NAEC QUALITY ASSURANCE IN THE NIGERIAN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

  • Slides: 85
Download presentation
NAEC QUALITY ASSURANCE IN THE NIGERIAN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM: MATTERS ARISING BY Dr P. J.

NAEC QUALITY ASSURANCE IN THE NIGERIAN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM: MATTERS ARISING BY Dr P. J. KPOLOVIE AT THE MAIDEN EDUCATION SUMMIT ORGANIZED BY THE NIGERIAN ARMY EDUCATION CORPS (NAEC) 4 TH – 8 TH OF NOVEMBER, 2013 IN UYO, AKWA IBOM STATE

SEQUENCE NAEC Introduction Quality Assurance/Quality Control Dimensions of Quality in Education Performance of Nigerian

SEQUENCE NAEC Introduction Quality Assurance/Quality Control Dimensions of Quality in Education Performance of Nigerian Universities Tools for QA/QC Usurpation of QA/QC Supremacy of Evaluation in QA/QC Evaluation Models Conclusion

NAEC Introduction Concerns in quality assurance processes in higher education have become increasingly common

NAEC Introduction Concerns in quality assurance processes in higher education have become increasingly common in Europe, the United Kingdom and Australia, and are steadily gaining in importance in Canada and the United States over the past two decades. This is anchored on the general realization that a well-educated workforce is essential for increased productivity and for maintaining a competitive edge in the global economy; which has given rise to increase in public funding for higher education to guarantee greater accessibility. The public funding has demanded ascertainment of total accountability in the form of high quality outputs that are only attainable via Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) mechanism.

NAEC Quality Assurance (QA) & Quality Control (QC) Quality Assurance (QA) refers to a

NAEC Quality Assurance (QA) & Quality Control (QC) Quality Assurance (QA) refers to a processcentred approach for certifying that a company or organization is providing the best possible products or services. It focuses on enhancing and improving the process that is used to create the end result, rather than focusing on the result itself. Quality Control focuses on the end result that is usually ascertained by testing of a sample of items from a batch after production.

NAEC QA & QC Contd. Without QA, there may not be a product or

NAEC QA & QC Contd. Without QA, there may not be a product or service that QC demands. Without QC, the final worth of a product or service that QA has culminated, may not be ascertained. To this end, QA and QC in education, as in some other industries, complement each other; and are thus used interchangeably or as QA/QC in this paper. What is Quality in the framework of QA/QC?

NAEC QUALITY A fair enough attempt at defining quality must acknowledge that quality: Is

NAEC QUALITY A fair enough attempt at defining quality must acknowledge that quality: Is an elusive concept Is a complex concept Is mostly noticed by its absence Is difficult to quantify Can only be ascertained by measuring something else.

NAEC Viewpoints of quality Transcendental: quality deals with its metaphysical aspect User: quality deals

NAEC Viewpoints of quality Transcendental: quality deals with its metaphysical aspect User: quality deals with appropriateness of the product for a given context of use Manufacturing: quality is conformance to requirements Product: quality is evaluated by measuring inherent characteristics of the product Value-based: acknowledges that quality has diverse importance or value to different stakeholders.

NAEC Quality Operationalized For the purpose of this presentation, Quality is defined as the

NAEC Quality Operationalized For the purpose of this presentation, Quality is defined as the inherent characteristics that clearly distinguish the products and services of an organization

NAEC Five Arms of Quality Exceptional: Extraordinarily high standards of academic achievement Perfection: Consistency

NAEC Five Arms of Quality Exceptional: Extraordinarily high standards of academic achievement Perfection: Consistency of processes and their specifications Fitness for purpose: Meeting customer specifications or conformity with the institutional mission Value for money: Return on investment or expenditure and is related to accountability Quality as transformation: A process of qualitative change, adding value to students and empowering them along with faculty members.

NAEC Three Perspectives of Quality Limited supply, often used in institutional rankings such as

NAEC Three Perspectives of Quality Limited supply, often used in institutional rankings such as university carrying capacity; Quality within mission, defined as “fitness for purpose” reflected in research, teaching and learning; Value-added, is quality in results such as the impact on students’ knowledge and personal development and on the faculty members’ scholarly and pedagogical ability and productivity.

NAEC Quality in Higher Education Quality is investment of excellent inputs and production of

NAEC Quality in Higher Education Quality is investment of excellent inputs and production of exceptional outcomes that are assessed in terms of the internal resources of an institution, such as student’s inclination to learning, staff productivity, number of faculties with terminal degrees, number of soft/hard copy volumes in the library, reputation, and magnitude of endowments. Quality is transformational, performance-oriented, outcome-based, and can best be measured in terms of the competencies that students gain from a university education. What determines student’s inclination to learning?

NAEC Student’s Inclination to Learning Self-discipline: is the ability to and the actual commitment

NAEC Student’s Inclination to Learning Self-discipline: is the ability to and the actual commitment to make oneself do what one should do, exactly how and when he should do it, irrespective of whether he feels like doing it or not. Persistence: is the indomitable willpower, unshakable determination, irrepressible commitment, absolute dedication, relentless pursuit, continuous and ever-increasing confidence and resolute action in the direction of one’s goal until it is satisfactorily achieved.

