The Internal Quality Audit

4.1 The Internal Quality Audit

An internal quality audit is also known as a self-review. It is conducted by the higher education provider and is an important part of the quality assurance process. The Chief Executive Officer and other senior staff of the HEP must be totally committed to, and supportive of, the self-review and its purposes. A senior person with appropriate expertise should lead the self-review process supported by the HEP’s quality committee. The self- review builds as much as possible on current relevant evaluative activity and relevant existing materials.

The HEP brings together representatives of the administration, the academic staff, students and other constituents to:

•฀ collect฀and฀review฀data฀on฀the฀HEP฀and฀its฀educational฀programmes; •฀

analyse฀the฀data฀to฀identify฀the฀institutional฀strengths,฀areas฀of฀concern฀and฀ opportunities;

develop฀strategies฀to฀ensure฀that฀the฀strengths฀are฀maintained฀and฀problems฀ are addressed; and

•฀ make฀specific฀recommendations฀for฀further฀quality฀enhancement. An internal quality audit is concerned with the HEP’s own objectives, and with the success

of the HEP in achieving those objectives based on the guidelines on good practices and the general requirements in the nine areas of quality assurance. The nine areas are:

1.฀ Vision,฀Mission,฀Educational฀Goals฀and฀Learning฀Outcomes;

2. Curriculum Design and Delivery;

3. Assessment of Students;

4. Student Selection and Support Services;

5. Academic Staff; 6.฀ Educational฀Resources; 7.฀ Programme฀Monitoring฀and฀Review; 8.฀ Leadership,฀Governance฀and฀Administration;฀and

Some possible self-questioning around each area might be structured along these lines: •฀

What฀actions฀are฀we฀taking฀in฀relation฀to฀this฀area?

Why฀were฀these฀actions฀chosen?

•฀ How฀ do฀ we฀ check฀ their฀ effectiveness฀ –฀ what฀ performance฀ indicators฀ do฀ we have?

Are฀the฀indicators฀effective?

What฀do฀we฀do฀as฀a฀result฀of฀the฀review?

•฀ Can฀we฀measure฀the฀degree฀of฀achievements฀–฀what฀are฀the฀actual฀outcomes? •฀

Can฀ we฀ improve฀ on฀ the฀ existing฀ actions,฀ even฀ those฀ that฀ are฀ already effective?

An internal quality audit has several merits, including: •฀

the฀recognition฀of฀institutional฀autonomy฀and฀responsibility; •฀

the฀maintenance฀of฀a฀process฀of฀critical฀self-development;฀and •฀

the฀ production฀ of฀ information,฀ and฀ reflection฀ on฀ it,฀ some฀ of฀ which฀ is฀ not฀ normally evident.

For฀effective฀quality฀management,฀it฀is฀imperative฀that฀the฀policies฀and฀procedures฀of฀ the HEP should be in writing, approved through appropriate institutional processes, published in appropriate institutional documents accessible to those affected by them, and implemented by the HEP.

4.1.1 The Internal Quality Audit Task Force

An internal quality audit requires time and effort. A self-review task force is formed and a Coordinator is appointed. Members of the task force should include people who are able to make an objective assessment and could give useful information on the HEP. The members may comprise of administrators (academic, fiscal, managerial), heads of departments and programmes, junior and senior academics, students and alumni, and others associated with the HEP as well as those external to the HEP.

The Coordinator is responsible for distributing and collecting the institutional database forms, answering questions during database preparation, preparing the final unified version of the database, coordinating the self-analysis report and writing฀the฀final฀consolidated฀self-review฀report.฀For฀each฀section฀of฀the฀self-review฀ report, it is recommended that a person most familiar with the relevant processes is appointed as the head of the section.

The students are expected to participate actively in the self-review process and are encouraged to produce an independent student report.

4.1.2 Data Collection

Data should be accurately and consistently collated by a knowledgeable person in the HEP for each particular section. Wherever possible, references should be made to documents that are already published.

The HEP should provide a factual description of its history, policies, procedures and structures to support the education, training and research activities, and not just provide brief answers to the specific questions listed under each heading. Information on the processes by which decisions are made and their rationale should also be included.

An institutional self-review should be built on the HEP’s existing quality improvement programme. It should incorporate information and conclusions obtained from a variety of sources.

4.1.3 The Self-Review Portfolio (SRP)

The self-review can be expressed in terms of asking questions about processes and their consequences, as well as about structures and their effects. The HEP self- review could generate an effective critique, which is both objective and effective for self-development.

The HEP is encouraged to undertake an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities that are appropriate and to assess itself against the quality assurance standards. An internal quality audit is concerned with the HEP’s own goals and with the success of the HEP in achieving those goals. The internal quality audit must be widely understood and owned so that the results and implications of the review and the resulting audit processes are followed through.

The head of every section forwards his report of the analysis to the Coordinator of the task force. The Coordinator synthesises these findings and analyses, fits them฀ in฀ line฀ with฀ the฀ nine฀ quality฀ assurance฀ areas,฀ and฀ generates฀ a฀ Self-Review฀ Portfolio฀(SRP).