NIRF, NBA and NAAC ASSESSMENT & ACCREDITATION A formal - - PDF document

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337857137

NIRF, NBA and NAAC ASSESSMENT & ACCREDITATION A formal Presentation

Presentation · December 2019

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.24352.74243

CITATIONS READS

22

2 authors, including: Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Wireless Sensor Network View project Smart City View project Hitesh Mohapatra Veer Surendra Sai University of Technology

81 PUBLICATIONS 401 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Hitesh Mohapatra on 10 December 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Rankings and its Guide lines

P R O F . A M I Y A K U M A R R A T H

ADVISER , ICT, NAAC, BANGALORE, INDIA PROFESSOR , CSE, VSS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, BURLA , ODISHA

National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF)

This document is a part of the National Institutional Ranking Framework with emphasis on methodology for ranking universities and colleges across India. The methodology draws from the broad understanding arrived at by the Core Committee (CC) set up by Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) that defines broad parameters to be used for ranking various universities and institutions. The ranking parameters agreed by the Core Committee (CC) are generic in nature that have been suitably adapted for evolving a detailed methodology for ranking universities and colleges

The main features of the methodology suggested are as follows:

It is recommended to set-up a Committee, which will oversee the implementation of ranking work for the first year, after which a suitable Ranking Agency duly authorized to receive and verify the data, and declare the rankings, may be set up. ii) This document identifies a set of suitable forms in which these parameters can be easily measured and verified across a variety of universities and colleges. iii) A strategy is suggested for calculating scores to measure the performance of the universities and colleges across each such parameter. This will help to obtain an overall score for obtaining the institution rank. iv) Separate ranking formulae for universities and colleges is suggested to ensure that institutions are compared within an appropriate peer group of institutions, and provided a level-playing field. v) A system for data collection from public bodies and random sample checks is suggested for each parameter.

Salient Features

Methodology involves defining a set of metrics for ranking of universities and colleges based on the parameters agreed upon by the Core Committee (CC). 2.2. These parameters are organized into five broad categories that have been further grouped into a number of sub-categories. Each broad category has an overall weight assigned to it. Within each category, the sub-categories also have an appropriate weight distribution. Executive Summary 2.3. An attempt is made here to first identify the relevant data needed to suitably measure the performance score under-each sub-category. Emphasis has been laid on identifying data that is easy to generate and easy to verify, if needed, in the overall interest of transparency. 2.4. A suitable metric is then worked out, based on this data, which computes a score under each sub-

• category. The sub-category scores are then added to obtain scores for each individual category. The
• verall score is computed based on the weights allotted to each category. The overall score can take a

maximum value of 100.

Ranking based on Institutional Category

In view of the distinct primary mandate and objectives of universities and colleges, separate ranking is designed for these two distinct categories of institutions. 3.2. The universities would include institutions of national importance setup by the Acts of Parliament, Central universities, State universities, Deemed-to-be universities, Private universities and other autonomous degree- awarding institutions. The colleges would include Autonomous Colleges that are affiliated to universities and do not enjoy full academic autonomy. 3.3. While score computations for some of the parameters are similar for both of these categories on most counts, the benchmarks are somewhat different on a few parameters, to take into account the ground realities, which may be very different for the two categories. This also creates a level playing field for both categories. 3.4. The weights assigned to different components have been adjusted to reflect different mandates and expectations from universities and colleges. 3.5. Even where the assessment metrics are similar, their computation (where percentile calculations or normalizations are involved) is based on their respective categories. 3.6. If implemented in this manner and spirit, the ranking methodology will produce two separate rankings, one for universities and one for colleges.

Summary of Ranking Parameters for Ranking Universities

National Board of Accreditation (NBA)

To be an accrediting agency of international standard by ensuring the highest degree of credibility in assurance of quality and relevance to professional education and come up to the expectations of its stakeholders viz. students and their parents, academicians, educational institutions, corporates, industry, government and regulators. To stimulate the quality of teaching, self–evaluation and accountability in the higher education system, which help institutions realize their academic objectives and adopt teaching practices that enable them to produce high-quality professionals and to assess and accredit the programs offered by the institutions imparting technical and professional education.

Objectives of NBA

❑To assess and accredit the technical education programs; ❑To evolve standards and parameters for assessment and accreditation in line with the parameters laid down by the appropriate statutory regulatory authority for co-ordination, determination and regulation of standards in the concerned field

• f technical education;

❑To promote excellence through a benchmarking process, which is helpful in determining whether or not an institution is able to achieve its mission and broad based goals, and in interpreting the results of the outcomes assessment process; ❑To promote quality conscious system of technical education where excellence, relevance to market needs and participation by all stakeholders are prime and major determinants. ❑To build a technical education system as facilitator of human resources, that will match the national goals of growth by competence, contribution to economy through competitiveness and compatibility with societal development; ❑To set the quality benchmarks targeted at global and national stockpile of human capital in all fields of technical education; To conduct evaluation of self-assessment of technical institutions and/or programs offered by them on the basis of guidelines, norms and standards specified by it; and ❑To contribute to the domain of knowledge in quality parameters, assessment and evaluation.