NAEC Student’s Inclination to Learning Contd. “Intelligence: is the general mental ability to learn,

NAEC Student’s Inclination to Learning Contd. “Intelligence: is the general mental ability to learn, solve novel problems, educe relationships, quickly process information accurately, think rationally, act purposefully, originate useful ideas, and adapt most effectively to one’s environments” (Kpolovie, 2005).

NAEC Quality is in the Eye of the Beholder Students are most likely to

NAEC Quality is in the Eye of the Beholder Students are most likely to judge quality as fitness for purpose (i. e. , whether the educational experiences have met their expectations); Faculty members are apt to measure quality in terms of inputs and outputs (such as research dollars and productivity, number of publications, number of courses taught, etc. ) as well as outcomes like improved student’s learning. External stakeholders like the government and the public would judge quality as value for money and achieving more with less. Employers of labour judge quality in terms of whether each university graduate possesses the requisite skills needed by industries.

NAEC DIMENSIONS OF QUALITY Figure 1: The 8 dimensions of product quality by Garvin

NAEC DIMENSIONS OF QUALITY Figure 1: The 8 dimensions of product quality by Garvin

NAEC Garvin’s 8 Dimensions of Quality at Work Performanc e the measurable primary operating

NAEC Garvin’s 8 Dimensions of Quality at Work Performanc e the measurable primary operating characteristics secondary characteristics that enhance appeal to Feature s customers Reliabili the frequency of functional period without failure ty Conforman match with pre-established standards or ce specifications Durabili the life span before a product becomes ty unusable Serviceabili maintenance ease or competence and ty speed of repair appearance of fitness and Aesthetic finishes to the sense organs; s reputation of; clients’ Perceived quality feelings and attitudes to it.

NAEC For a University that has Quality Are the objectives of the institution appropriate

NAEC For a University that has Quality Are the objectives of the institution appropriate ? Are its plans suitable for attaining the objectives ? Are all its actions in conformity with the plans? Are its actions effective in achieving its objectives ? Are the objectives totally actualized timely?

NAEC PERFORMANCE OF NIGERIAN UNIVERSITIES RANKED 43 rd among 52 African countries in Appendix

NAEC PERFORMANCE OF NIGERIAN UNIVERSITIES RANKED 43 rd among 52 African countries in Appendix A. No university in Nigeria qualified to make the top best 3000 universities in the world as objectively ranked by the Academic Ranking of World Universities (Appendix B); QS World University Rankings (Appendix C); Times Higher Education World University Rankings (Appendix D)

NAEC Performance of Nigerian Universities Contd. There is no Nigerian university that its products

NAEC Performance of Nigerian Universities Contd. There is no Nigerian university that its products qualified to fly the most respected Nigerian Flag as we have seen from Appendices B, C and D in the midst of best 3000 universities in the world. The question that is begging for answers here is: Why is it that the Performance Dimension of Quality of Nigerian universities is so poor that none of them was able to fly our National Flag among the topmost best 3000 universities in the world?

NAEC Performance of Nigerian Universities Contd. Virtual lack of QA/QC Poor education funding Absence

NAEC Performance of Nigerian Universities Contd. Virtual lack of QA/QC Poor education funding Absence of Evaluation Models and Designs Lack of employment opportunities Inadequacy of productive lecturers U-L-U-E-S Syndrome Dilapidated learning and living environment Total Disregard for Intelligence Testing Instability of academic calendar Invalid, unreliable and unfair assessment Poor selection of students and staff Social vices Adoption of dead Curriculum

NAEC Engineering Curriculum for 21 Century & Beyond Nuclear Energy Eng Solar Energy Hydro

NAEC Engineering Curriculum for 21 Century & Beyond Nuclear Energy Eng Solar Energy Hydro Energy Thermal Energy Bio Energy Atomic Energy Nuclear Weapons Creation Nuclear Weapons Destruction Information Communication IT Microchips Production IT Software Development Internet Eng Artificial Intelligence Eng Web. Hosting Space Eng Nano Eng Bionic Electron Eng Fibre Optic Eng Fusion Eng Robotic Eng Underwater Eng Atomic Learning Aeronautical Eng

NAEC Aeronautical Engineering �Alaska alone successfully trained 8, 550 of her 663, 661 population

NAEC Aeronautical Engineering �Alaska alone successfully trained 8, 550 of her 663, 661 population to become professional pilots, which is one pilot in every 77 citizens (U. S. Federal Aviation Administration, 2005). What is Nigeria doing in this regard when our universities do not even have such programs? �Alaska airlines Boeing 737 airliner

NAEC Performance of Nigerian Universities Contd. The best university in Nigeria, Obafemi Awolowo University,

NAEC Performance of Nigerian Universities Contd. The best university in Nigeria, Obafemi Awolowo University, as ranked by the most liberal (Webometrics) in 2013, did not qualify to be among the top 1100 best universities (Appendix E). The much revered University of Ibadan is ranked 2109 th position. The American University in Nigeria clinched 6367 th position. Unique Uniport is ranked 7326 th position. The famous University of Uyo is ranked 9471 st position. As much as 101 of the 125 universities in Nigeria did not qualify to even fall within the best 10, 000 universities in the world.

