Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Higher Education Review Unit
Institutional Review Report
New York Institute of Technology
Kingdom of Bahrain
Dates Reviewed: 10 – 13 May 2009
Table of Contents
1. The Institutional Review Process ............................................................................................ 1
2. Overview of NYIT-Bahrain ....................................................................................................... 1
3. Mission, Planning and Governance ....................................................................................... 1
4. Academic Standards ................................................................................................................... 5
5. Quality Assurance and Enhancement ................................................................................. 13
6. Quality of Teaching and Learning ........................................................................................ 17
7. Student Support ......................................................................................................................... 19
8. Human Resources ...................................................................................................................... 21
9. Infrastructure, Physical and Other Resources ................................................................... 26
10. Research ........................................................................................................................................ 28
11. Community Engagement ........................................................................................................ 29
12. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 30
© Copyright Quality Assurance Authority for Education and Training Bahrain ,2010
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 1
1. The Institutional Review Process
The review of NYIT-Bahrain (henceforth referred to as NYIT-Bahrain or the University) was
conducted by the Higher Education Review Unit (HERU) of the Quality Assurance Authority
for Education and Training (QAAET) in terms of its mandate to ‘review the quality of the
performance of education and training institutions in light of the guiding indicators developed
by the Authority’ (Royal Decree No 32 of May 2008 amended by the Royal Decree No 6 of 2009).
This report provides an account of the HERU institutional review process and the findings of
the Expert Review Panel based on the Self-Evaluation Report (SER), appendices (AP), and
supporting materials (SM) submitted by the University, the supplementary documentation
requested from the institution, and interviews and observation made during the review site
visit.
2. Overview of NYIT-Bahrain
NYIT was founded in 1955 as a non-profit, non-secular, independent private institution of
higher learning. It has students at campuses in New York (Long Island and Manhattan), online
and sites in a number of countries including the United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Bahrain.
NYIT-Bahrain was licensed by the Higher Education Council (HEC) in Bahrain on 17 May 2003.
The Bahrain campus, which comprised the former American Embassy building in Adliya, was
inaugurated in 2005 and has subsequently expanded with the addition of seven renovated
buildings across the campus.
3. Mission, planning and governance
NYIT-Bahrain is one of the Middle East campuses of New York Institute of Technology (NYIT)
licensed by the Ministry of Education, Higher Education Council Office in 2003. The license
envisages an institution vested with authority to make financial and management decisions.
Such authority enables it to ‘conduct its business with autonomy, independent from the other
business interests of a financial sponsor or owner’. The institution’s own Self-Evaluation Report
reveals that the Bahrain campus does not own such authority. This was confirmed during
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 2
interviews with the senior management at the local (Bahrain), regional (Middle East) and global
level (New York).
There is however a degree of awareness from senior management at the global level (in New
York) that such an arrangement is inadequate to meet the managerial requirement expected
from a licensed institution. At present, the Bahrain campus can best be described as a delivery
site of the Global programmes of NYIT. In order to address this inadequacy, attempts have
been made to establish governance structures such as a local Board of Trustees, and local
officials’ titles have recently been adjusted in an attempt to comply with the requirements of the
Higher Education Council (HEC). The Panel nevertheless heard during the interviews that the
local officials are not vested with the authority to make any academic or management decisions;
for example, the Panel heard from senior management that full-time academic appointments
and student admissions are done in New York.
As part of the global family of NYIT, NYIT-Bahrain is expected to meet the same standards,
follow the same curriculum, meet the same graduation requirements, award the same diplomas,
and be governed by the same policies as those at NYIT-New York. The Panel is of the view that
the present structural and organizational arrangements militate against a scenario in which
NYIT-Bahrain could influence and shape deliberations and decisions taken at the institution’s
central office in New York. Firstly, reporting arrangements as indicated in the organizational
chart give the Campus Dean (local president) little influence or authority to shape the academic
strategic plan as envisaged in the licensing arrangement. In real terms his/her role is at best
supervisory as it relates to Program Coordinators. He/she facilitates and coordinates activities
between Program Coordinators and Deans in New York. At the same time he/she is expected to
play a facilitative role in relation to the Campus Manager whose role is to ensure that logistical
and infrastructural support is available regarding the provision of instruction.
Recommendation 1
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain establish effective
governance structures that would enable it to conduct its business with autonomy in accordance
with the terms of the licence under which it operates.
