Quality Audit
Audit kualiti dalam pendidikan tinggi
(Quality Audit in Higher Education)
After completing this topic, you should be able to:
Explain the meaning of quality audit
Describe the components of quality audit
Learn the importance of quality audit in HEI
Quality Audit
Senario pengajian tinggi negara
Pendidikan
tinggi merupakan pemangkin utama
penjanaan sumber tenaga manusia.
Pelan Strategik Pendidikan Tinggi Negara menggariskan 7
tuntutan cabaran pendidikan tinggi:
Peranan universiti dan ahli akademik
Perkembangan kurikulum mengikut keperluan pasaran
Penyelidikan, pembangunan dan pengkomersialan dalam
sistem inovasi kebangsaan
Kaedah pengajaran dan pembelajaran
Globalisasi dan piawaian melalui pemeringkatan dan
penarafan
Peluang guna tenaga
Quality Audit
Senario pengajian tinggi negara
Universiti
awam dikategorikan kepada tiga kumpulan iaitu
universiti penyelidikan, universiti berfokus (teknikal,
pendidikan, pengurusan dan pertahanan), universiti
komprehensif.
Universiti penyelidikan:
Ciri-ciri – bidang pengajian fokus kepada penyelidikan,
kemasukan kompetitif, pensyarah berkualiti, nisbah
siswazah dan pascasiswazah 50:50.
UM
USM
UPM
UKM
Quality Audit
Senario pengajian tinggi negara
Universiti komprehensif:
Ciri-ciri – pelbagai bidang pengajian, kemasukan
kompetitif, pensyarah berkualiti, nisbah siswazah dan
pascasiswazah 70:30.
UiTM
UIAM
UMS
Unimas
Quality Audit
Senario pengajian tinggi negara
Universiti berfokus: Ciri-ciri – bidang pengajian berfokus,
kemasukan kompetitif, pensyarah berkualiti, nisbah
siswazah dan pascasiswazah 70:30.
UTM
UUM
UPSI
UTHM
UTeM
UMP
UMT
UDM
UMK
UPNM
Quality Audit
Audit kualiti dalam pendidikan tinggi
(Quality Audit in Higher Education)
A Quality Audit has been defined as:
A systematic and independent determination of
whether: the planned arrangements are suitable to
achieve the objectives; the actual quality activities
conform to the planned arrangements; and the
arrangements are being implemented effectively.
(Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA), 2009)
Relevant web site: http://www.auqa.edu.au
Quality Audit
Dimensions of evaluation
AUQA methods of Evaluation: Evaluates institution
quality assurance arrangements:
Approach
Deployment
Results
Improvement
Does
not impose an externally prescribed set of
standards upon auditees, but uses it as primary
starting point for audit of organization’s own
objectives.
Quality Audit
AUQA Objectives
AUQA has several objectives:
Arrange and manage a system of periodic audits of the
quality of academic activities, the quality assurance
arrangements, institutional compliance to criteria set out in
the National Protocols for Higher Education Approval
Processes.
 Monitor, review, analyze and provide public reports on
the quality of outcomes in Australian universities and
higher education institutions.
Arrange and manage a system of periodic audits of the
quality assurance processes, procedures, and outcomes.
Publicly report periodically on matters relating to quality
assurance.
Quality Audit
Approach
The trail from an organization’s mission, vision and values
(the overall objectives). Audit questions include:
What is this organization about?
What outcome is it trying to achieve?
What, if any, reference points are used in establishing the
organization’s objectives?
 How does the organization plan to achieve its objectives?
Does it understand its context and capabilities?
Are the organization’s objectives set against appropriate
benchmark?
What risk management processes does it have in place?
Is the approach aligned and communicated throughout the
organization and more widely?
Quality Audit
Deployment
The deployment dimension considers whether and
how effectively, the approach is being put into effect.
Audit questions include:
Is the approach being deployed in the best possible
manner? According to whom?
What standards and benchmarks is the organization
using to assess this?
If the approach is not being deployed, why not, and
how is this managed?
Are staff appropriately trained and resources
appropriately deployed, to fulfill the approach?
Quality Audit
Results
The result dimension looks at results as a means of
determining how ell the deployment is achieving the
planned approach. Audit questions include:
Is the organization achieving its intended objectives
and outcomes?
Does the organization understand why and how it
achieved those particular results?
How are the results reported and used within the
organization?
Quality Audit
Improvement
The improvement dimension focuses on whether the
organization is actively and continuously engaged with
understanding its performance in each of the A-D-R
dimensions, and is using this understanding to bring
about improvements . Audit questions include:
Does the organization know how it can improve?
How does it know this (e.g. through the use of external
benchmarks)?
How is it acting upon this knowledge?
Does the organization have a sustained history of
improvement?
Quality Audit
The Practice in Malaysia
MQA – Malaysian Qualifications Agency