NAEC FEATURES OF NIGERIAN UNIVERSITIES Ø Features play complementary role to the primary functions

NAEC FEATURES OF NIGERIAN UNIVERSITIES Ø Features play complementary role to the primary functions of a product. In the long past, features in Nigerian universities were free food with fruits, free laundry services, well equip laboratories, free hostel accommodation to the undergraduates as well as employment opportunities that were readily awaiting them on graduation. Ø For over two decades now, all these have ended. Ø Students are now subjected to excruciating feeding arrangements like Ø O – Water; O – Without; O – One; Ø Paying of exorbitant accommodation fee to take to village life of disregard for serious academic work; Ø Lack of employment opportunities.

NAEC RELIABILITY OF OUR UNIVERSITY PRODUCTS �Reliability is the consistency with which a product

NAEC RELIABILITY OF OUR UNIVERSITY PRODUCTS �Reliability is the consistency with which a product or service successfully performs its specified functions over the specified period of time under the specified conditions. Reliability measures require a product to be in full use for a specified period of time without malfunctioning. It is the certainty that a product will not fail within a specific time period. �Reliability of Nigerian educational products is highly questionable due largely to frequent strikes: �“A broken product cycle culminates almost always in production of products with broken reliability” (Kpolovie 2012) �Unutilized knowledge and skills learnt EXPIRE due to memory loss, forgetting, information decay, retrieval failure, trace decay.

NAEC CONFORMANCE OF NIGERIAN EDUCATION PRODUCTS �Conformance dimension of product’s quality demands that the

NAEC CONFORMANCE OF NIGERIAN EDUCATION PRODUCTS �Conformance dimension of product’s quality demands that the product should strictly match the pre-established standards. It is the extent to which both the product’s design, process and operating characteristics meet the established standards of the product in line with international best practices. 4, 120, 926 failed WAEC SSCE. The goal of free higher education for all is defeated. Number of Percentage of Year Total candidates 5 C+ME Pass 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total 1, 373, 009 356, 981 25. 99 1, 351, 557 1, 540, 250 337, 071 472, 906 24. 94 30. 70 1, 672, 224 649, 156 38. 82 5, 937, 040 1, 816, 114 30. 11

NAEC UTME for 10 Years (2003 -2012) Failure Rate is 77. 64% Total number

NAEC UTME for 10 Years (2003 -2012) Failure Rate is 77. 64% Total number Percentage Description Candidates who took UTME from 11, 910, 926 2003 -2012 (10 years) 100 Candidates universities 14. 01 admitted into 1, 672, 788 Those admitted into polytechnics 880, 380 and colleges of education 7. 39 Those admitted into NOUN 0. 93 110, 276 Grand Total of candidates 2, 663, 444 admitted into higher education 22. 36 Grand total of candidates denied 9, 247, 482 admission 77. 64

NAEC Kpolovie’s Model for our National Security Problems Denied Minimum Requirements Denied Admission Denied

NAEC Kpolovie’s Model for our National Security Problems Denied Minimum Requirements Denied Admission Denied Gainful Employment Opportunity Irrepressible Deprivation Great Frustration Violent Aggression

NAEC’s QA/QC The Nigerian Army Education Corps’ QA/QC Demands Immediate Establishment of: Remedial schools

NAEC’s QA/QC The Nigerian Army Education Corps’ QA/QC Demands Immediate Establishment of: Remedial schools for refining of SS products without the minimum requirements of 5 C+ME Two-Year Community Colleges to serve as PRIMARY GATEWAY into University Education NAEC’s Universities to absorb qualified SS outputs who are denied admission Industries that will provide employment opportunities for graduates

NAEC’s QA/QC Contd. Colorado has 495 universities and colleges. California state has many federal

NAEC’s QA/QC Contd. Colorado has 495 universities and colleges. California state has many federal universities (+ Naval Postgraduate School; Defense Language Institute; and the Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center); 10 University of California (12. 5% BSSP 234, 000+ students) 23 California State Universities (33. 3% NBSSP 430, 000+sts) 112 California Community Colleges (54% RSSP 3, 264, 000+sts)

NAEC’s Industries for Job Creation NAEC’s Industries for job creation for instance, is very

NAEC’s Industries for Job Creation NAEC’s Industries for job creation for instance, is very feasible as done by Raytheon in Arizona, USA Raytheon Missiles Manufacturing System in Tucson, Southern Arizona alone has 10500 graduates in its employment. Raytheon Company for Manufacturing of other Defense Equipment in Flagstaff, Northern Arizona alone has employed 11500 graduates.