There are no local structures such as a formalized local senate and faculty boards. This raises
three concerns:
(i) It is a deviation from (if not violation of) the licensing requirements.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 3
(ii) Local senate and faculty committees play an important oversight role in ensuring the
integrity and meaningful contextualisation of the academic project. Their absence is an
ever present risk for the maintenance of academic standards. Any deviation or failure to
comply with the challenge of meeting the same standards of academic provision
envisaged by NYIT-New York cannot be immediately addressed. Committees such as
the Quality Assurance Committee and the Committee on Teaching, Learning and
Assessment have been hurriedly put together to respond to the institutional review.
They were not part of an envisaged and on-going institutional practice.
(iii) The absence of local deliberative structures limits the influence of Program Coordinators
in shaping the content and direction of the academic project. In other words, local staff
members do not have a credible platform to initiate and review programs, to inform and
review practice in teaching, learning and research. In the present circumstances,
Program Coordinators and Campus Deans are reduced to mere ‘transmitters’ whose role
is limited to relaying information to New York.
Recommendation 2
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain establish appropriate
committees such as Senate and Faculty Boards, and ensure that these committees, including the
Quality Assurance Committee and the Committee on Teaching, Learning and Assessment, are
empowered to ensure the integrity and meaningful contextualisation of the academic project.
In addition, the Panel found no evidence of arrangements to enable students to participate in
decision-making through a student association or representation on relevant governance and
management committees. The only structure representing students, namely the Student Life
Organization, is responsible for social functions.
Recommendation 3
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain put in place appropriate
mechanisms for including students in decision-making processes at various organisational levels.
The Panel is satisfied that the present organizational arrangement is at the heart of NYIT-
Bahrain’s failure to meet the expected institutional challenge and its failure to provide quality
higher education. On the one hand, NYIT-Bahrain has an academic model whose authority is
located in NYIT-New York. On the other hand, it has a business model that is driven from a
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 4
different centre via the Middle East Executive Chair. It is quite clear that the imperatives
imposed by the business model are different from those of the academic model.
This model creates an unhealthy tension that becomes self-evident when the Panel explored the
division of responsibilities at a campus level. The Campus Dean, for example, handles the
academic side of the operations and reports to the Global Vice President: Academic Affairs.
Matters relating to administration, infrastructure, recruitment, etc. are however handled
through the NYIT local partner, the Middle East Executive Chair. The different reporting lines
undermine effective coordination and leadership across the institution, especially among senior
management. It also undermines the limited authority of the local president.
Recommendation 4
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology rationalise the reporting lines
between New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain and the head office in New York as well as
the Middle East office to ensure effective coordination and leadership at the Bahrain campus, and
in particular at the senior management level.
NYIT’s vision and mission statements reflect a primary focus on higher education and
maintenance and enhancement of academic standards. The evidence provided to the Panel and
their experience at its Bahrain campus does not encourage the view that the mission is being
delivered.
The lack of authority at NYIT-Bahrain was evident when the Panel perused the document that
was entitled ‘a strategic plan’. The strategic plan is little more than a bundling together of
statements from the NYIT Global Strategy and the Bahrain 2030 vision of Economic
Development. There is no evidence to suggest that an exploration of even the most elementary
thought about strategy was undertaken. Questions of how the institution compares with its
competitors, where it will be in five to ten years, what changes are required to achieve its
strategic objectives, and what changes to the structure and financing will be required are not
articulated in the plan. An analysis of the internal and external drivers would help to provide
insights into the sustainability of the project. Strategic analysis becomes even more critical if one
considers that NYIT faces fierce competition from large and well-established institutions in a
small country like Bahrain. The institution has failed to show how the mission, performance
indicators and annual targets will be achieved. Nothing in the SER gives a sense that enough
thought has been given to a teaching and learning strategy and plan, a research plan, and an
enrolment plan.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 5
Recommendation 5
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain develop a meaningful
strategic plan that shows how the institution’s mission and performance indicators will be
achieved, and that this should encompass a well-thought through teaching and learning plan, an
enrolment plan and a research plan.
NYIT-Bahrain has a register of all policies and procedures. While these are consistent with the
Higher Education Council (HEC) licensing regulations, the Panel found that they were
generated in New York and still need to be contextualized. These policies seem not to be
understood by all staff and do not seem to have been applied consistently. The lopsided relation
between NYIT-Bahrain and NYIT-New York and the absence of appropriate local structures
frustrate the effective application of these policies. Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest
that the local campus has ever participated in processes that lead to consideration and approval
of policies.