MQA established under the Malaysian Qualifications
Agency Act 2007. It was the merging of LAN (Lembaga
Akreditasi Negara) and QAD (Quality Assurance Division
of the Ministry of Higher Education).
MQF (Malaysian Qualifications Framework) was
developed to unify and harmonize all Malaysian
qualifications.
Code of Practice for Program Accreditation (COPPA)
and Code of Practice for Institutional Audit (COPIA) are
guidelines, standards and code of practice to ensure
quality in the academic performance and institutional
effectiveness.
The codes contain an overview of the Malaysian quality
assurance system for higher education.
MQA – Malaysian Qualifications Agency
definitions



Quality Audit
Institutional Audit – an evaluation of an institution to
determine whether it is achieving its mission and goals,
to identify strengths and areas of concern, and to
enhance quality.
Internal Quality Audit – an evaluation conducted
internally by a higher education provider (e.g. the
university) to determine whether it is achieving its
mission and goals; to identify strengths and areas of
concern, and to enhance quality. It generates a SelfReview Portfolio.
Program Accreditation – an exercise to accredit the
teaching, learning and all other related activities to a
program provided by a higher education provider.
Quality Audit
MQA – Malaysian Qualifications Agency
definitions

Quality Assurance – comprises all those planned and
systematic actions (policies, strategies, attitudes,
procedures and activities) necessary to provide
adequate demonstration that quality is being maintained
and enhanced, and the products and services meet the
specified quality standards. In higher education, quality
assurance is the totality of systems, resources and
information devoted to maintaining and improving the
quality and standards of teaching, scholarship and
research as well as students’ learning experience.
Quality Audit
MQA – 7 responsibilities

To implement the MQF as a reference point for the
Malaysian qualifications.
 To develop standards and criteria and all other relevant
instruments as a national references for the conferment of
awards with the co-operations of stakeholders.
 To quality assure higher education providers and
programs.
 To accredit programs that fulfill a set of criteria and
standards.
 To facilitate the recognition and articulation of qualifications
 To establish and maintain the Malaysian Qualifications
Register (MQR).
 To advise the Minister on matters relating to quality
assurance in higher education.
Quality Audit
MQA Council
MQA is headed by a Council comprising a Chairman and 16
members. The functions of the Council are to:
 Approve plans and policies for the management of the
Agency.
 Approve any amendment or update of the MQF.
 Approve policies and guidelines relating to audit processes
and accreditation of programs, qualifications and higher
education providers.
 Receive and monitor reports and other information relating
to accreditation, institutional audit and evaluation.
 Continuously guide the Agency in its function as a quality
assurance body.
Quality Audit
Malaysian Qualifications Framework - MQF

The MQF is an instrument that classifies qualifications
based on a set of criteria that are approved nationally and
benchmarked against international best practices.
 The framework clarifies the academic levels, learning
outcomes and credit systems based on student academic
load.
 The MQF integrates with and links all national
qualifications.
 3 types of quality assurance: Provisional Accreditation;
Full Accreditation; and Institutional Audit.
Quality Audit
COPIA, COPPA, HEP, MQA, MQF
 COPIA –
Code of Practice for Institutional
Audit
 COPPA – Code of Practice for Programme
Accreditation
 HEP – Higher Education Provider / Pemberi
Pendidikan Tinggi
 MQA – Malaysian Qualification Agency /
Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia
 MQF – Malaysian Qualifications Framework
/ Kerangka Kelayakan Malaysia (KKM)
Quality Audit
Code of Practice for Institutional Audit (COPIA)

Contains guidelines on criteria & Standards for Higher
Education Provider (HEP).
 Define requirements for higher education in broad terms.
 Divided into 9 areas of evaluation.
 Standards are categorized into 2 attainment levels:
 Benchmark – expressed as a “must”.
 Enhanced – expressed as a “should”
 Purpose:
 multipurpose audit code , comprehensive.
 Guided information template.
 Explains preparations for audits, roles of audit panels, MQA
 Explains processes, responsibilities, audit criteria, report
writing formats.
Quality Audit
Findings and Judgments of COPIA