NAEC DURABILITY OF NIGERIAN EDUCATION PRODUCTS Durability is a dimension of product or service

NAEC DURABILITY OF NIGERIAN EDUCATION PRODUCTS Durability is a dimension of product or service quality which demands that the length of a product or service life should be long enough for the customer to enjoy full value of his money paid in exchange for it. It is the amount and worth of use obtained from a product or service before it deteriorates to the point that replacement is preferred over repair or retraining. Durability of the educational products in Nigeria can best be imagined, particularly in a setting that the environment under which they are used is not rewarding, motivating and stimulating enough.

NAEC SERVICEABILITY OF NIGERIAN EDUCATION PRODUCTS The products and process of an educational system

NAEC SERVICEABILITY OF NIGERIAN EDUCATION PRODUCTS The products and process of an educational system that has been in funding crisis for many years are bound to fail often. Poor funding of education in the country has culminated in Shortage of materials Inadequate appropriate human resources Lack of laboratories for research and teaching Brain drain Ill-conceived policies

NAEC Budgetary Allocation to Education üOver the 53 years of the existence of Nigeria,

NAEC Budgetary Allocation to Education üOver the 53 years of the existence of Nigeria, the average Percentage of Total Annual Budgetary Allocation to Education (PTABAE) is self-destructively low as 5. 72. A close look at the PTABAE shows an Allocation Trend that: üIs abysmally retrogressive; üIs intended to destroy all the goodness of education; üNegates the values education holds; üIs malicious to the citizenry; üReflects a deliberate attempt to cripple education; üIs adopted to kill our national development.

NAEC Percentage of Annual Budgetary Allocation to Education Year % 1960 6. 02 1976

NAEC Percentage of Annual Budgetary Allocation to Education Year % 1960 6. 02 1976 8. 71 1992 3. 86 2008 13. 00 1961 6. 15 1977 3. 12 1993 5. 62 2009 6. 54 1962 5. 19 1978 11. 44 1994 7. 13 2010 6. 40 1963 3. 43 1979 3. 70 1995 7. 20 2011 1. 69 1964 3. 65 1980 4. 95 1996 12. 32 2012 10. 00 1965 3. 57 1981 6. 45 1997 17. 59 2013 8. 70 1966 4. 23 1982 8. 09 1998 10. 27 1967 4. 88 1983 4. 04 1999 11. 12 1968 2. 84 1984 4. 49 2000 8. 36 1969 2. 20 1985 3. 79 2001 7. 00 1970 0. 69 1986 2. 69 2002 5. 90 1971 0. 53 1987 1. 93 2003 1. 83 1972 0. 62 1988 2. 40 2004 10. 5 1973 0. 88 1989 3. 55 2005 9. 30 1974 2. 96 1990 2. 83 2006 11. 00 1975 4. 57 1991 1. 09 2007 8. 09

NAEC PTABAE of 20 World Bank Sampled Countries S/No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

NAEC PTABAE of 20 World Bank Sampled Countries S/No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Country % Budget allocation to education Position Ghana Cote d’ Ivore Uganda Morocco South Africa Swaziland Mexico Kenya United Arab Emirate Botswana Iran USA Tunisia Lesotho Burkina Faso Norway Colombia Nicaragua India 31. 0 30. 0 27. 0 26. 4 25. 8 24. 6 24. 3 23. 0 22. 5 19. 0 17. 7 17. 1 17. 0 16. 8 16. 2 15. 6 15. 0 12. 7 1 st 2 nd 3 rd 4 th 5 th 6 th 7 th 8 th 9 th 10 th 11 th 12 th 13 th 14 th 15 th 16 th 17 th 18 th 19 th

NAEC AESTHETICS OF THE NIGERIAN EDUCATION Aesthetics dimension of a product’s quality deals with

NAEC AESTHETICS OF THE NIGERIAN EDUCATION Aesthetics dimension of a product’s quality deals with the extent to which it maximally appeals to the customer’s sense organs of sight, taste, smell, hearing and touch. It serves like the face value of the product that first and foremost attracts customers to it. 1) The first impression that majority of our educational products make is uncontrolled use of Ghetto Language, wrongly styled Pidgin English. Nigerian universities are not far from being GHETTOS as they are often crowded , with very bad living conditions. 2) Fiddling with their handsets uncontrollably

NAEC PERCEIVED QUALITY OF NIGERIAN EDUCATION Perceived quality is the reputation of the product

NAEC PERCEIVED QUALITY OF NIGERIAN EDUCATION Perceived quality is the reputation of the product to attract positive predisposition, attitude and interest of the customers. The reputation, branding, and ranking of a university depend largely on the extent to which every of the institution’s products is of utmost quality.

NAEC Nigeria Spends for Studying Abroad Annually, Nigeria spends over N 1. 5 trillion

NAEC Nigeria Spends for Studying Abroad Annually, Nigeria spends over N 1. 5 trillion on students studying abroad. Ghana gets over N 160 Billion of Nigerian students’ funds (Premium Times, 2013). Nigerian students spend over N 264 Billion annually studying in the United Kingdom (Nigerian Curiosity, 2010). Nigerians spend an average of $500 million annually on European and American universities (CVC, 2013).

Synopsis on Quality In fact, Nigerian higher education lacks serviceability as well as all

Synopsis on Quality In fact, Nigerian higher education lacks serviceability as well as all the other seven Dimensions of Quality. There is virtually No Quality left to Assure and No Quality left to Control in the Nigerian higher education.

NAEC TOOLS FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL AHELO is a Tool for ensuring Higher Education

NAEC TOOLS FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL AHELO is a Tool for ensuring Higher Education QA/QC, developed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to assist: Universities in assessing and improving their teaching Students in making better choices when selecting institutions Policy-makers in ensuring that funds provided are well utilized Employers in ascertaining that the skills graduates possess match employers’ needs.

NAEC OECD is an international organization that is the authoritative source for accurate information

NAEC OECD is an international organization that is the authoritative source for accurate information on the: State of education globally. Structure, finances, and performance of education systems universally. Tackling of security, social, scientific, technological, and governance challenges on globalized economy via QA/QC in higher education.

PDCA CYCLE AS TOOL FOR QA/QC PDCA or Deming Cycle is a critically important

PDCA CYCLE AS TOOL FOR QA/QC PDCA or Deming Cycle is a critically important tool that QA/QC uses to guarantee product quality improvement during and after the production process. Deming Cycle is used to effectively and efficiently analyse all the existing conditions, methods and techniques for production to ascertain excellence in every unit or aspect of the: Inputs Operations Outputs interplay, and To guarantee the customers the very best of products and services.

NAEC PLAN: Design or revise business process components to improve results ACT: Decide on

NAEC PLAN: Design or revise business process components to improve results ACT: Decide on changes needed to improve the process & implement. DO: Implement the plan and measure its performance P D Plan Do A C Act Check CHECK: Assess, take measurements and report the results to decision makers

NAEC AC T CHEC K PLA N D O Wheel within a wheel for

NAEC AC T CHEC K PLA N D O Wheel within a wheel for test-running of units

NAEC PDCA Implementation in School Plan: Initiate ideas to improve the operations first by

NAEC PDCA Implementation in School Plan: Initiate ideas to improve the operations first by finding out what things are going wrong (i. e. , identify the problems faced) in a given school system (pre-primary, junior secondary, senior secondary, non-degree awarding tertiary, first degree awarding tertiary, post-graduate degree awarding tertiary institution), and come up with ideas for solving these problems.

NAEC Do: Execute the changes designed to solve the problems on a small or

NAEC Do: Execute the changes designed to solve the problems on a small or experimental scale first. Confirm that each unit of the experimentation is working maximally in meeting the desired objectives. �Student input (personality disposition), �Instructional materials and methods, �Teachers input (qualification, motivation), �Environment and facilities, �Administration, �Curriculum, �Measurement instruments

NAEC Check: Evaluation of each unit of the production’s input, process and outcome. Also,

NAEC Check: Evaluation of each unit of the production’s input, process and outcome. Also, continuously assess nominated key activities (regardless of any experimentation going on) to ensure that quality of the output is always at its best.

NAEC Act: is the stage where the completed product is compared with the originally

NAEC Act: is the stage where the completed product is compared with the originally predetermined or ideal product in terms of substance, quality and quantity for determination of whether the goals of the school are: totally achieved, exceeded, or not achieved in order to implement large scale changes. Act requires implementation of the resulting action-plan in terms of which aspects or stages of the process that demands alteration, improvement, or outright termination.

NAEC USURPATION OF QUALITY CONTROL FROM HIGHER EDUCATION FOR COMPARABILITY OF STANDARDS Conventionally, the

NAEC USURPATION OF QUALITY CONTROL FROM HIGHER EDUCATION FOR COMPARABILITY OF STANDARDS Conventionally, the university community has been the primary guardian of quality. But it has largely lived below expectations. Its role has therefore been effectively usurped for good by: The government Concerned citizens outside the university system Independent ranking bodies International QA/QC bodies

NAEC Examples of Govt. and other Agencies’ Involvement in QA/QC The Finnish Higher Education

NAEC Examples of Govt. and other Agencies’ Involvement in QA/QC The Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council, which focuses on quality enhancement processes in which universities are assessed against their own criteria for improvement of praxis. The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency that regulates and evaluates performance of higher education-providers against standards set by the government. The Carnegie Classification System that provides a workable framework to describe differences between institutions according to universally acceptable mission.

NAEC Examples Contd. • OECD’s AHELO • The U-Map Project of the European Union.

NAEC Examples Contd. • OECD’s AHELO • The U-Map Project of the European Union. • UK Quality Code for Higher Education • The Degree Qualifications Profile by Lumina Foundations in US. • The Britain and Catalonia Public Scrutiny of Universities Performance. • UNESCO’s Education Quality Assurance Task Force.