Recommendation 6
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain urgently engage the local
campus in an all- inclusive process to contextualise the suite of available policies and procedures.
Efforts should also be made to ensure that these policies are applied consistently across the
institution.
4. Academic standards
All NYIT’s academic programmes are required to meet the registration requirements of the
New York State Education Department (NYSED), as well as those of various professional
accrediting bodies in the case of professional programmes. The NYSED has a comprehensive
approval process for the registration of new programmes which requires information on the
programme structure and credit hours. Programmes offered at NYIT-Bahrain are aligned with
those offered at the main campus, and thus adhere to the registration standards of the NYSED
and the various professional accreditation bodies. The NYIT programmes offered at the Bahrain
campus are also approved by the HEC in Bahrain. The Panel found evidence from the
undergraduate and postgraduate catalogues, and the NYIT-Bahrain brochure for 2008-2009, that
suggests that NYIT’s programmes at its Bahrain campus have an appropriate number of total
credit hours, that information on progression and credit transfer requirements is clearly
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 6
conveyed, and that the programme structures present a coherent body of knowledge in
appropriate academic fields.
The School and Senate Curriculum Committees are the key structural mechanisms for ensuring
consistency in terms of programme design. The Procedures and Rules for the NYIT Senate
Curriculum Committee broadly delineates the role that this committee and its subcommittees
play in the development and approval of core courses and programme learning outcomes. All
proposals for new programmes are required to be submitted in terms of a prescribed format
provided in the New Program Guidelines. Following discussion in the School Curriculum
Committee, programme proposals are reviewed by the Senate Curriculum Committee and
approved by Senate. In terms of formal structures, it appears that NYIT has an effective
programme approval system. The Procedures and Rules for the NYIT Senate Curriculum Committee
do not clearly set out its terms of reference while the Panel was not provided with information
on the status and terms of reference of School Curriculum Committees. In order to explain
clearly its systems for assuring the standards of its academic programmes, NYIT needs to
document formally the terms of reference of its Senate and School Curriculum Committees, and
clearly delineate the relationship between these committees and the Bahrain campus.
During interviews with faculty members, the Panel was informed that the programme chairs at
NYIT-Bahrain are members of their respective School Curriculum Committees, and are
involved in the discussion of the programme structure and credit hours within the faculty
context. However, the Panel was not provided with any evidence, such as the approved
membership of the School Curriculum Committees, to support this statement. Furthermore, the
Procedures and Rules for the NYIT Senate Curriculum Committee do not clearly set out its
membership in a manner that explains how this committee takes the views and
recommendations of the Schools at the Bahrain Campus into account in considering the
standards of the academic programmes that are offered at NYIT-Bahrain.
Recommendation 7
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain ensure that the Procedures
and Rules for its Senate and School Curriculum Committees clearly set out their membership in
order to explain their role in assuring programme standards across all its global campuses,
including the New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain campus. This should include
arrangements for faculty at the New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain campus to participate
meaningfully in the setting of the standards of the academic programmes that are offered at the
Bahrain campus.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 7
The Panel notes with concern that faculty in at least some Schools receive little guidance with
respect to the nature and requirements of the institutionally approved syllabi that they are
appointed to teach at the NYIT-Bahrain campus. Furthermore, there do not appear to be
appropriate measures in place to ensure that faculty adhere to the requirements of the approved
syllabi. As a result, it is not possible to state with confidence that the delivery of academic
programmes at NYIT-Bahrain adheres to the required standards in terms of their structure and
credit hours, and consequently that students at NYIT-Bahrain receive the same degree as those
at the New York main campus.
Recommendation 8
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain implement appropriate
measures to ensure that faculty in all Schools are fully informed of, and understand, the
requirements of the approved syllabi that they are appointed to teach, and implement monitoring
and review systems to ensure that programme delivery adheres to approved standards in terms of
their structure and credit hours.
The Panel notes that during the past few years, the Senate Curriculum Committee has devoted
considerable attention to the development of a ‘core curriculum’ at NYIT. The debate on this
topic has the potential to impact positively on programme standards, by means of the
systematic integration of the key graduate competencies that students should attain into the
design of all NYIT’s academic programmes, including those offered at the NYIT-Bahrain
campus.
