1. Harmonization of QA in ASEAN
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih
AUN QA Senior Trainer and Quality Officer
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

2. Topics of Presentation
ASEAN Community 2015
Regional Initiatives of QA System in ASEAN
Introduction to ASEAN University Network for Quality Assurance
QA-SEAN: A collaboration between Europe and ASEAN funded by DAAD
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

3. Topics of Presentation
ASEAN Community 2015
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

4. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM
ASEAN Community 2015
the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC)
the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC)
and the ASEAN Political-Security Community (APSC)
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

5. Master Plan on ASEAN Connectivity (MPAC) in October 2010
which is envisaged to connect ASEAN through enhanced physical infrastructure development (physical connectivity), effective institutional arrangements (institutional connectivity), and empowered people (people-to-people connectivity).
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

6. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM
The MPAC seeks to help narrow development gaps in ASEAN by implementing capacity building cooperation arrangements
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

7. Topics of Presentation
Situational Analysis of QA System in ASEAN Member Country
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

8. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM
SEAMEO RIHED
South East Asian Ministers of Education Organization Regional Centre for Higher Education Development
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

9. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

10. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM
SEAMEO RIHED
ASEAN
QA Framework
IQA in each university
EQA in each country
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

11. SEAMEO RIHED Purposes of ASEAN QA System
maintain quality in higher education, thus meeting the public interest
allow for informed decision-making by students and
parents through sharing information on the status of universities
enhance assessment and assurance of standards.
mutual recognition for mobility and credit transfer
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

12. SEAMEO RIHED Purposes of EQA System
the regional quality assurance system operates to
strengthen national quality assurance systems, facilitate
mobility and increase cooperation among higher education institutions
regional harmonization
the establishment of common higher education space
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

13. ASEAN 2009: The Cha-am Hua Hin Educational Plans
objectives for quality education including promoting equal accessibility to education, improving educational quality
strengthening cooperation between international
organisations, encouraging cross-regional cooperation
enhancing regional mobility and exchange programmes and promoting life-long learning
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

14. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM
Asean Quality Assurance Network (AQAN):
A network of accreditation agency in ASEAN
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

15. ASEAN University Network (AUN)
the importance of quality in higher education
the need to develop a holistic QA system
to raise academic standards
to enhance education, research, and service among AUN member universities
A network of Universities in South East Asia
17 member universities (1995)
26 member universities (now)
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

16. ASEAN University Network
establishment of the AUN-QA:
Bangkok Declaration 1998
the development of the AUN-QA Guidelines (2004) and the AUN-QA Manual for the Implementation of the Guidelines (2006)
start of the AUN-QA implementation journey in 2007
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

17. QA Journey – AUN QA
Introduction

18. Guide to AUN Actual Quality Assessment at Programme Level
AUN-QA Models
First revision of the AUN-QA Manual
Criteria and assessment process of AUN Actual Quality Assessment at Programme Level
Associated resources (templates and samples)
Effective August 2011
Guide to AUN Actual Quality Assessment at Programme Level
AUN-QA Models

19. AUN-QA Models Strategic (QA at Institutional Level)
Systemic (Internal QA System)
Tactical
(QA at Programme Level)
AUN-QA Models P7

20. AUN-QA Models QA at Programme Level (Revised) AUN-QA Models P12
Stakeholders Satisfaction
Quality Assurance and (Inter)national benchmarking
Programme Specification
Programme Structure & Content
Student
Assessment
Academic Staff Quality
Support Staff Quality
Student Quality
Facilities & Infrastructure
Quality Assurance of Teaching & Learning
Stakeholders Feedback
Pass Rates
Drop Out Rates
Employability
Expected
Learning
Outcomes A c h i e v m n t s
Teaching & Learning Strategy
Student Advice & Support
Staff
Development
Activities
Graduation
Time
Research
AUN-QA Models
P12

