530 likes | 1.33k Views
THE SELF-STUDY. “OUR EXPERIENCE”. MAJAN COLLEGE (UNIVERSITY COLLEGE ). Normal self-review vs. the self-study. Normally our main focus is: monitoring all academic aspects quality of provision and academic standards identifying and acting on areas for improvement The self-study :
E N D
THE SELF-STUDY “OUR EXPERIENCE” MAJAN COLLEGE (UNIVERSITY COLLEGE)
Normal self-review vs. the self-study Normally our main focus is: • monitoring all academic aspects • quality of provision and academic standards • identifying and acting on areas for improvement The self-study : • more comprehensive and intensive (all departments and all activities) • focus on existing policies and systems • more emphasis on data and analysis • strengths, weaknesses, gaps and areas for improvement
Broad areas of focus • Institutional governance and management; • Learning and teaching environment; • Student Support; • Support Services • Staffing and Resources • Timing of the self-study: 6 months before the submission of portfolio to the OAC
Steering Committee Included the: • Academic Management Team • Quality Assurance Committee • 22 members • all levels of academic management.
What did the Steering Committee do? • Own the process. • Lead the way and walk the talk. • Don’t fool yourself. • Ensure maximum involvement. • Transparency and openness cannot be over emphasised. Forget the OAC. • Empower staff and ensure that they are critical and reflective . Forget the OAC. • Send out the right message (its not just for the OAC, its for us)
How did the Steering Committee do this? • Planned, organised and coordinated the self-study (as a committee); • Identified and managed working groups for each specific section/subsection in the QAM (as a committee) ; • Conducted orientation meetings (focus ADRI) with members of the working groups and other committees (as smaller committees);
How did the Steering Committee do this? • Organised student and employer surveys and student and staff focus groups (smaller committees & individuals); • Managed all the data (smaller committees & individuals); • Allocated responsibility for the writing up of various sections in the portfolio (committee); • Reviewing working drafts of the portfolio (committee);
Working Groups • Structure the working groups around the sections in the portfolio/manual. • Essential to ensure wider participation and ownership. Almost all staff was involved . • The self-study was structured around our mission, values, stated policies and objectives and processes in each area and results;
Consistency is critical: All working groups/ committees used the following approach. • Approach: What is supposed to be achieved in terms of stated objectives and policies? • Deployment: What is actually being done? • Results: What are the results with supporting evidence? • Improvement: How can we improve?
What would we change? • Nothing in terms of process. • Data analysis for support services could be improved. • For the OAC: Issues around the Audit panel’s/ reviewers understanding of: • The role of the prescribed self-study in the audit process and how it informs the Quality Audit Manual. • the institution's normal/ existing QA systems and how they have been influenced by the self-study.
THE END THANK YOU