Outcome–Based Program Quality Assurance Accreditation Survey Instrument: Its Development and Validation
Main Article Content
Keywords
accreditation, outcomes-based education, quality, standard, education
Abstract
In the Philippines, the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) has recognized the need to realign the academic program offerings of 112 state colleges and universities thereby raising the standards of quality assurance. The Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges and Universities in the Philippines (AACCUP), aimed to develop a new outcomes-based quality assurance (OBQA) instrument using both quantitative and qualitative approaches of a multi-method design. There are three phases of this study: 1) consideration of benchmark data; 2) development and validation of instrument; and 3) pilot testing. The first phase generated ten areas of the instrument with 700 Likert-type benchmark statements. The second phase led to the trimming of the item pool to 672. The last phase revealed that all 672 item pool identified benchmark indicators passed both the content validationas well as reliability test. It is recommended that the instrument be used and revalidated for further improvement.
References
City University London (2012). Quality assurance framework. Retrieved from https://www.city.ac.uk/_data/assets/pdf_file/0007/135349/quality_assurance_framework.pdf.
Commission on Higher Education (2014). Handbook on typology, outcomes-based education, and institutional sustainability assessment. Quezon City, Philippines. Retrieved from http://www.ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Handbook%20on%20Typology%20Outcomes.pdf.
Corpus, M. T. (2003). Historical perspectives of the Philippine quality assurance system. Journal of Philippine Higher Education Quality Assurance. Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges and University of the Philippines (AACCUP).
Dill, D. D. (2007) Quality assurance in higher education: practices and issues. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
European Network for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (2009). Standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area. Helsinki, Finland.Retrieved from http://www.enqa.eu.
Higher Education Bureau Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology. (2009). Quality assurance framework of higher education in Japan. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/06/20/1307397_1.pdf.
Hay, M., & Lidl, R. (2009). Australia's Higher Education Quality Framework – Components and current challenges. Retrieved from https://www.eurashe.eu/library/quality-he/III.2%20-%20Lidl_Hay.pdf.
Kimberlin, C. L., & Winterstein, A. G. (2008). Validity and reliability of measurement instruments used in research. Research Fundamentals. Retrieved from http://www.ajhepworth.yolasite.com/resources/9817-Reliabillity%20and%20validity.pdf.
Kis, V. (2005). Current practices in OECD countries and a literature review of potential effects. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyondschool/38006910.pdf.
Lawson, M. J., & Askel-Williams, H. (2007). Outcomesbased Education: Discussion paper prepared for the Association of Independent Schools of South Australia (AISSA).
National Council for Higher Education. Quality Assurance Framework for Universities and the Licensing Process for Higher Education Institution. Kyambogo, Uganda.
Padua, N. P. (2003). Historical perspectives of the Philippine quality assurance system. Journal of Philippine Higher Education Quality Assurance. Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges and University of the Philippines (AACCUP).
Richey, R., & Klein, J. D. (2005). Developmental research methods: Creating knowledge from instructional design and development practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education.16(2), 23-38.
Sanjaya, M. (2008). Quality assurance in higher education: An introduction. Retrieved from https://col.org/resources/quality-assurance-higher-educationintroduction.