GEETANJALI UPADHYAYA

Starting with a positive note, post 1990s has seen a tremendous growth in the number of higher education service providers (Universities and colleges) and data reveal that access to higher education has increased. However, sadly, the quality of education so imparted is questioned. Of late, from my rendezvous with professional academicians in different parts of the country, I have learnt about their conspicuous enthusiasm to establish and/or transfer their institutions to universities, which I deeply appreciate as that, I believe, would help decentralize higher education service and make it more accessible, at least. But given the fact, none of our present universities have any ‘real’ mechanism to monitor and evaluate the teaching/learning/research practices of their affiliating institutions, keeps me baffled: whether the higher education institutions, if established as university, will/can really ingrain quality culture in the system!

Technically it is not easy to define quality, but if we go with a common layperson perception about the term then it goes something like strictly retaining the basic norms and standards.

Recent decades have shown an alarming concern on the quality of higher education not only with the intellectual masses but also with the people at large. A plethora of issues, for instance, the (thin) employability of the graduates, the (traditional) teaching – learning methods, (scanty) research exercises, (none) recognition and credibility of the institutions are out – rightly raised.

To address the issues, the need to assure the quality of education and also to establish the system of accreditation was something felt to be done in the country as well.

In this regard, University Grants Commission (UGC) Nepal has started a commendable step by undertaking institutional assessment and accreditation, the first of its kind in the country, which is currently under Second Higher Education Project (2007 – 2013) supported by the World Bank. This piece does not attempt to explore the nuts and bolts of the Quality Assurance and Accreditation (QAA) system in Nepal, but would like to give a glimpse of it, and in turn raise the quality concern among the stakeholders.

Accreditation is the process by which UGC evaluates the quality of a higher education institution (HEI) in order to formally recognize it as having met certain predetermined minimal criteria or standards.

Its objective is to recognize and acknowledge the value addition in transforming a student admitted to a institution into a graduate with enhanced knowledge and an acceptable level of professional and personal competence.

As because QAA is the voluntary process in Nepal, the HEI itself has to apply at UGC for starting the QAA Cycle. So far, some 35 HEIs are already in the process of the Cycle, which are at different stages – most at Self Assessment (by the institution itself) stage, some at Field Visit (by the Peer Review Team) Stage, a few at Decisive Stage (by the UGC Board) and only two at Post Accreditation Stage. Agreed, 35 is not an encouraging number of HEIs involved in the Cycle, but keeping in mind the nature of HEIs running, their seriousness in quality education and the political/administrative/managerial complexities they are entangled with should be taken as an appreciable start.

Moreover, undergoing the Cycle is not a piece of cake, the institution has to strictly adhere with the eight benchmarks and hundred and twenty indicators for the assessment developed by the UGC, and for that it demands dedicated institution family guided by the practical philosophy of good governance, and this is why the completion of the Cycle entirely depends upon the institution itself.

It does not mean that UGC has nominal role in carrying out the Cycle. Rather, UGC plays a paramount role as it applies formative approach in the QAA process, in that, UGC not only guides/orients but also technically supports the institutions in all phases of the Cycle, as and when necessary.

How about charging HEIs scientifically – some lakhs (the actual cost) to undergo the Cycle. Will the institutions be interested for quality auditing then. A big doubt. Reason is simple: Why HEIs will spend much, as they are making good money even without any kind of quality assessment and accreditation? Now, this does not mean that such assessment should always be rendered free, instead it should be charged and for that it is necessary to make the whole QAA process ‘demand driven’, meaning that HEI should itself demand such assessments.

The need of hour is to ingrain about the importance, need and scope of QAA to the institutions. And, the challenge lies to UGC, to make itself a more efficient, credible and recognized agency in national and international higher education QAA arena, and make the QAA system ‘demand driven.’

Indeed, the quality concern with the HEIs in Nepal is pretty low and the challenge is to instill the culture of imparting standard quality education to the institutions, and unless that is impregnated, quality in higher education in Nepal has a long way to go.

source: Upadhyaya, Geetanjali (2012),"Education quality concern:Appreciable start", The Himlayan Times, 8 Feb 2012

Photo courtesy: The Himalayan Times

Upadhyaya is Program Officer, Quality Assurance and Accreditation Division, University Grants Commission.