NYIT-Bahrain’s admission criteria are published in the Student Undergraduate and Postgraduate
Catalogues, which are available on the NYIT-Bahrain website, and which contain explicit
admission requirements. The marketing brochure for the NYIT-Bahrain campus also provides
clear information on admission requirements for both undergraduate and graduate students.
These admission requirements refer to various standards of achievement in the final high school
examinations (GPA, Tawjihi, IGSCE) for undergraduate students and in undergraduate studies
(GPA, proof of degree) for postgraduate students, as well as official TOEFL results. With regard
to undergraduate study, the specified admission standards are relatively low. The Panel
suggests that the University should consider the appropriateness of these standards in relation
to the academic demands of their study programmes. The admission requirements for
postgraduate study, and for language proficiency at both the undergraduate and postgraduate
level, are appropriate.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 8
Recommendation 9
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain consider the appropriateness
of the standards that it sets for admission to undergraduate studies in terms of achievement in the
final high school examinations (GPA, Tawjihi, IGSCE) in order to ensure that students are able
to address the academic requirements of their study programmes.
In order to ensure the consistent application of admissions criteria, the Panel was informed that
the Admissions/Enrolment Office at the NYIT-Bahrain campus screens all applications in terms
of the prescribed admission criteria, and then sends all applications to the Admissions Office at
the NYIT main campus where final admissions decisions are made. Technically, therefore, the
Admissions Office at NYIT-Bahrain functions as a recruitment office. Effective measures appear
to be in place to validate the accuracy of student academic records. While conditional
acceptance may be granted where a student does not fully meet matriculation requirements, it
was stated during the interviews that very few students are admitted on probation, and then
only for one semester. The Panel was provided with lists of students who are admitted on
probation to confirm this statement.
All undergraduate students who do not meet the necessary English language requirements in
terms of their TOEFL scores, are required to take the ‘Accuplacer test’ (on-line) to be placed in
the appropriate ELI level (ELI 1-4). The Panel was provided with statistics on the placement of
students in the ELI programme for the 2006/7 – 2008/9 triennium which indicate that a relatively
large number of NYIT-Bahrain students take part in this programme. Between 40-50% of these
students participate in the level 4 programme, which suggests that they have good prospects for
developing the required level of English language proficiency for meeting the demands of
higher education study.
The Panel is, however, not convinced that the admission criteria are applied in a consistent
manner at the Bahrain campus. It is not clear that students who are admitted on probation are
refused permission to continue with their studies if they do not achieve matriculation status
within the prescribed time-frame, nor is it clear that the ELI programme is managed in a
manner that ensures that students actually demonstrate the required English language
competence. Some of the students who were interviewed stated that admission criteria at both
the undergraduate and postgraduate levels are not stringently enforced, while some students
also confirmed that they were provided with almost immediate admission decisions, which
suggests that the decision is made at the local campus level rather than in the Central
Admissions Office. It is not clear to the Panel that admission criteria, including requirements for
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 9
English language proficiency, are applied in a consistent manner, or that the institution’s own
protocols for ensuring the integrity of the admissions process are consistently observed.
Recommendation 10
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain implement effective
measures to ensure that its protocols and requirements for admission, including those relating to
probation for non-matriculated students and English language proficiency for students who do
not achieve the required TOEFL scores, are stringently enforced at its Bahrain campus.
The Panel heard in interviews with various staff members that the Admissions/Enrolment
Office at NYIT-Bahrain reports to the Campus Manager/ Registrar for the Middle East, who in
turn reports to the Executive Chairman for the Middle East. This arrangement contradicts the
information that was provided in the NYIT-Bahrain organization chart according to which the
Director of Admissions reports to the Associate Campus Dean and through this office to the
Campus Dean. The integrity of the admissions process requires oversight at the level of
academic management, so that in terms of governance structures the Office of the Campus
Dean should serve as the integrative point that ensures the consistent application of NYIT
admissions protocols.
Recommendation 11
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain reconsider the de facto
reporting line of the Director of Admissions to the Campus Manager/Registrar for the Middle
East, in order to ensure the integrity of the admissions process.
All the academic programmes that NYIT offers at its Bahrain campus are standard institutional
programmes that are offered across all NYIT’s global campuses. The Undergraduate Catalogue
indicates that NYIT provides its students with a clear understanding of the relationship
between the programmes offered at the Bahrain Campus and its main campus in New York.
NYIT policy states that programme specific goals and objectives must be clearly stated and that
there must be an accompanying matrix that demonstrates where the objectives are distributed
among the courses of the various programmes. The site-visit established that, within the
University as a whole, the process of redesigning academic programmes around the
achievement of both core and programme-specific learning outcomes, with appropriate
underlying course outcomes, is a relatively new initiative that has been underway over the past
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 10
two to three years. The process is being driven through the Global Assessment Committee, and it is
the responsibility of each School to ensure the integration of programmatic and course-level
learning outcomes into its programmes and courses.
As stated in the self-evaluation report, the supplementary material provides examples of well-
formulated programme and course level learning outcomes. However, with respect to the
Bahrain campus, there is sufficient evidence to indicate that such well-designed learning
outcome statements are the exception rather than the norm. Firstly, the Panel learned from
interviews with various categories of staff that the process of developing learning outcomes at
the Bahrain campus is only in an initial phase, with the workshop conducted by the Dean for
Global Operations, Assessment and Accreditation in April 2009 serving as a significant catalyst
in this regard. Various Schools at the Bahrain campus are currently embarking on faculty-
driven initiatives in relation to the development of learning outcomes.
Secondly, based on a sample of the course files provided to the Panel, current practice with
respect to the formulation of course learning outcomes varies widely. There are cases where
outcomes are explicit, and seem to support the programme outcomes – though this connection
is not clarified in the course outlines or syllabi. However, there are other cases where the
outcomes lack or have no specificity, and provide little or no guidance to the students, and
many more in which no learning outcomes have been formulated. Clearly the requirements for
course syllabi as set down by NYIT in the Staff Handbook are not consistently followed. Thirdly,
while the Senate Assessment Committee has the mandate to ensure that all NYIT programmes
have appropriately formulated learning outcomes, the Teaching, Learning and Assessment
Committee at the NYIT-Bahrain campus has only just been constituted and has no defined role
in ensuring consistency of practice with respect to the formulation of programme- and course-
level learning outcomes.
Recommendation 12
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain set in motion a systematic
process that would ensure that all programmes and courses offered at the New York Institute of
Technology-Bahrain campus have appropriate and explicitly formulated learning outcomes.
Recommendation 13
HERU recommends that the terms of reference of the Teaching, Learning and Assessment
Committee clearly describe its relationship to the Senate Assessment Committee and its role in
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 11
overseeing the process of learning outcome formulation at the New York Institute of Technology-
Bahrain campus.
At an institutional level, NYIT-Bahrain seems to be taking appropriate steps to review and
improve the effectiveness of its assessment processes. As described in the Institutional
Assessment Plan, NYIT has established a systematic and comprehensive process across all its
programmes to review the extent to which learning outcomes are appropriate, assessment
methods are effective, and assessment results present an accurate reflection of the achievement
of learning outcomes. In terms of the annual ‘Faculty Assessment Cycle’, all faculties submit
assessment plans relating to the achievement of learning outcomes to the Senate Assessment
Committee, conduct an analysis of assessment results, and develop an improvement plan. The
Senate Assessment Committee thereafter prepares an annual report on the status of student
learning outcomes for consideration by Senate. The Review Report can only comment on this
process on a conceptual level as the Panel was not provided with any examples of the manner
in which it is being implemented. Nevertheless, this recent initiative has significant potential to
introduce systematic reflection on effective approaches to teaching, learning and assessment
that are appropriate to programme and course level learning outcomes.
In addition, the Panel was able to access some examples of completed Online Faculty
Assessment Reports (OFAR) that demonstrate the manner in which faculty at NYIT-Bahrain
reflect on the appropriateness of their chosen assessment methods and the extent to which
students have achieved the learning outcomes. The Panel notes that, according to the self-
evaluation report, the Department of Computer Science has formed an examination committee
to review and monitor the assessment process in the department. Despite these positive
developments in the area of assessment, NYIT-Bahrain has not yet developed a formally
approved assessment policy that documents the institution’s procedures with respect to the
assessment of student learning outcomes at the programme and course level.
Recommendation 14
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain develop for itself an
assessment policy that outlines its approach to the assessment of student learning outcomes, and
ensure a consistent application of this policy across its programmes.
