1. Sistem Informasi Mutu Pendidikan Formal dan Nonformal
Deni Darmawan
Pascasarjana Universitas Islam Nusantara
Bandung
Mei, 2015

2. Kajian Fenomena Mutu

3. Sistem Informasi Mutu Lulusan
• Progress rate
• Retention rate
• Graduate full-time employment
• Graduate part or full-time further study
• Graduate satisfaction with generic skills obtained
• Graduate satisfaction with the quality of teaching received
• Graduate overall satisfaction.

4. Indikator Khusus mutu Informasi tentang siswa:
type and level of course
mode of attendance
field of study
disciplines for units of study
attendance mode
nationality
age
gender
prior education
country of birth
location of residence
Aboriginality
other personal characteristics
liabilities through the Higher Education Contribution Scheme

5. Sistem Informasi Mutu Pengelolaan (Australia)
• Student achievement • Curricula • Faculty /Class/ Level • Facilities • Fiscal and administrative capacity • Student support services • Recruitment and admissions practices • Measures of the program duration and objectives of degrees or credentials offered • Records of student complaints.

6. Sistem Informasi Mutu Pengelolaan (Newzeland)
• Academic policies • Admission requirements • Promotion and graduation requirements • Program content • Program delivery • Governance structure • Human resources • Physical resources • Credential recognition • Regulation and accreditation from relevant regulatory and professional bodies • Policies and procedures for program evaluation.

7. Sistem Informasi Mutu Pengelolaan (Canada)
Mission statement and academic goals
Governance
Administrative capacity
Faculty and staff (number, qualifications, employment conditions, andprofessional development)
Information services and learning resources
Infrastructure
Ethical conduct
Academic freedom and integrity
Financial stability
Student protection
Dispute resolution
Periodic review.

8. References
ACER (2007) Retrieved 18 December, 2007 fromhttp:// Brochure.pdf American Association for Higher Education (AAHE). (1998). American College Personnel Association. National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. Powerful partnerships. A shared responsibility for learning. A joint report. Retrieved February 23, 2007 from: Anderson, G. (2006). Assuring quality/resisting quality assurance: academics responses to ‘quality’ in some Australian universities. Quality in Higher Education, 12 (2), Denise Chalmers, Katie Lee and Becky Walker ( 2008). International and national quality teaching and learning performance models currently in use. Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education Ltd. Young, S. & Shaw, D. G. (1999). Profiles of effective college and university teachers. The Journal of Higher Education, 70(6), Westerlund, J. (2007). Class size and student evaluations in Sweden. Education Economics. 16(1) Umbach, P. D. & Wawrzynski, M. R. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), Umbach, P. D. & Kuh, G. D. (2006). Student experiences with diversity at liberal arts colleges: another claim for distinctiveness. Journal of Higher Education, 77(1), Unite NZUAAU. (2007). Academic audit manual for use in Cycle 4 academic audits. New Zealand Universities Academic Audit Unit, Retrieved 08th February, 2008 from: