability • to the providers of funding • to the users of graduates • to the licensing authorities • to the citizens of the country The Curriculum of educational programme must be competency (outcome)-based

32. Principle of Self Evaluation

33. Principle of Self-Evaluation (1) • Indication of maturity and confidence (self-controlled) • Pre-supposes organisational framework supportive of monitoring and evaluation • Requires procedural arrangements for exercising responsibilities Policies will be implemented without external pressure for implementation

34. Principle of Self-Evaluation (2) • Internal quality control mechanism as the basis for quality improvement Continuous • Internal preparation for the visit of external reviewers To make the visit efficient and effective

35. Principle of External Review (1) • The primary safeguard of QA in Higher education • Requires national structure to ensure common quality framework for all higher education institutions

36. Principle of External Review (2) • Wide spectrum of external advice sought • from external examiners • From policy makers • from community • from practitioners in the profession

37. Principles into Practice

38. Principle of Accountability (1) • Stakeholders able to seek evidence that competency-basis of the curriculum is being implemented and evaluated as claimed

39. Principle of Accountability (2) • Sanctions available to ensure that standards are maintained and that proposed remedial action is taken

40. Principle of Self-Evaluation (1) • Continuous monitoring and evaluation of the operation of the educational program • Regular audit of effectiveness of systems

41. Principle of Self Evaluation (2) • Regular review of performance against objectives of the education program • Periodic review of curriculum in relation to community health care needs

42. Principle of External Review • Willingness to accept external review • Mechanisms for considering external reports • Procedures for dealing with recommendations from external reviewers

43. Implication (1) • Appropriate national and local organisational structure and operational framework to deal with QA issues • Formal institutional committee structure with relevant procedures in relation to, e.g. planning, approval, and review of courses

44. Implication at National Level (1):Harman and Lynn Meek (2000) • Responsible Organisation or Agency: • Unit or Section within Government • Separate Quality Assurance Agency established by Government • Separate Quality Assurance Agency established collectively by higher education institutions • Agency established jointly by the Government and higher education institutions

45. Implication at National Level (2) • Participation in reviews and other activities: • Voluntary • Compulsory • Voluntary, with some measure of pressure/persuasion

46. Implication at National Level (3) • Methodologies of review and assessment: • Self-study or self-evaluation • Peer review by panels or experts, usually with use of external panel members and site visits • Analysis of statistical information or use of performance indicators • Surveys of students, graduates, employers and professional bodies • Testing the knowledge, skills and competencies of students

47. Focus: National reviews of disciplines : reviews of research only reviews of teaching only reviews of combination of research, teaching and other activities Focus Institutional Evaluations: reviews of teaching only reviews of research only reviews of quality assurance processes Comprehensive reviews – teaching, research, management, and quality assurance process Implication at National Level (4)

48. Implication at National Level (5) • Focus: comprehensive of national evaluations of higher education system • Purposes: • Accountability • Improvement and renewal • Combination of purposes

49. Implication at National Level (6) • Reporting and Follow-up Activities: • Report provided solely to the institution or unit concerned • Report solely for the institution and published • Formal reports to the Ministry • Public Reports • Performance funding • Accreditation or validation • Improvement and renewal activities

50. Principles into Practice: Example in UK