The first question relates to the meaning of QAA. Assuring the quality and accrediting the institutions or programs is what comprises external quality audit and certification. In fact, the phenomenon advocates the concept of internationalization of standards that are accepted, recognized and believed to be competent all around the world. It has been merely five years since UGC Nepal commenced QAA of HEIs. So far, around 4 percent HEIs have been brought into the realm of the quality assessment cycle.
The second question is about the process of QAA. As in most countries, QAA is a voluntary process in Nepal. As the first step, institutions have to apply for QAA, and if found eligible, they have to prepare specified report called Self Study Report (SSR)—which will be marked (50 percent is the cut off to pass). The microscopic assessment of SSR, which also includes institutional visit, is done by an expert team formed by UGC. On the basis of the team’s suggestions, UGC decides whether or not to accredit the institution in question.
Ideally, the period required to prepare a SSR is up to five months. However, experiences show that institutions take more than a year to draft SSRs. The obvious reason is that the eight criteria for evaluation—governance; curricular aspects; teaching—learning approach, research, consultancy and extension; infrastructure; students’ support; guidance; EMIS and public information—are often at embryonic stage in the institutions. Hence, in most cases they are required to reform a multiple layers of functioning in line with the criteria to assure quality.
The third question is about the benefits of QAA. UGC Nepal envisions accredited institutions to be recognized worldwide, and with time, this would ease transfer of credit to foreign universities.
In response to the third question, it is pragmatic and important to unearth the experience of QAA participating institutions, and share some of their transformations as a result of QQA assessments. Initiating steps towards qualitative changes in the teaching, learning and evaluation system is one of the changes these institutions have gone through. According to the Damak Multiple Campus, Jhapa, “Earlier, we had a staff room for all the faculties of different subjects, so there were very thin chances for the subject faculties to interact. After undergoing QAA, we learnt the importance of subject-wise departments. Now, we have not only established logistically sound departments, but also an academic calendar, lesson plan, students’ profile, teachers’ profile, feedback collection system, examination result analysis and remedial programs as per students’ performance.”
Another positive feedback is that now all accredited institutions have formally made a provision for Faculty Capacity Development Plan (FCDP), which includes the provision for PhD and M.Phil courses along with participation in workshops and orientations as well as research and publication. Lumbini Banijya Campus, Butwal, is enthusiastic while talking about its publication of research based journal, something that was non-existent prior to QAA involvement. The FCDP, according to them, is a ‘propelling factor for quality enhancement’.
The next achievement is the expansion of libraries, which has given an academically rich environment and more students and faculty members now can spend their time in library. “Library was like a small grocery shop where students came, borrowed one book and left,” Makwanpur Multiple Campus, Hetauda says, “But now, the library expansion in terms of number of reading materials, e-library system and provision of trained library personnel has made our institution a real educational institution.”
Governance is rightly and adequately emphasized in the QAA assessment. Previously, accountability (social and professional), transparency and participatory systems existed more on paper, but now, the institutions are actually following it. They also agree that a greater say of other stakeholders (parents, employers, students and teachers) in education matters and is now being incorporated. While these are just some examples, the increasing discourse on quality education in educational institutions in Nepal’s context is nothing short of exemplary.
One might term these changes as insubstantial, but it would help to remember that in a country where the quality of education leaves much to be desired, some positive steps will go a long way in adding value to the system.
The author is Program Officer at the Quality Assurance and Accreditation Division, University Grants Commission, Nepal
Related story
