|Commenced in January 2007||Frequency: Monthly||Edition: International||Paper Count: 6|
The accreditation process of engineering degree programmes is based on various reports evaluated by the relevant governing bodies of the institution of higher education. One of the aforementioned reports for the accreditation process is a self-assessment report which is to be completed by the applying institution. This paper seeks to emphasise the importance of analysis of internal quality management systems and self-examination processes in the engineering accreditation processes. A description of how the programme fulfils the criteria should be given. Relevant stakeholders all need to contribute in the writing and structuring of the self-assessment report. The last step is to gather evidence in the form of supporting documentation. In conclusion, the paper also identifies learning outcomes in a case study in seeking accreditation from an international relevant professional body.
Datasets or collections are becoming important assets by themselves and now they can be accepted as a primary intellectual output of a research. The quality and usage of the datasets depend mainly on the context under which they have been collected, processed, analyzed, validated, and interpreted. This paper aims to present a collection of program educational objectives mapped to student’s outcomes collected from self-study reports prepared by 32 engineering programs accredited by ABET. The manual mapping (classification) of this data is a notoriously tedious, time consuming process. In addition, it requires experts in the area, which are mostly not available. It has been shown the operational settings under which the collection has been produced. The collection has been cleansed, preprocessed, some features have been selected and preliminary exploratory data analysis has been performed so as to illustrate the properties and usefulness of the collection. At the end, the collection has been benchmarked using nine of the most widely used supervised multiclass classification techniques (Binary Relevance, Label Powerset, Classifier Chains, Pruned Sets, Random k-label sets, Ensemble of Classifier Chains, Ensemble of Pruned Sets, Multi-Label k-Nearest Neighbors and Back-Propagation Multi-Label Learning). The techniques have been compared to each other using five well-known measurements (Accuracy, Hamming Loss, Micro-F, Macro-F, and Macro-F). The Ensemble of Classifier Chains and Ensemble of Pruned Sets have achieved encouraging performance compared to other experimented multi-label classification methods. The Classifier Chains method has shown the worst performance. To recap, the benchmark has achieved promising results by utilizing preliminary exploratory data analysis performed on the collection, proposing new trends for research and providing a baseline for future studies.
Estimation of the quality regarding higher education within a university is practically long drawn process besides being difficult to measure primarily due to lack of a standard scale. National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) evolved a methodology of assessment which involves self-appraisal by each university/college and an assessment of performance by an expert committee. The attributes involved in assessing a university may not be totally independent from each other thereby necessitating the consideration of interdependencies. The present study focuses on evaluation of assessment criteria using graph theoretic approach and fuzzy treatment of data collected from the students. The technique will provide a suitable platform to university management team to cross check assessment of education quality by considering interdependencies of the attributes using graph theory.
The general functions of the university amongst other things include teaching, research and community service. Universities are recognized as the apex of learning, accumulating and imparting knowledge and skills of all kinds to students to enable them to be productive, earn their living and to make optimum contributions to national development. This is equivalent to the production of human capital in the form of high level manpower needed to administer the educational society, be useful to the society and manage the economy. Quality has become a matter of major importance for university education in Nigeria. Accreditation is the systematic review of educational programs to ensure that acceptable standards of education, scholarship and infrastructure are being maintained. Accreditation ensures that institution maintain quality. The process is designed to determine whether or not an institution has met or exceeded the published standards for accreditation, and whether it is achieving its mission and stated purposes. Ensuring quality assurance in accreditation process falls in the hands of university management which justified the need for this study. This study examined accreditation and quality assurance: the management imperative. Three research questions and three hypotheses guided the study. The design was a correlation survey with a population of 2,893 university administrators out of which 578 Heads of department and Dean of faculties were sampled. The instrument for data collection was titled Programme Accreditation Exercise scale with high levels of reliability. The research questions were answered with Pearson ‘r’ statistics. T-test statistics was used to test the hypotheses. It was found among others that the quality of accredited programme depends on the level of funding of universities in Nigeria. It was also indicated that quality of programme accreditation and physical facilities of universities in Nigeria have high relationship. But it was also revealed that programme accreditation is positively related to staffing in Nigerian universities. Based on the findings of the study, the researcher recommend that academic administrators should be included in the team of those who ensure quality programs in the universities. Private sector partnership should be encouraged to fund programs to ensure quality of programme in the universities. Independent agencies should be engaged to monitor the activities of accreditation teams to avoid bias.