“Performance Indicators for Evaluation of Quality Factors in Higher Education With Special Reference to Indian Scenario”.
Prof. A. T. Gaikwad [1] Dr. R . V. Kulkarni [2]
Associate Professor Professor & Head
Dept. of Computer Applications Chh. Shahu Institute of Business Edu.
BVDU Institute of Management, and Research Kolhapur-Maharashtra
Kolhapur-Maharashtra-India India.
E-Mail: E-mail :
Prof. Mukund A. Kulkarni [3]
Assistant Professor
Dept. Of Computer Applications
BVDU Institute of Management , Kolhapur
India - Email –
ABSTRACT
The Indian Higher Education in the present scenario is in development stage. The enrollment rate is 13% as per Indian Academic Report 2011. Higher education requires important trace on quality maintenance at every step of higher education process. It is the responsibility of stakeholders to be aware of quality parameters and take part in development of the nation since the students coming out of theses Institutes would become the good citizens of the country. The research topic stated above will look into various performance indicators for evaluation of quality factors , study existing organizations and their quality parameters and suggest the better performance indicators to safeguard the quality of higher education . Higher Education is important sector in which young students are shaping their academic career and make them good or bad citizens of the country. In order to make theses Institutes very strong in disseminating the knowledge the use proper performance indicators with the use of advance technology at every step will help in improving the quality of Higher educational Institutes . The bodies like AICTE, NBA, NAAC and professional bodies are responsible for controlling the activities of higher education and accrediting by providing the grades as per the various quality parameters. The Institutes have to maintain various standards prescribed by these controlling bodies.
Keywords:Performance Indicators , Quality Assurance, higher education,NAAC , AICTE, NBA, ISO.
1)Introduction
The criteria used for evaluating the work of an individual or an institution , or for adjudging the effectiveness of a programme , are often referred to as Performance Indicators. As far as 350 performance indicators are identified by the committee of Vice chancellors and Principals formed in the year 1985 till date. The validity, reliability, and utility of many of these performance indicators is questioned. All these performance indicators cannot be used as universal in their applicability and must therefore be chosen with care keeping in view the goals , objectives , location , background and social factors to evaluate the Institutions of higher learning.[3]
The concept of performance indicators in higher education is borrowed from economics where efficiency of the system or institutions is related to its productivity in terms of returns [1]. The performance indicators are defined as numerical value(s) used to measure something whichis difficult to quantify and which can be derived in different ways. They provide measurement for assessing the quantitative and qualitative performance of the system. Performance Indicators are statistics , ratio, costs and other forms of information which measures the progress in achieving the mission and objectives of the Institutions.[4]
2) Objective of the Paper:- The paper is based on the quality parameters suggested by various accrediting bodies like NAAC and NBA for quality assessment for the higher education Institutions. The performance indicators and their applicability to measure the efficiency and quality of higher education institutes through theoretical concepts.
The study aims at
1)To study the Performance indicators used for quality assessment of higher education with respect to stakeholders.
2)To study the Parameters used by NAAC and NBA for Accreditation of Institutes.
3)To suggest model Performance indicators for Indian Scenario .
3) Types of Performance Indicators :- The Jarratta Committee proposed the three types of performance indicators :- Internal , External and Operational. The Internal indicators are those that are based on information relating to the Institution such as number of applications for admission, results , research grants and teaching learning process[2]. The external performance indicators are acceptability of the students in Industries and society. Publication and consultancy undertaken by faculty and overall reputation as judged external reviews. The Operational indicators include Student/Staff Ratio, unit cost of education, class size, library, computing facility and other infrastructural facilities provided to the students.[4]
4) The Use of Performance Indicators :- The main use of performance indicators is to evaluate the efficiency of the system in this case institutes of higher learning other applications are[4]
1)As a measure of quality.
2)As a Measure of accountability.
3)Comparison with similar institutions.
4)Improving effectiveness in management by providing the information.
5)For creating awareness among stakeholders of the higher education like students , faculty , parents , Government and society at large.