The Panel could find no evidence that NYIT’s protocols for assuring the integrity of the
assessment process are being applied at its Bahrain campus. It was not clear that faculty were
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 12
required to fill out the OFAR. There is also no evidence that faculty members have begun to
participate in the Faculty Assessment Cycle as described in the Institutional Assessment Plan. In
addition, the members of the Teaching, Leaning and Assessment Committee at NYIT-Bahrain
have been provided with no information on how their role relates to that of the Senate
Assessment Committee, and what their role in overseeing the implementation of NYIT
assessment protocols at NYIT-Bahrain may be.
Recommendation 15
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain take immediate steps to
ensure that the assessment protocols that have been established at New York Institute of
Technology are implemented at the campus. This includes i) participation by all Schools at the
campus in the annual Faculty Assessment Cycle; and ii) ensuring that all faculty members
regularly complete the Online Faculty Assessment Reports.
Furthermore, the Panel is concerned that various practices at the Bahrain campus pose a serious
threat to the integrity of the assessment process. Firstly, the Panel understands that, at least in
some Schools, there is an over-dependence on multiple choice questions which, while a
legitimate assessment method, is not appropriate for assessing the achievement of certain
learning outcomes. Secondly, the Panel was informed by both faculty members and students
that grade inflation occurs on a wide-scale.
Recommendation 16
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain take urgent action to
address the integrity of its assessment processes by addressing the problem of grade inflation.
Student data, such as registration details, enrolments (overall and per programme), student
degree maps, academic performance, and students placed on probation, is captured on the
student information system. This information is captured and supplied by the Registrar’s Office
at the NYIT main campus in New York, so that local ICT staff plays no role in this process.
During the site visit, the Panel was provided with a demonstration of how student data can be
accessed on the ‘NYIT-Connect’ portal. The Panel is satisfied that the portal provides reliable
access to student data, and that the nature of the data captured on the student information
system is adequate to monitor students’ academic profile.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 13
However, on the basis of the interviews conducted during the site visit, the Panel is of the
impression that the use of such student data to monitor and improve student performance, and
to implement strategies to support at-risk students, is largely left to the initiative of programme
chairs and individual faculty members. While some information on aggregated student data,
such as retention statistics per programme and average GPA scores per programme, were made
available in the evidence, there does not appear to be a systematic process of supplying regular
standard reports on student performance to academic Schools. The absence of an effective
framework for the regular provision of management information impedes the extent to which
reliable data is used for institutional planning at NYIT-Bahrain. Furthermore, meaningful
information, which could be used in identifying and providing support for at-risk students, for
tracking success rates across Schools and programmes, and for advising individual students, is
not readily available. Thus, while some form of evaluation using data takes place, the absence of
a reliable management information system for the purpose of the consistent monitoring of
performance across the faculties is an area of concern.
Recommendation 17
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain develop an effective
management information system in order to support institutional planning, the monitoring,
review and improvement of student performance, and the provision of effective student support,
including the student advising system.
While effective security measures appear to be in place to ensure the safety of student data, the
institution should consider whether the current arrangements for sending the hard copy
versions of student records to the New York campus for electronic capturing constitute a threat
for maintaining the integrity of student records.
5. Quality assurance and enhancement
In its Self-Evaluation Report, NYIT-Bahrain identified the following elements of its quality
assurance framework:
• Award of BS EN ISO 9001:2000.
• Quality Manual and Quality Procedures (available May 2009).
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 14
While ISO 9001 may be an effective and appropriate tool for developing a general platform for
quality management, it is less obvious that it is sufficient and/or appropriate as an instrument
for quality assurance and enhancement of learning and teaching. The Panel considers that ISO
9001 cannot serve as a substitute for the quality assurance processes that are required to
safeguard the quality of students’ learning experiences.
The SER states that ‘the requirements to document, implement and maintain a QMS and
continually improve its effectiveness are contained in the Quality Manual’. The Panel was,
however, neither shown a Quality Manual nor any Quality Procedures, and therefore cannot
judge whether the processes and procedures which the manual contains would provide
effective quality management of learning and teaching. It was also not obvious that faculty
members knew of such a manual, and they did not refer to it. A copy of the NYIT Global
Academic Programs: Policies and Procedures Manual 2008-9 was made available, but this did
not make any special reference to programmes delivered in Bahrain. And while it included
sections on grading, it did not constitute a comprehensive description of procedures which
could be used to monitor and enhance quality.
