3rd cycle of AQIA 2008
3rd cycle of AQIA was carried out in two steps : 1) desk evaluation (system audit) was held on Dec 9,2008 at PPI (Program Language and Literacy), opened by head of QAC, 2) visitation (compliance audit) was held on December 11-12, 2008, the scheduled meeting arranged byauditor and audited unit.
The number of auditors involved was 68 auditors (73% of the total auditors of 93 auditors).
Un-available auditors (11 auditors (12%) were caused by further study, illness and other reasons. Un-responded auditors was 14 auditors (15%). Distribution of auditors was based on some factors as follows:
1) The auditors involved at 2nd cycle of AQIA
2) The auditors involved at level of quality assurance unit
Auditors distribution has been changed during desk evaluation, some auditors resigned due to some reasons. Therefore, changing auditors was done by appointing the available auditors.
Unit participation at 3rd cycle of AQIA was 100% consisting 12 Faculty/Program and 37 department/SP. This number was based onthe submitted evaluation performancereport and Faculty/Program Academic Standards.
The results of 3rd of AQIA and Management Review are important. Therefore, it is necessary to be validated. The variable of assessment addedare
A. Planning, Organization and Documentation System consist of :
- AQAS Target Socialization
- Quality Culture Internalization
- AQAS Organization
- AQAS Documentation
- Socialization of facilities
B. Academic Performance consists of :
- Curriculum of department/SP
- Human resources (lecturer and supporting staff)
- Teaching learning process
- Academic atmosphere
- Research and publication
- Public Services
- Academic management
- Academic information system
AQIA 3rd cycle was grouped into 2 i.e. faculty/program anddepartment/SP. This was done to classify the unit easily because the differences in percentage of score in every criteria of evaluation.
As in Manual Procedure (MP) of AQIA, there are two criteria (a) Planning, organizationand documentation system and (b) Academic Performance
The result showed that the percentage of compliance in Planning, Organizationand Documentation System was 78,75%. The percentage of compliance in Academic performance was 89,95%. The highest score was achieved in Academic Management and the lowest score was research and publication.
From those scores, the lowest score was performance and non-compliancesfindings at units. Some audited items with lowest scoreshould be focused on and be solved are
- Illegalized document of academic standards.
- The evaluation of performance has not referred to the Academic Standard and delayed submitting the documents .
- Non compliances are found in 10 items of academic standards.
- The weakness of database unit .
Figure below is the score of faculty/program according to criteria and the ranking from 3rd cycle in 2008.
Scoring based on Faculty/Program’s criteria
Faculty/Program rank in 3rd cycle of AQIA for Academic Service Units
The picture (below) presents the scoring of Department/SP based on criteria and the rank in 3rd cycle of AIMA of 2008.