6)Proper utilization of resources [4]
5) Assessment, Controlling and Accrediting Bodies in India:-
The major bodies responsible for above functions are National Assessment Accreditation Council (NAAC) established in 1984 under University Grants Commission (UGC). The National Board of Accreditation (NBA) established in 1984 under the All India Council for technical education . An Accreditation Board under the Indian Council for Agriculture Research and a Distance Education council established under provisions of the Indira Gandhi National Open University Act, 1985. Internal Quality Assurance Cells at Institute level are formed to maintain the quality assurance measures by involving all the members of the Institute over a period of time. Other measures are benchmarking , national quality frame work, community development through NSS, Institute Industry Interaction and Research Orientation.[4]
6) Quality Parameters Used By NAAC for evaluating the Institutes performance for accrediting the Institutes.
The NAAC in India plays an important role in India by providing the accreditation to the Institute by strict measures of evaluation and its uses various performance indicators to evaluate the efficiency of each stakeholder in the higher education system. It has brought number of changes in its process from the grading system to provide self report evaluation prepared by the applicant Institute. The Weight ages and numerous material is printed and uploaded on its website for the information of the students and interesting parties of the higher education. The NAAC Grade has become the sign of quality in India and students are now asking the grade at the time of admission , Government also has related various facilities and funds with these grades.[7]
7) The Performance indicators used by NAAC
7.1) Table showing 7 criteria and their weighatge for University, Autonomous Institute and Affiliated Colleges.
Table – 1 (Source NAAC Manual-2011)
Sr. No. / Criteria / WeighatgeUniversity / Autonomous Institute / Affiliated Colleges / Constituent Units
1 / Curricular Aspect / 150 (15%) / 100 (10%) / 50 (5%)
2 / Teaching Learning and Evaluation / 250 (25%) / 350 (35%) / 450 (45%)
3 / Research Consultancy and Extension / 200 (20%) / 150 (15%) / 100 (10%)
4 / Infrastructure and Learning Resources / 100 (10%) / 100 (10%) / 100 (10%)
5 / Student Support and Progression / 100 (10%) / 100 (10%) / 100 (10%)
6 / Governance and Leadership / 150 (15%) / 150 (15%) / 150 (15%)
7 / Innovative Practices / 50 (5%) / 50 (5%) / 50 (5%)
Total / 1000 / 1000 / 1000
From the above table it can be interpreted that University has more teaching learning and evaluation with research consultancy and extension with 250 and 200 marks weightage. Autonomous Institutes and Affiliated colleges have maximum weight ages to teaching learning and evaluation with 450 and 350 marks. Governance and leadership have 15% weightage to all three categories.
7.2)Table showing the types of Letter Grade and Performance Descriptor Suggested by
NAAC
Table-2 (Source NAAC Manual-2011)
Range of Institutional Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) / Letter Grade / Performance Descriptor3.01 - 4.00 / A / Very Good (Accredited)
2.01 – 3.00 / B / Good (Accredited)
1.51 – 2.00 / C / Satisfactory (Accredited)
<= 1. 50 / D / Unsatisfactory (Not accredited)
7.3) The Performance indicators used by NBA
The NBA is responsible for evaluating technical Institutions or programmes on the guidelines , norms and standard specified by itself and it reports the recognition or de-recognition of the progrmme to the AICTE . All Diploma, Undergraduate , Post Graduate Porgrammes coming under Engineering and technology, Management, Architecture , Pharmacy , Hotel management and Catering technology, Town and Country Planning , Applied Arts and Craft are covered under NBA. [8]
Following performance indicators are used by NBA to Accredited the Institutions
Table-3 (Source AICTE Manual 2011)
Sr. No. / Parameter / WeighatgeUG / PG
1 / Mission, Goals , organization financial resources allocation and their Utilization HR, Students / 500 / 450
2 / Teaching Learning Process / 350 / 250
3 / Supplementary Process like extra curricular activities, ED, student counseling, alumni involvement / 50 / 50
4 / Industry Institution Interaction / 70 / 100
5 / Research and development / 30 / 150
Total / 1000 / 1000
The Individual programmes are classified according to following categories for accreditation by NBA.
1)Accredited for five years : Excellent / Very Good Meeting all accreditation criteria when the cumulative score exceeds 750 on a 1000 scale.
2) Accredited for three years : Good Meeting the minimum criteria with deficiencies being marginal that can be improved with in a short time. Score between 650 and 749.
3)Not Accredited (NA) : Not ripe for accreditation due to the seriousness of the deficiencies below score below 550 on a 1000 scale.