NYIT (including the Bahrain campus) is accredited by the Commission on Higher Education of
the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools (CHEMSA) , and as stated in the SER, the
Commission’s one-day site visit during 2008 found that ‘…all aspects of the campus and its
programs are consistent with the Commission’s standards as described in Characteristics of
Excellence.’ The standards used by CHEMSA are similar to those used by HERU in its reviews,
although there is no standard relating to quality assurance and enhancement per se.
Nevertheless, the evidence used in the NYIT submission for accreditation could have provided
assurance to the Panel that the institution has policies and procedures in place to assure quality
and standards. No such evidence was made available to the Panel. The detailed accreditation
self-study available on the NYIT website includes a section on Global Campuses. This
document is, on the whole, descriptive but it does enumerate several key recommendations.
One of these, for global campuses, is to ‘Develop and implement a formal quality assurance
plan’. As far as teaching and learning at the Bahrain campus is concerned, the Panel could see
little evidence that this has been implemented.
A two page report by CHEMSA on the NYIT-Bahrain campus gave little further evidence for
the Commission’s findings but did point out certain challenges facing the campus, such as the
increasing faculty workload, desire for more administrative support and support for research,
more academic support for students, opportunities for faculty communication and exchange
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 15
between NYIT’s global campuses and better communication across the Bahrain campus. The
Panel heard that these observations were being followed up by the Office of the Provost.
The Panel explored the understanding of quality with senior members of the University and the
mechanisms they saw as key in assuring academic standards and the quality of the student
experience. Faculty and staff pointed out a number of indicators of quality and to other factors
contributing to quality assurance.
The Panel found that the indicators do not form an articulated set of policies or procedures, but
simply reflect what individual staff and faculty felt were important indicators of quality. In
pursuing some of the above indicators further, the Panel found, for example, that faculty reviews
were carried out for the first time in 2007. Although feedback was given to faculty, it was not
apparent to the Panel whether the information was used, either in Bahrain or New York, for
quality management and enhancement purposes.
Student evaluations were also obtained from NYIT-Bahrain campus students and sent to the
New York campus for analysis. The Panel heard that these evaluations were not analysed in
such a way that made comparisons across Schools or programmes possible, so again this source
of information was not used locally to assure or enhance quality.
The Panel came to the conclusion that many of the mechanisms identified above are used
sporadically, and only in certain Schools. The mechanisms do not appear to stem from any
overall common understanding of quality assurance and are not based on a strategic approach
to quality assurance; neither are they implemented in any consistent manner across the campus.
This is surprising since the NYIT Institutional Assessment Plan (which was revised in January
2009) indicates that the institution has a comprehensive strategy for quality assurance. This is
an example of how mechanisms in operation at the New York campus do not seem to have
visibility in Bahrain.
Recommendation 18
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain engage in a process of debate
across the campus, with all stakeholders, through which a common understanding of quality can
be developed.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 16
In addition the Panel was concerned that certain mechanisms that might be expected in an
effective quality assurance framework were not mentioned by faculty and did not appear to
operate at all in NYIT-Bahrain, chief amongst these are periodic review and annual monitoring
of programmes. The Panel heard during interviews with a range of staff that there have been no
regular reviews of programmes at the Bahrain campus, except for professional body
accreditation purposes.
It was evident to the Panel that there are no deliberative structures at the Bahrain campus which
deal with matters relating to quality assurance. The Panel heard that the Provost, in
consultation with relevant colleagues, is responsible for key quality assurance instruments such
as faculty evaluations and student evaluations. The Panel heard that a Quality Assurance
Committee (QAC), Teaching and Learning Centre and Assessment Committee have recently
been established, but the latter has not so far met.
The Quality Assurance Committee was established to help the Bahrain campus prepare for the
HERU review. The Panel considers that the setting up of these two committees is a positive
development. However, it also considers that the committees will achieve very little if they are
not placed within a transparent and clearly-articulated structure for decision-making.
Recommendation 19
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain develop a framework of
appropriate policies and procedures that would ensure the quality of teaching and learning at the
University, and set up structured mechanisms for their implementation and monitoring at the
Bahrain campus.
