1. World Bank Learning Seminar Quality Assurance in Tertiary Education (CIEP, Sevres, France, June 18-20, 2006) Welcome to presentation by Prof. V. S. Prasad Director, NAAC, India on Indian Experience on Quality Assurance

2. Higher education system in India: The context  Long history of advanced education Hindu - Gurukulas ; Buddhist - Viharas ; Quaremic - Madarasas Modern institutions of Higher Education: 1857 Three universities at Bombay (Mumbai), Madras(Chennai) and Calcutta (Kolkata)  Large size 356 - Universities (includes Central, State, Private, Deemed and Institutions of National Importance) 17625 – Colleges (Includes affiliated, constituent, autonomous, public aided and private etc.) 10.5 million students (Source: University Grants Commission, India)  Huge Diversity Higher Education is in the concurrent list. National and provincial Governments have a role of play in this sector; Higher education mostly is in public domain (80% publicly funded and 20% privately funded); Different types of higher education institutions in size, resources, systems of governance and ownership 2

3. 3 External Quality Assurance Agencies Agency and Year of EstablishmentDomain of activities 1.National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), 1994 (Established by UGC) All categories of higher education institutions (Institutional and programme accreditation) 2.National Board of Accreditation (NBA) 1994, (Established by AICTE) Technical Education (programme accreditation) 3.Accreditation Board (AB), 2002 (Established by ICAR) Agricultural Education (Programme and institutional accreditation) 4.Distance Education Council (DEC) 1992, (Established by IGNOU) Distance Education (Programme and institutional accreditation) All these are in public domain Some private agencies, sponsored mostly by popular magazines, are engaged in rating of higher education institutions

4. 4 Frequently used terms and their context specific meanings  Quality as “fitness for purpose” – ability to meet the stated purpose of education  Quality Assurance as “a process of continuous quality improvement”  Assessment is “a process of evaluation of performance of an institution of Higher Learning and/or its units, based on certain established criteria”  Accreditation is “certification of assessment given by the NAAC which is valid for a stated period of time and the recognition accorded to an institution that meets standards or satisfies criteria laid down by a competent agency”  Criteria as “predetermined standards for the functioning of an institution of Higher Education that form the basis of assessment and accreditation”

5. 5 Role of NAAC  To assess and accredit institutions of higher education in India 128 Universities and 2879 colleges were assessed and accredited (as on May 21, 2006)  To promote Quality Assurance in Higher Education More than 100 publications on quality assurance Number of awareness programmes Series of post-accreditation activities Promotion of Internal Quality Assurance mechanism i.e. Internal Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) in every accredited higher education institution National and International collaboration activities

6. 6 Value Framework for Assessment of Higher Education Institutions * Values/GoalsSuggested Parameters/Activities 1.Contribution to National Development  More access with equity  Developmental thrust in identification of research areas and academic programmes  Community engagement 2. Fostering Global Competencies among Students  Development of generic skills  Development of application skills  Development of life skills 3. Inculcating Value System in Students  Value integration in academic Programmes  Value integration in management practices  Value inculcation through co-curricular and extra-curricular Activities 4. Promoting the Use of Technology  For enrichment of learning  For increasing the access-online programmes  For system management 5. Quest for Excellence  Development of benchmarks of excellence  Best Practices application  Institutionalization of continuous improvement systems * The list is only illustrative. Institutions may identify many other parameters/ activities depending on their context.

7. 7 Assessment Methodology Four stage approach 1.Identifying pre-determined criteria for assessment 2.Preparation and submission of self-study report (SSR) by the institution 3.On-site visit by the Peer Team for validation of SSR and for recommending the assessment outcome to NAAC 4.The final decision on accreditation by the Executive Committee of the NAAC

8. 8 The Criteria of Assessment The institutions are assessed on a 1000 point scale on seven criteria with different weightages to each criteria as follows CriterionUniversityAutonomous College Affiliated College Curricular Aspects150 100 Teaching-Learning and Evaluation250300400 Research, Consultancy and Extension15010050 Infrastructure and Learning Resources150 Student Support and Progression100 Organization and Management100 Healthy Practices100 Total1000 Average of all criteria is taken to measure the quality of performance

9. Peer Team Constitution Universities Chairperson - Eminent Educationist/Vice-Chancellor/Director Members (3 to 5) - Eminent Educationist/Professors Co-ordination - NAAC academic staff Colleges Chairperson - Eminent Educationist/ Vice-Chancellor/Director Member –1 - Professor Member – 2 - Principal/ Educational Administrator Co-ordination - NAAC Academic Staff or External Member- Coordinator Person from industry/service sector as an observer

10. 10 A. The Grading Institutional Score (upper limit exclusive) Grade 95-100A++ 90-95A+ 85-90A 80-85B++ 75-80B+ 70-75B 65-70C++ 60-65C+ 55-60C The outcome of Assessment B. Peer Team Report - Peer Team prepares a report with commendations and recommendation for further improvement of quality of institutional operations. It is given to the institution and also is made public through website. C. Provision for Appeal – Appeals Committee with members other than Peer Team Committee is constituted to address the appeals of institutions on grading awarded by NAAC

11. 11 Impact of NAAC  Generated more interest and concerns about Quality Assurance among the stake holders of Higher Education  Created better understanding of Quality Assurance among Higher Education Institutions (HEI’s)  Triggered Quality Assurance activities in many of the Higher Education Institutions  Helped in creation of institutional database of the accredited institutions of Higher Education  Helped other funding and regulatory agencies to take some of their decisions based on the assessment outcomes

12. 12 The Concerns  Appropriate methodologies for assessment of large number of institutions  Identification of ‘right things’ to assess the quality of provision  Reliability of grading and relevance of Peer Team report.  Recognition of accreditation  Multiple agencies and co-ordination among them.  Accreditation of cross-border education  Limited Autonomy of assessment agencies

13. 13 The lessons of experience  Government association and support is critical to the effectiveness of external assessment agencies  Simple and quantifiable criteria of quality assessment will bring more credibility to the operations  Transparency of the process brings more accountability and reliability to the operations  Involvement of academia is critical to their acceptance of external assessment activity  Internal Quality assurance systems and processes is a pre-condition for the successful operation of external quality assurance system  E-assessment systems may have to be adopted to address the problem of assessment of large numbers and to reduce subjectivity in judgements of quality  Quality assessment institution as a role model of quality is critical to the effectiveness of its operations

14. 14 “We must be the change that we wish to see in the world” - Mahatma Gandhi Thank you