For Academic Performance Audit (APA):
 highlight affirmation, commendation and areas of concern.
 Indicate performance of institution on 9 areas of evaluation.
 No specific decision of pass or fail.
 For continuation or cessation of Program Accreditation:
 Maintain accreditation
 Cease accreditation
 For Self-accreditation Status:
 Grant Self Accreditation Status
 Not granted Self Accreditation status
 MQA Institutional Audit Committee will make decisions base
on proposal by the panel of assessors.
Quality Audit
Malaysian Qualifications Framework - MQF



Provisional Accreditation – seeking approval from the
Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) to conduct new
programs.
Full Accreditation – a conferment to denote that a program
has met all the criteria and standards set for that purpose.
Institutional Audit – periodic academic performance audit
on all universities or to establish the continuation or
maintenance of program accreditation status. It could take
the form of an exercise for purposes of verifying data,
public policy input or for rating and ranking of institutions
and programs. The highest form of IA is the selfaccreditation audit which can lead to a conferment of a
self-accreditation status for the institution whereby the
institution can accredit its own programs.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation COPIA

Vision, mission, educational goals and learning outcomes
 Curriculum design and delivery
 Assessment of students
 Student selection and support services
 Academic staff
 Educational resources
 Program monitoring and review
 Leadership, governance and administration
 Total continual quality improvement
Quality Audit
2 levels of standards attainment

Benchmark standards – are standards that must be met
and compliance demonstrated during institutional audit.
Benchmark standards are expressed as a “MUST”.

Enhanced standards – are standards that should be met
as the institution strives to continuously improve itself.
Enhanced standards reflect international and national
consensus on good practices in higher education.
Enhanced standards are expressed by a “SHOULD”.
The standards define the expected level of attainment for
each criterion and serve as a performance indicator.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation – Benchmark standards
Statements of Vision, Mission, and Educational goals:
 Set the direction, guide academic planning and
implementation, and bring members towards achievement
of world class status and tradition of excellence.
 HEP must state vision, mission and educational goals and
make known to internal and external stakeholders.
 Mission statements and goals must reflect crucial
elements of the processes and outcomes of higher
education.
 Must formulate goals consistent with vision and mission.
 Publications must accurately cite the current vision and
mission.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation – Enhanced standards
Statements of Vision, Mission, and Educational goals:
 Mission and goals should encompass leadership qualities
in the areas of social responsibility, research attainment,
community involvement, ethical values, profesionalism and
knowledge creation.
 Should demonstrate that planning and evaluation
processes, educational programs, educational support
services, financial and physical resources, administrative
processes are adequate and appropriate to fulfill stated
purpose of mission and goals.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation – Benchmark standards
Curriculum Design and Delivery:
 Must have a clearly defined process by which the
curriculum is established, reviewed and evaluated.
 All Educational programs must be considered only after a
needs assessment have been identified.
 All Educational programs must be considered only after
resources to support the programs have been identified.
 All aspects of educational programs must be related to
HEP’s vision and mission.
 Must show that educational content and approach,
teaching learning methods are appropriate, consistent with
and support the attainment of learning outcomes.
 Teaching learning methods must ensure that students take
responsibility for their own learning and prepare for life long
learning.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation – Enhanced standards
Curriculum design and delivery:
 The curriculum should encourage multi-disciplinary
approaches to enhance personal development through
electives, study pathways and other means which should
be monitored and appraised
 There should be co-curricular activities that will enrich
students’ experiences, foster personal development and
responsibility.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation – Benchmark standards
Assessment of students: Assessment and Learning
 Assessment principles, processes, methods and practices
must be aligned with learning outcomes and program
content.
 The process and methods of assessment must reflect the
change to the program outcomes from any review
exercise.
 The assessment must be consistent with the levels
defined in the MQF and the MQF eight domains of learning
outcomes.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation – Enhanced standards
Assessment of students: Assessment and Learning
 Assessment methodology should be reviewed periodically
to ensure currency with development in best practices.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation – Benchmark standards
Assessment of students: Assessment methods
 Frequency and methods of student assessment including
grading criteria and award must be documented and
communicated to students.
 The assessment methods must comprise of summative and
formative purposes compatible with learning outcomes.
 A variety of methods and tools must be used appropriately
for assessing the given learning outcomes and
competencies (communication, problem solving, teamwork
and self-directed learning).
 There must be mechanisms to ensure the validity, reliability
and fairness of the assessment system.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation – Enhanced standards
Assessment of students: Assessment methods
 Methods of assessing should be comparable to
international best practices.
 The assessment systems should be reviewed periodically.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation – Benchmark standards
Student selection and support services: admission and
selection – 13 standards (here are five examples)
 The HEP must have an admission policy with clear
statements on the criteria and processes of student
selection including transferring students.
 The criteria and processes of selection must be published
and disseminated to students.
 If a selection interview is used, the HEP must demonstrate
that it is objectively and fairly structured.
 Student selection must be free from discrimination and bias.
 The HEP must provide evidence that it selects students
whose capabilities are consistent with the admission
policies.
Quality Audit
9 Areas of evaluation – Enhanced standards
Student selection and support services: admission and
selection
 The admission policy should be reviewed periodically.
 The outcome of selection and student performance should
be monitored to improve the selection process.
 The size of student intake should be reviewed in
consultation with stakeholders.
 Students intake should include a consideration of gender
and ethnic balance and social responsibilities such as
policies for disadvantaged students.
Quality Audit
The Practice:
Academic Performance Audit – Audit Prestasi Akademik