Examples Contd. The 4 International Colleges and Universities rankings. Time Higher Education World University

Examples Contd. The 4 International Colleges and Universities rankings. Time Higher Education World University Rankings. QS World University Rankings. The U. S. News and World Reports’ Ranking of World Universities. The Ranking Web of Universities (Webometrics). Academic Ranking of World Universities (Shanghai Ranking).

NAEC Reasons for Government and other Agencies Involvement in QA/QC The quality of higher

NAEC Reasons for Government and other Agencies Involvement in QA/QC The quality of higher education and research are core indicators of national competitiveness as higher education is the only undisputable engine for radical economic advancement Universities function as the magnetic determinant of industrial; commercial; and human capital growth that demand heavy fiscal investment that has distinguished every developed nation. National and global rankings of universities now play critical role in encouraging quality higher education.

NAEC The growth of functional global labour market depends strictly on the graduates’ and

NAEC The growth of functional global labour market depends strictly on the graduates’ and employers’ confidence in the quality and comparability of qualifications. The need for establishment of international accreditation bodies for ensuring optimum quality in higher education is increasing dramatically. Consequently, the Nigerian Army Education Corps (NAEC) has taken up the responsibility of ensuring quality higher education in Nigeria with this all important Education Summit.

NAEC INTERNATIONALIZATION OF NAEC’S HIGHER EDUCATION QA/QC The additional challenge that the NAEC has

NAEC INTERNATIONALIZATION OF NAEC’S HIGHER EDUCATION QA/QC The additional challenge that the NAEC has to urgently meet is, the development of a Universities Ranking Software System that will regularly compare and rank all universities in the world online objectively, reliably, and validly. It is the cybernetic rankings of universities globally by NAEC that shall automatically take the NAEC’s commitment to higher education quality to its zenith.

NAEC SUPREMACY OF EVALUATION IN QA/QC The development and enshrinement of a rich culture

NAEC SUPREMACY OF EVALUATION IN QA/QC The development and enshrinement of a rich culture of program evaluation in our educational system is both a supreme and an indispensable precondition for QA/QC to thrive in our national educational industry. Every standard quality establishment practice in the education subsector, like in other professions, necessarily demands comparison of the actually observed outcomes with the intended outcomes, and the continuous analysis of the sources of dysfunction for best possible correction; both of which are in the realm of evaluation.

NAEC Every well-developed QA/QC demands internal self-evaluation as well as an external evaluation of

NAEC Every well-developed QA/QC demands internal self-evaluation as well as an external evaluation of the educational program. The quality of education in any nation depends on the educational policy of that country. Policy guiding any aspect of education can only be useful if it was well formulated after due evaluation of all possible policies with respect to the aspect. Evaluation is concerned with data-based formulation of a vision and strategy for educational development, and mobilization of support as well as cooperation of all stakeholders for implementing the vision.

NAEC Evaluation is systematic and comprehensive setting of the most utilitarian, sublime and worthwhile

NAEC Evaluation is systematic and comprehensive setting of the most utilitarian, sublime and worthwhile goals and the most efficient ways of combining and applying resources for complete actualization of the goals of a given program in an ever improving manner. It deals with the meticulous passing of value judgments on the basis of standard goals set, actual implementation of entire human and physical resources of a particular program and the results yielded by the program within a given time and circumstances.

NAEC EVALUATION EXAMINES: Desirability of a program’s objectives on the basis of needs analysis;

NAEC EVALUATION EXAMINES: Desirability of a program’s objectives on the basis of needs analysis; Effectiveness and efficacy of unit-by-unit implementation of the combined resources; Results of the entire program during and after due implementation; Best ways of optimizing the products and services of the program;

NAEC What Evaluation examines: Contd. Whether the objectives should be modified and improved upon;

NAEC What Evaluation examines: Contd. Whether the objectives should be modified and improved upon; Whether the facilities or resources and the execution procedure should be altered for additional thoroughness; Whether the program or parts of it should be terminated either for having met all its goals or for its gross inability to achieve the set goals.

Uses of evaluation NAEC Program evaluation is used to: Understand, verify and increase the

Uses of evaluation NAEC Program evaluation is used to: Understand, verify and increase the impact of products or services on customers or clients; and to accurately specify what would be an excellent product or service to all the stakeholders. Improve delivery mechanisms to be more efficient and less costly. Correctly identify program strengths and weaknesses for improvement. Verification that the program is really running or implemented as planned.

Uses of Evaluation Contd. Smoothen management's thinking about the program, its goals, how it

Uses of Evaluation Contd. Smoothen management's thinking about the program, its goals, how it is meeting the goals, and setting of superexcellent goals. Produce data and results for promoting services to the public. Produce valid comparisons between programs to decide which should be retained. Fully examine and describe effective programs for duplication elsewhere.

NAEC EVALUATION MODELS Evaluation model is a simplified description and illustrative representation of the

NAEC EVALUATION MODELS Evaluation model is a simplified description and illustrative representation of the complex structure of worthwhile goals setting and resources application for complete achievement of the goals within the same composite system. Evaluation model is the hypothetical portrayal of the interrelationships that exist in the needs analysis for setting of most desirable goals, best expenditure of financial, human and physical resources in an educational program and the degree to which the needs are actually met.