8) Performance Indicators for Assessing the Indian Institutions (By Using Cumulative Grade points used by NAAC and NBA):-
By considering the above criteria used to assess the best measures would include following broad categories with respect to Indian context being its size , multi culture and social reasons
1)Administration, Rules and Controlling bodies.
2)Teaching and Learning Process.
3)Research Input and Impact of Research on Society.
4)Social attachment and Capacity to deal social issues and find solutions.
5)Innovations and Idea Generation in Educational Institutions of higher learning.
6)International Relation, Benchmarking.
7)Best Practices and Morals (Success Stories).[3]
9) Accreditation Scenario In Indian Higher Education Institutes .
Source:-NAAC Publication During the period (2007 to 2012)
Table-4
Sr. No. / Universities / Total No. of Universities1 / Universities with A Grade / 55
2 / Universities with B Grade / 53
3 / Universities with C Grade / 02
Total / 110
From the above table we can interpret that the accreditation scenario in India is not good and needs serious thought since only 55 Universities are in A grade and 53 Universities have to improve their grade from B to A in the next five years. The Government can start counseling these Universities and provide proper guidance and support to go for accreditation and prove the quality so that students and stakeholders are benefited.
10) Higher Education Challenges in Indian Scenario (Model Parameters)
The Indian higher education with just 13% enrollment can not be called as mature sector to comment on quality authors suggest following priorities to bring awareness and improve the quality awareness in the Institutes of higher learning.
1)Inclusive Policy :- To admit the students from different categories with proper representation to all classes of the society.
2)Proper Planning of the Policies and rules related with controlling bodies from central govt. to State Govt. and Professional bodies.
3)Motivation to Secondary Schools level students to pursive higher education and conduct orientation courses for all the prospectus students of the higher education.
4)Starting New Colleges as per the requirement and fair competition among the Institutes to provide healthy environment to get quality education to the students.
5)Staff Development Colleges with persistent efforts to train the teachers.
6)Research at all levels of Higher Education Learning to maintain quality.
7)Special provision for economical weaker section students to make the higher education affordable to these students.
8)Industry Institute Tie ups for Human Resource Development
9)Value Education and Business Ethics to be followed by all stake holders.
10)Internationalization of higher education for betterment of mankind.
Conclusion
Higher Education is an important sector for all the countries in the 21st century. Use of proper tools, techniques, procedures , rules and proper planning will make good global citizens. The countries like India have bright opportunities in this sector provided each stakeholder performs his/her duty with most sincerity and with 100% dedication. The proper performance indicators discussed by authors will play an important role in measuring the quality of higher education Institutes. The future scope depends on use of advance technology and trained human resource with proper utilization of resources. The Paper entitled Performance Indicators for Evaluation of Quality Factors in Higher Education With Special Reference to Indian Scenariowill be an decent contribution in the body of knowledge of higher education for the researchers and stakeholders of higher education. Authors in future have plan to develop and implement the Expert System for quality Assessment and enhancement in higher education Institutes
Abbreviations :- AICTE- All India Council for Technical Education , NAAC – National Assessment and Accreditation Council , NBA-National Board of Accreditation , ISO-International Standards Organization, KM- Knowledge Management , IT- Information Technology, BVDU-Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University.
References :
1) Ashish Kumar , Arun Kumar – IT based KM in Indian Higher Education System : Addressing
Quality concerns and setting the priorities right - Journal of Knowledge Management
Practice Vol. 7 No. 3 Sep.2006.
2) Alstete J.W. (1995) , Benchmarking in Higher Education : Adopting Best Practices to improve quality ,
ASHE-ERIC-HE Report G.W. University , Washington.
3.) Ball, R. , Halwachi J. (1987) , Performance Indicators in Higher Education , Higher Education,
16: 393- 403.
4) K.B. Powar Quality in Higher Education Anamaya Publication shers New Delhi PP.17-23
ISBN 81-88342-11-4 Pub. Year-2005.
5) Prof. Dr. Arun Nigavekar New Delhi December, 2003 Chairman, UGC.
6) Prof. Yoginder VermaProfessor of Management and Director UGC-ASC, Himachal Pradesh
University, Shimla, India.
7) University Grants Commission, Towards New Education Management , A Report of the UGC
Committee ( Gnanam Committee report UGC New Delhi 199o.
8) Website references
Website: Addresses
1) Web Sites ,
2) Websites
==
1