TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing the impact of accreditation standardson quality assurance and risk management in higher education institutions
T2 - Faculty members’ perceptions
AU - Aldoseri, Mahfod
AU - Sharadgah, Talha A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - The study examined the perceptions of faculty members at Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University on the impact of accreditation standards on quality assurance (QA) and risk management within Saudi Arabia higher education institutions. 305 participants responded to an e-survey. Interviews were conducted with QA consultants. Findings revealed that faculty members perceive accreditation standards to have a positive impact on QA procedures of: (1) program management regarding handbooks, strategic planning, committees, KPIs, feedback mechanisms, (2) missions and goals relating to stakeholders’ awareness and mission consistency, (3) teaching and learning concerning course portfolios, periodic reviews, quality of teaching, outcomes, and coursework plans, (4) faculty involvement in QA and research output, (5) risk management concerning resources and educational risks, (6) learning resources, facilities, and adequacy of equipment, and (7) students, with more emphasis on learning, admission policies, and involvement in assessment. Significant differences were found for gender, age, teaching experience, and academic rank.
AB - The study examined the perceptions of faculty members at Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University on the impact of accreditation standards on quality assurance (QA) and risk management within Saudi Arabia higher education institutions. 305 participants responded to an e-survey. Interviews were conducted with QA consultants. Findings revealed that faculty members perceive accreditation standards to have a positive impact on QA procedures of: (1) program management regarding handbooks, strategic planning, committees, KPIs, feedback mechanisms, (2) missions and goals relating to stakeholders’ awareness and mission consistency, (3) teaching and learning concerning course portfolios, periodic reviews, quality of teaching, outcomes, and coursework plans, (4) faculty involvement in QA and research output, (5) risk management concerning resources and educational risks, (6) learning resources, facilities, and adequacy of equipment, and (7) students, with more emphasis on learning, admission policies, and involvement in assessment. Significant differences were found for gender, age, teaching experience, and academic rank.
KW - Accreditation Standards
KW - Higher Education Institutions
KW - Quality Assurance
KW - Risk Management
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85112833527&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85112833527
SN - 1544-0036
VL - 24
SP - 1
EP - 17
JO - Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues
JF - Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues
IS - Special Issue 1
ER -