NAEC SUMMATIVE EVALUATION MODEL Summative evaluation model by Provus (1969) presents evaluation as a

NAEC SUMMATIVE EVALUATION MODEL Summative evaluation model by Provus (1969) presents evaluation as a process or an exercise aimed fundamentally at delineation and determination of the worth of an already existing educational program in order to ascertain aspects that: Deserve continuation as they are Demand modification by radical change or natural change, or both Require instant termination.

NAEC T T. S. S C. 1 D. P. R C 2 D P

NAEC T T. S. S C. 1 D. P. R C 2 D P M. Summative evaluation model M R

NAEC S: Standards, ( the generally acceptable goals and objectives) P: Performance (the totality

NAEC S: Standards, ( the generally acceptable goals and objectives) P: Performance (the totality of combinations of resources in actual implementation of the program and its outcomes. C: Comparison of the standards and the performance. D: Discrepancy between performance and standards as accurately revealed by the comparison. T: Termination of either aspects or entire program due to its irrelevance. M: Modification, alteration and improvement of either aspects or the entire program for its continuity. R: Retain the entire program or part of it as it is. 1, 2, etc. = Recycling of the program in parts or entirely with the elements of modified inputs.

NAEC Summative evaluation model represents a sequence of problem-solving efforts with the aim of

NAEC Summative evaluation model represents a sequence of problem-solving efforts with the aim of determining discrepancies during the definition, installation, process and product stages of the program development as well as identification of corrective alternatives for rectifying the discrepancies by providing data-based answers to the questions of: �Why should the discrepancies exist? �What corrective measures can be adopted? �Which are the most appropriate corrective measures? �How best can the suitable remediation measures be implemented? �Which brand new program should be embarked on where the formally existing program is terminated in its entirety?

NAEC COMPONENTIAL EVALUATION MODEL Componential evaluation model holds that every educational program has three

NAEC COMPONENTIAL EVALUATION MODEL Componential evaluation model holds that every educational program has three basic components (inputs, operations and outputs) on which its evaluation depends. Generally, each ongoing educational program is designed actively to produce specific desirable changes in the behavior of the individuals who are exposed to the program. An educational program could be a particular instructional method, single classroom lesson, a complete course of study, college environment, a specific remedial program, an apprenticeship, a textbook or an entire school system.

NAEC 1 2 5 3 6 7 Inputs-Operations-Outputs evaluation model

NAEC 1 2 5 3 6 7 Inputs-Operations-Outputs evaluation model

NAEC STAKE’S SUMMATIVE EVALUATION MODEL In 1967, Robert Stake posited an educational evaluation model

NAEC STAKE’S SUMMATIVE EVALUATION MODEL In 1967, Robert Stake posited an educational evaluation model that is summative in nature. The model holds that education program evaluation is the formal inquiry for provision of description and judgment through delineation of all associated variables and activities. The model reserves actual decision-making or rendering of judgment as the prerogative of the administrator, chief executive or decision-maker; and restricts the responsibility of the evaluator or researcher to processing judgment.

NAEC In the judgmental procession, evaluation deals with descriptive matrix and a judgmental matrix

NAEC In the judgmental procession, evaluation deals with descriptive matrix and a judgmental matrix that are indispensable in every program evaluation. The descriptive matrix seeks to establish congruence between idealistic intends (i. e. , the desired goals) and the realistic observation (which are those goals that were actually attained with implementation of the program). The judgmental matrix elicits the congruence between absolute criteria and relative criteria. While the absolute criteria is anchored on experts’ judgments about the value and utility of the specific program under investigation, the relative criteria is arrived at via comparison of the various units of the program being investigated with the units of another similar program that is existing very successfully elsewhere. Kpolovie (2010) illustrated the model thus.

NAEC Judgmental Processes evaluation model

NAEC Judgmental Processes evaluation model

NAEC Modified goals and processes for alternative or improved decision making either from descriptive

NAEC Modified goals and processes for alternative or improved decision making either from descriptive matrix via idealistic intents and realistic observation congruence or from judgmental matrix via absolute criteria and relative criteria congruence in this summative model are anchored on three classes of data: antecedents, transactions and outcomes.

NAEC All the human, physical and financial resources as well as every other input

NAEC All the human, physical and financial resources as well as every other input that serves as raw materials for the execution of the educational program are categorized as antecedents. Every activity and all the events that transpired in the actual implementation of the program are considered as the transactions. The outcomes are the end products or results attained due to the combinations of all the antecedents and the transactions.