Effectiveness of the internal management systems for
quality by which institutions manage their core functions with
resources and manpower available.
Strength & areas of concern in the academic performance of
the universities.
Improvements needed in the areas of concern.
Action plans by institutions.
Institutions demonstrate that they have systems and
resources in place for institutional effectiveness.
Quality Audit
The Practice:
Academic Performance Audit – Audit Prestasi Akademik





The audit is in the form of an external quality assurance in
which institutions perform self evaluation against standards
and criteria.
The quality assurance standards and criteria are intended to
help develop, enhance, and strengthen the institutional
effectiveness.
The results do not “pass” or “fail”.
Reports are not intended to penalize or reward institutions.
Information will give trends, differences between institutions,
indication of impact of policy implementation, constraints
and expectations.
Quality Audit
Some Comparisons between COPIA & COPPA




Area 1: Vision, Mission, Educational Goals & Learning
Outcomes
1.1 Statements of vision, mission and educational goals:
COPIA – sets the direction of the HEP and guides
educational planning & implementation.
COPPA – at the program level, it is more directed to see
how a specific program supports the larger institutional
vision.
Quality Audit
Some Comparisons between COPIA & COPPA




Area 1: Vision, Mission, Educational Goals & Learning
Outcomes
1.3 Academic Autonomy:
COPIA – specifies the autonomy of HEP over academic
matters.
COPPA – autonomy in designing the curriculum of a specific
program.
Quality Audit
Some Comparisons between COPIA & COPPA




Area 1: Vision, Mission, Educational Goals & Learning
Outcomes
1.4 Learning Outcomes (LO):
COPIA – relates LO and competencies to vision and mission
of HEP.
COPPA – emphasis on learning outcomes of a particular
program.
Quality Audit
Some Comparisons between COPIA & COPPA




Area 2: Curriculum Design and Delivery
2.1 Curriculum Design and Teaching Learning Methods:
COPIA – perspective of curriculum design is largely about
institutional policies, structures, processes and practices
related to curriculum development across the institution.
COPPA – refers to specific description, content and delivery
of a particular program.
Quality Audit
Some Comparisons between COPIA & COPPA




Area 2: Curriculum Design and Delivery
2.2 Curriculum Content and Structure:
COPIA – relates to HEP’s processes in developing all
program content in general.
COPPA – focuses on the processes of developing one
particular program.
Quality Audit
Some Comparisons between COPIA & COPPA




Area 3: Assessment of Students
3.3 Management of Student Assessment:
COPIA – looks at the HEP’s students assessment system.
COPPA – how is the students assessment system
implemented for a specific program.
Quality Audit
Some Comparisons between COPIA & COPPA




Area 4: Student Selection and Support Services
4.1 Admission and Selection:
COPIA – how the institution comply to the MOHE admission
and selection policies.
COPPA – how are the policies cascaded down (diturunkan)
and implemented at the departmental level for a particular
program.
Quality Audit
Some Comparisons between COPIA & COPPA
 Area
4: Student Selection and Support
Services
 4.5 Alumni:
 COPIA – incorporating alumni into curriculum
development of HEP.
 COPPA – involvement of alumni in
developing a specific program
Quality Audit
Some Comparisons between COPIA & COPPA
 Area
5: Academic Staff
 COPIA – looks at HEP policies on academic
staff recruitment, appointment and
promotion, and academic staff development.
 COPPA – looks at policies and requirements
for academic staff involved in teaching a
specific program.