21. QA at Programme Level P11 Original Criteria Sub-criterion
2nd Revised Criteria
1. Goals and Objectives; Expected Learning Outcomes 4
1. Expected Learning Outcomes
2. Programme Specification 3
3. Programme Content
3. Programme Structure and Content
7 (-1)
4. Programme Organisation
5. Didactic Concept and Teaching/Learning Strategy 5
4. Teaching and Learning Strategy
4 (-1)
6. Student Assessment 8
5. Student Assessment
7. Staff Quality 10
6. Academic Staff Quality
8. Quality of Support Staff
7. Support Staff Quality
9. Student Quality
8. Student Quality
3 (-1)
10. Student Advice and Support
9. Student Advice and Support
11. Facilities and Infrastructure
10. Facilities and Infrastructure
12. Quality Assurance of Teaching/Learning Process
11. Quality Assurance of Teaching/Learning Process
7 (-2)
13. Student Evaluation 2
14. Curriculum Design
15. Staff Development Activities
12. Staff Development Activities
16. Feedback Stakeholders
13. Stakeholders Feedback
3 (+1)
17. Output
14. Output
4 (+2)
18. Stakeholders Satisfaction 1
15. Stakeholders Satisfaction
Total 72
68 (-4)
QA at Programme Level
P11

22. Structure of the AUN QA Criteria
Definition of Criteria
Checklist
Explanation
Diagnostic Questions
Sources of Evidences
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

23. 5. Student Assessment QA at Programme Level P 23-25 Assessment covers:
New student entrance by means of input competency
Student’s study progress by means of matrix/map/portfolio of the competency and outcome-based curriculum
Final/ Exit test of the graduates by means of Graduate Competency Checklist or comprehensive and integrated assessment
In line with principle of adult learning, adults prefer to be assessed by criterion-referenced methods and by a combination of peer, self- and teacher assessment.(3.1)
In fostering open, flexible, reflective and outcome-based assessment, the teachers should provide a variety of assessment methods of students’ learning, through self-, peer and teacher assessment where the criteria are made explicit following negotiation with the course members. The assessment strategies adopted should be congruent with clearly defined learning outcomes.(3.2)
Assessment methods correspond to all the aims and aspects of the curriculum as taught (3.3)
A range of assessment methods is used in a planned manner to serve diagnostic, formative, and summative purposes. (3.4)
The scope and weighting of assessment schemes are clear and known to all concerned. (3.5)
Standards applied in assessment schemes are explicit and consistent across the curriculum. (3.6)
Procedures are regularly applied to ensure that, as far as possible, assessment schemes are valid, reliable and fairly administered. (3.7)
Students have ready access to reasonable appeal procedures.(3.9)
The reliability and validity of assessment methods should be documented and regularly evaluated and new assessment methods are developed and tested.(3.10)
QA at Programme Level
P 23-25

24. 5. Student Assessment QA at Programme Level P 23-25 51 2 3 4 6 7
5.1
Student assessment covers student entrance, student progress and exit tests (1)
5.2
The assessment is criterion-referenced (2)
5.3
Student assessment uses a variety of methods (3, 5)
5.4
Student assessment reflects the expected learning outcomes and the content of the programme (3)
5.5
The criteria for assessment are explicit and well-known (3,6)
5.6
The assessment methods cover the objectives of the curriculum (4)
5.7
The standards applied in the assessment are explicit and consistent (7, 8, 9, 10)
Overall opinion
QA at Programme Level
P 23-25

25. IQA Roadmap for Programme Development
External Factors
Internal Factors
Review
Programme Learning Outcomes
Course/Lesson Learning Outcomes
Learner
An IQA system towards programme level is the curriculum development. An environmental scan of external factors provides the context and direction for IQA and curriculum development and revision. Ministry policies, changes in the workplace, college guidelines and expectations of key stakeholder groups are all powerful drivers influencing IQA system and curriculum development.
You will see that the expected learning for the course (course learning outcome) is derived from “designing back” from the expected learning for the program (program learning outcome). The course outcomes contribute to the achievement of the program outcomes.
The course learning outcome describes clearly what learners will know and be able to do at the end of the course. They are results oriented in that they describe what the learners will be able to do at the end of the course.
The learners are at the centre of the process. We need to consider the characteristics of the learners (their interests, experiences, learning preferences, abilities etc.) so that we create learning activities and resources that are relevant and useful to them. We also need to develop evaluation strategies that allow them to demonstrate their achievement of the learning outcomes. Note that the learning outcomes are not likely to change based on learner characteristics, but the way we help learners achieve these outcomes (learning activities and learning resources) and the way they demonstrate their achievement of the outcomes (evaluation) will be influenced by our knowledge of learner characteristics.
Evaluation of the learners is directly linked to the course learning outcomes. Evaluation is designed so that learners can demonstrate their achievement of the course learning outcomes. Different learners may demonstrate their learning in different ways but they all must demonstrate that they have achieved the outcome.
Learning activities are designed, grouped and sequenced so that they will help learners achieve the course learning outcomes. Through these learning activities learners also receive feedback about their progress and are prepared for the course evaluation.
Finally, learning resources needed to support the learning activities and/or evaluation processes are identified. They may be developed or selected from existing resources.
As noted earlier, our curriculum decisions are guided by internal factors such as our beliefs and our understanding of learning and curriculum design principles.
Activities
Assessments
Resources and Support System
External Assessment
Review
Internal Assessment
Curriculum Development
IQA for Programme Development

