FOLLOW UP SITE VISIT

1
FOLLOW UP SITE VISIT

• Dr Robert Schofield
• Dr Arthur Brown
• Advisors to the Quality Assurance and
  Accreditation Project
• Republic of Egypt

2
Purpose

• Follow-up to Developmental Engagements
  supplements the reports of the Monitoring and
  Evaluation team and the Review report from the
  site-visit. It has two purposes

3
Purpose

• Identifying the time that individual faculties
  may need to be ready to apply for accreditation.
  

4
Purpose

• Providing further information and support for the
  continuing improvement of academic standards and
  the quality of higher education.

5
Method

• The follow-up process is designed to deliver
  evidence based reports to the Ministry for Higher
  Education and Scientific Research on the
  readiness of institutions to apply for
  accreditation during and after the transitional
  period of establishing internal quality assurance
  systems and processes and completing related
  funded QAAP/HEEP projects.

6
Method

• A follow-up site visit, normally needing one
  day, to faculties, leading to a brief written
  report to NQAAC on the state of readiness to
  apply for accreditation, Conducted by
• - the Head of the Universitys Quality
  Assurance Centre
• - a member of the National Committee
• - an external consultant.

7
Method

• Faculties will be reviewed under 10 headings and
  scored under each heading either one for
  satisfactory to apply for accreditation ,or zero
  for further improvement required before an
  application for accreditation can be made
• Faculties will therefore be scored out of 10.

8
Method

• A consolidated overview report to the Ministry on
  the state of readiness of faculties to apply for
  accreditation will be prepared by NQAAC after the
  completion of each series of follow-up visits.
• The planned timing for the delivery of this
  report is January 2008.

9
Main Headings

• 1. Effectiveness of Quality Management and
  Enhancement.
• 2. Intended Learning Outcomes(ILOs)
• 3. Curricula.
• 4. Student Assessment.
• 5. Achievement.

10
Main Headings

• 6. Teaching and Learning.
• 7. Student Support.
• 8. Learning Resources.
• 9.Academic Research and other Scholarly Activity.
• 10. Community Involvement.

11
Evidence base

• The faculties state of readiness to apply for
  accreditation will be assessed by the follow up
  process using the following sources of evidence
• Successive Faculty Annual Self-Evaluation Reports
  together with annual programme reports and annual
  course reports (i.e.2006-2007 as well as 2005-06)
• Action plans
• Developmental Engagement Review Report (executive
  summary and conclusions)
• Faculty strategic plan linked to the Universitys.

12
Faculty Annual Self Evaluation Reports

• All issues in the template must be addressed.
• Course reports must be properly completed by the
  person delivering the course.
• Programme reports must be completed by the
  programme coordinator.
• Must report the consideration of and improvements
  needed in ILOs to reflect external reference
  points (NARS).
• Previous action plan must be addressed.

13
Action Plans

• Must be routinely in all course, programme and
  faculty reports.
• Must emphasise the implications for refining
  ILOs, checking NARS, enhancing teaching and
  assessment methods, and for learning resources.
• Must be checked for completion in succeeding
  reports.

14
Example

• The following ILOs are to be clarified.
• The ILOs need checking against the new NARS
• The existing curriculum has the following gaps.
• Revisions are proposed for the programme in
  respect of
• The curriculum (practicals)
• Teaching and learning methods
• Assessment
• Develop laboratories and workshops
• The obstacles identified are.
• Timetable for implementation including training
  is.

15
The Follow Up action plan

• Consider and report how it -
• Addresses DE reports
• Considers the recommendations
• Identifies actions with priorities
• Sets out timetable for implementation
• Takes into account implications for resources

16
Suggested Timetable for Follow-up Site Visits

•  
• Based on a six hour day to accommodate travel
  etc
• The situations in different Faculties will be
  different so this timetable will have to be
  flexible
• Details to be agreed in advance by NQAAC member
  and the Faculty representative.

17
Timetable (morning session)

• Session 1 (15 minutes)
• Courtesy meeting with Dean and senior staff.
• Session 2 (90 minutes)
• Meeting with key staff
• Discussion of implementation of action plan
  and level of progress
• Session 3 (45 minutes)
• Meeting with students

18
Timetable (afternoon session)

• Session 4 (30-60 minutes)
• a)Tour of any new resources.
• b)Scrutiny of new documentation.
• Session 5 (30-60 minutes)
• Follow up meetings as required .
• Session 6 (45 minutes)
• Team discussion
• Session 7 (15 minutes)
• Oral feedback.

19
THANK YOU