Benefits of Accreditation

Helps the Institution to know its strengths, weaknesses and opportunities; Initiates Institutions into innovative and modern methods of pedagogy; Gives Institutions a new sense of direction and identity; Provides society with reliable information

• n quality of education offered;

Students studying in NBA accredited programs can be assured that they will receive education which is of high academic quality and professional relevance and that the needs of the corporate world are well integrated into programs, activities and processes; Accreditation assures prospective employers that students come from a program where the content and quality have been evaluated, satisfying established standards. It also signifies that the students passing out have acquired competence based on well-established technical inputs; and Accreditation helps in gaining confidence of stakeholders and in giving a strong message that as a country, our technical manpower is of international standards and can be very useful in enhancing the global mobility of our technical manpower.

The Impact of Accreditation

Encourages quality improvement initiatives by Institutions; Improves student enrolment both in terms of quality and quantity; Helps the Institution in securing necessary funds; Enhances employability of graduates; Facilitates transnational recognition of degrees and mobility of graduates and professionals; Motivates faculty to participate actively in academic and related institutional / departmental activities; Helps create sound and challenging academic environment in the Institution; and Contributes to social and economic development of the country by producing high quality technical manpower.

Imperatives of Accreditation

Funding decisions; State recognition of qualification/ certification of professionals; Accountability of Institutions to stakeholders; Encouraging self-improvement initiatives by Institutions; and Quality assurance of educational programs.

ACCREDITATION PROCESS FLOW CHART

Pre-assessment 30 days

Assessment 60 days

Post-assessment 60 days

Benefits of Accreditation

❑Institution to know its strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities through an informed review process ❑Identification of internal areas of planning and resource allocation ❑Collegiality on the campus ❑Funding agencies look for objective data for performance funding ❑Institutions to initiate innovative and modern methods of pedagogy ❑New sense of direction and identity for institutions ❑The society look for reliable information on quality education offered ❑Employers look for reliable information on the quality of education offered to the prospective recruits ❑Intra and inter-institutional interactions

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

• 1. Universities (Central / State / Private / Deemed-to-be) and Institutions of National

Importance Provided the Institutions /Deemed to-be Universities and their offcampuses if any are approved by MHRD/UGC. NAAC will not consider the unapproved off-campuses for A&A. Provided that these institutions have regular students enrolled in to the full time teaching and Research programmes offered on campus. Provided further that the duly established campuses within the country, if any, shall be treated as part of the Universities / Institutions of National Importance for the A&A process. NAAC will not undertake the accreditation of off-shore campuses

Cont..

• 2. Autonomous colleges /Constituent Colleges / Affiliated Colleges (affiliated to

universities recognised by UGC as an affiliating University) Provided the Colleges are affiliated to a University recognised by UGC for the purposes

• f affiliation. Constituent colleges of a Private and Deemed- to be Universities are

considered as the constituent units of the University and thus will not be considered for A&A independently. Such constituent colleges need to come along with the University Provided the colleges / institutions not affiliated to a University are offering programmes recognized by Statutory Professional Regulatory Councils and have been recognised by Association of Indian Universities(AIU) or other such Government agencies concerned, as equivalent to a degree programme of a University

Cont..

• 3. Accredited HEIs applying for Reassessment or Subsequent Cycles (Cycle 2, Cycle

3, Cycle 4) of Accreditation Institutions, which would like to make an improvement in the accredited status, may apply for Re-assessment, after a minimum of one year and before three years of accreditation subject to the fulfilment of other conditions specified by NAAC from time to time for the purpose. Institutions opting for Subsequent Cycles (Cycle 2, Cycle 3, Cycle 4) of Accreditation can submit the Institutional Information for Quality Assessment (IIQA), during the last 6 months of validity period subject to the fulfilment of other conditions specified by NAAC from time to time for the purpose.

UNITS OF ASSESSMENT

FLOW CHART OF ASSESSMENT AND ACCREDITATION PROCESS

Cont..

Cont..

Cont..

CRITERIA & WEIGHTAGES

GRADING

GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL

RE RE-ASSESSMENT

CYCLES OF ACCREDITATION

ASSESSMENT OUTCOME

Cont..