26. Quality & Improvement Interpretation
Rating Scale
Score
Value Interpretation
Quality & Improvement Interpretation 1
Nothing (no documents, no plans, no evidence) present
Absolutely inadequate; immediate improvements must be made 2
This subject is in the planning stage
Inadequate, improvements necessary 3
Documents available, but no clear evidence that they are used
Inadequate, but minor improvements will make it adequate 4
Documents available and evidence that they are used
Adequate as expected (meeting the AUN-QA guidelines and criteria) 5
Clear evidence on the efficiency of the aspect
Better than adequate (exceeding the AUN-QA guidelines and criteria) 6
Example of best practices 7
Excellent (world-class or leading practices)
The 15 criteria listed are subject to rating based on a 7-point scale for its quality assessment. The scaling aims to offer the universities and external assessors an instrument for scaling their verdicts and to see how far they have progressed on the way to meeting the criteria and to see how far quality is assured. The meaning of the value in the 7-point scoring scale is as indicated on the slide.
As weight is not allocated to each criterion, the overall opinion should be based on the achievement or fulfillment of the criterion as a whole. It should not be computed based on the average score of the statements under each criterion. However, the overall average score for the 15 criteria is computed based on the their average scores.
QA at Programme Level

27. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM
The implementation at program level was on a voluntary basis
The outcome of the 1st actual quality assessment was encouraging
This led to an overwhelming request for voluntary assessment
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

28. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

29. Topics of Presentation
QA-SEAN: A collaboration between Europe and ASEAN funded by DAAD
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

30. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM
To harmonize QA in ASEAN
Using AUN QA Guidelines
DIES-QA ASEAN
HRK German Rector’s
Conference
Pilot: Engineering, Economics
Social sciences
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

31. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM
HRK German Rector’s Conference
Personell QA-SEAN Project: AQAN: Dzafir, Syed, ,Zita AUN: Nantana, Ratsuda DAAD: Daun, Essig, Pieper de Avila, Wilde; Pohlenz (U Potsdam), Grieb (Consultant) HRK: Michalk SEAMEO-RIHED: Aom, Supachai Trainers/ Facilitators: Group A (IQA): AUN-QA Trainers (Guevara, Titi, Johnson); Grieb, Pohlenz Group B (IQA): TKC, Stella, Zita; Grifoll, Hopbach, Wasser
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

32. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM.
HRK German Rector’s Conference
To train Internal QA Officer for each university
(Bangkok Oct 2011, Postdam March 2012, Ho Chi Minh Nov 2012)
To train External QA Officer from each QA Agency in each country (Bangkok Oct 2011, Postdam March 2012)
To train subject specialist from ENQA (Jan 2013) and from ASEAN univs (KL Feb 2013)
To conduct a joint external quality assessment: AUNQA Officer, European asesor, ASEAN asessor, EQA Officer
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

33. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM
Assessors Team
Name
Institutions
Roles
Assoc. Prof. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih, MD, MA, MMedEd, PhD
Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia
AUN QA Lead Assessor
Prof Dr Andreas Knorr
German University of public Administration Science Speyer, Germany
European Subject Specialist
Assoc Prof. Nguyen Ngoc Thanh,
University of Economics and Business, Vietnam National University, Hanoy
ASEAN Subject Specialist
Ms Marziawani Othman
Malaysian Qualification Agency
EQA Officer
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

34. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM
After Assessment
After the assessment
Activities
PIC
On the third day of visit
Presentation of results
Clarification and feedback from the University
Lead Assessor
IQA Officer
Directly after the visit
Preparing for the draft report for all criteria
Assessors Team
1 month
Submission of report to AUNQA Secretariat
Lead assessor
1,5 month
Submission of report to Universities
AUNQA Secretariat
Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM

35. ONE VISION ONE IDENTITY ONE COMMUNITY
Roadmap for ASEAN Community

36. Titi Savitri Prihatiningsih-BPK FK UGM