NAEC ANTECEDENTS TRANSACTIONS OUTCOMES Students’ characteristics Communication flow Students’ achievement Teachers’ characteristics Time allocation

NAEC ANTECEDENTS TRANSACTIONS OUTCOMES Students’ characteristics Communication flow Students’ achievement Teachers’ characteristics Time allocation Students’ attitude Curricula content Sequence of events Effects on teachers Instructional materials Reinforcement schedule Effects on the institution Physical plant Social climate Effects on employers School organization Interaction within school Effects on the society Community context Interaction within community Economic independence of each graduate

NAEC Decision Management Evaluation Model by Alkin In the late 1960 s, Marvin Alkin

NAEC Decision Management Evaluation Model by Alkin In the late 1960 s, Marvin Alkin propounded a decisionmanagement centered evaluation model as an empirical means of providing workable decisions alternatives for the chief executive of a program to use in maximizing the quality, merit and worth of the organizational products and services to all stakeholders. It deals with objective collection, analysis, synthesis and recording of accurate and controlled observations for the practice of improved inputsprocess-outputs decision making and development of generalizations, paradigms, principles or theories that are aimed ultimately at description, explanation, prediction and possible control of necessary variables to bring about achievement of specific educational program goals.

NAEC SA = system assessment PP = program planning PI = program implementation PIv

NAEC SA = system assessment PP = program planning PI = program implementation PIv = program improvement PC = program certification DM = decision management Decision-management (SA-PP-PI-PIv-PC) evaluation model

�System Assessment: Clear identification of goals and sub-goals of the program via needs analysis

�System Assessment: Clear identification of goals and sub-goals of the program via needs analysis that adequately meets the needs of all stakeholders in the program. �Program Planning: This provides information on the possible impact of each of the processes; showing the various ways that all available and required resources (facilities, finance and human capital) can be combined to produce the desired goals of the program in both intrinsic and extrinsic forms �Program Implementation: Provides information on the extent to which the program as being executed is meeting its planned processes as is in the second stage (program planning). �Program Improvement: Is an intervention approach which provides requisite information on the functioning (on-going) program with the aim of improving, modifying and altering the processes adopted in the implementation to yield better attainment of the organizational goals �Program Certification: Adopts accreditation procedure to avail the decision maker with the total merit and worth of the program as planned and implemented

CIPP DECISION MANAGEMENT EVALUATION MODEL BY STUFFLEBEAM CIPP evaluation model is used for delineation,

CIPP DECISION MANAGEMENT EVALUATION MODEL BY STUFFLEBEAM CIPP evaluation model is used for delineation, obtaining and provision of series of beneficial information to guide cyclical decision making and systematic systemic implementation for the highest possible QA/QC in a program. The • • Planning, Structural, Implementation, and Recycling decisions; that are respectively used for: • Context, • Input, • Process, and • Product evaluations of an educational program.

Types of Decisions in CIPP Model Planning Decisions: are intended ends for determination of

Types of Decisions in CIPP Model Planning Decisions: are intended ends for determination of the goals of an educational program. Structural Decisions: intended means that are used to design the entire procedures for the attainment of the specified program objectives. Implementation Decisions: the realistic and careful execution of the program by utilizing, combining and controlling all available resources in the program to ensure better refined procedures for production of best quality products and services. Recycling Decisions: The actual ends, outcomes and outputs of the program by judging and continuously reacting positively to the quantum and quality of achieved goals.

CIPP Evaluation Model

CIPP Evaluation Model

NAEC Types of Evaluation in the CIPP Model �Context Evaluation: Uses two main strategies,

NAEC Types of Evaluation in the CIPP Model �Context Evaluation: Uses two main strategies, needs assessment and conceptual analysis to arrive at definition of relevant environment; description of the requisite setting content; verification of the stakeholders’ needs, unmet needs and unused opportunities, and diagnosis of the root causes of the needs, unmet needs and unused opportunities. �Input Evaluation: Adopted for determination of all resources and the best ways that the resources can be blended or combined to produce the most desirable objectives. �Process Evaluation: Ascertains the accuracy and appropriateness of the program implementation as planned with a view to knowing its effectiveness and efficacy in meeting the goals. �Product Evaluation: Provides decisions about actual ends or outcomes of the program for recycling of the decisions to judge and respond to the magnitude of goal attainment of the entire

NAEC CONCLUSION There is virtually No Quality left to Assure and No Quality left

NAEC CONCLUSION There is virtually No Quality left to Assure and No Quality left to Control in the Nigerian Education as it blatantly Lacks all the Eight Dimensions of Quality and the Two Tools for QA/QC. Indeed, Educational QA/QC emphasizes ensuring the highest possible quality which demands evaluation. Program evaluation should be embraced by all, particularly the government and be accorded highly backed political will as an integral part of modern administrative procedure. Evaluation should regularly be designed, conducted, funded, and directed towards maximization of optimum policy formulation, practice and implementation in the educational sector to ensure Quality for the common good of all stakeholders. Evaluation of any program should be based on a most suitable evaluation model and a most appropriate evaluation research design for maximum utility. ONLY THE NAEC CAN SAVE HIGHER EDUCATION IN NIGERIA.

NAEC THANK YOU P. J. Kpolovie drkpolovie@yahoo. com

NAEC THANK YOU P. J. Kpolovie [email protected] com