Recommendation 20
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain set out the terms of reference
of the Quality Assurance Committee and other related committees, such as the Teaching,
Learning and Assessment Committee, and ensure that such committees are properly constituted,
empowered to function effectively and fit within a clearly articulated quality assurance
framework .
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 17
Recommendation 21
HERU recommends that the New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain should pay due attention
to allowing for participation by the student body, so that the student voice can be clearly heard
within the institution.
6. Quality of teaching and learning
The SER notes that NYIT-Bahrain uses the following vehicles for assuring sound academic
standards:
• Program Portfolio Review
• Curriculum development procedures
• Review and approval by the Bahraini Ministry of Education.
In exploring these procedures, the Panel found that the Program Portfolio Review process was a
once-off exercise that was conducted in September 2006 with the objective to ‘eliminate certain
programmes with falling enrolment’. As such, it does not constitute an ongoing review across
continuing programs.
The Panel heard a clear description of the curriculum development procedures from various
faculty and staff but was not able to see any documentation which supported this process. The
process enables Faculty and Programme Coordinators at Bahrain to ‘propose course or program
modifications and transmit their recommendations to the appropriate Program Coordinator in
New York. However, the final decision on programme approval is taken by the New York
campus. There is no obvious element of externality, such as the use of suitably qualified
academic peers in the programme approval process, except in the case of professional body
accreditation for certain programmes, which will give some guarantee of national (Bahraini)
standards.
Recommendation 22
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain introduce appropriate
procedures to ensure that all of its programmes meet Bahraini standards. In particular, New
York Institute of Technology-Bahrain should put in place periodic review mechanisms that would
involve the local faculty and other external stakeholders in Bahrain to ensure they satisfy Bahrain
labour market requirements.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 18
NYIT-Bahrain has no specific teaching or learning plan. However, its mission includes aims
related to teaching and learning, and in particular ‘to provide career oriented professional
education’. The University states that it is also committed to ‘integrating technology into all
teaching and learning and to develop and disseminate information about technology-based
education’. Although the challenges faced by the campus are clearly set out in the section of the
University’s strategic plan, and suggestions for action to address them are given, it was not
clear to the Panel what structures are in place in Bahrain for ensuring that the appropriate
actions are implemented and monitored. For example, the Panel heard that the Learning Centre
and Career Centre have not yet been set up at the Bahrain campus, and that implementation of
these developments would depend on ‘advocacy or championing by individual faculty
members’.
The SER noted the work of the Centre for Teaching and Learning (CTL) in supporting faculty to
improve their teaching skills. However, it became apparent to the Panel that most of the CTL’s
activities are provided at the NYIT-New York campus, and the activities provided on-line were
limited. Besides, a considerable number of staff was unaware of the existence of the CTL.
While the University considers that Global Campuses would have the benefit of on-line
resources such as ‘Blackboard’ and ‘Turnitin’, the staff whom the Panel interviewed indicated
that uptake of these resources was variable. One school had held training sessions for the use of
the ‘Blackboard’ and was intending to make it compulsory for lecturers to use it in the next
semester.
Recommendation 23
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain make effective use of the
Centre for Teaching and Learning to train all faculty members on the use its on-line learning
resources.
The Panel saw and heard examples of a variety of learning methods in use, ranging from formal
lectures and classes to workshops and case-study sessions. The faculty whom the Panel met
were enthusiastic about their programmes and about their students’ work. It was obvious that
in parts of the NYIT-Bahrain campus students were encouraged to develop an independent
approach to their learning.
In terms of student satisfaction, the Panel heard that student evaluations are systematically
carried out and used (though variably) for ‘instructor personal development’. Results of
student evaluations are, however, not used at a local level to assure or enhance quality.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 19
Students who met the Panel indicated that they do not feel that their voice was heard, or that
issues they raised in these evaluations are given any attention. ‘Lacklustre’ student satisfaction
was identified by the University as long ago as May 2006 in the NYIT Vision 2030, yet progress
to improve this appears to be almost non-existent at the Bahrain campus. The Panel learned
during interviews with both staff and students that neither the staff nor the students at the
Bahrain campus are aware of the various survey instruments that are listed on page 29 of the
Self-Evaluation report.
Recommendation 24
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain ensure that course
evaluation questionnaires and other student satisfaction surveys are considered at a central level
of the local campus with a view to enhancing quality and improving student satisfaction.
7. Student support
The Panel found that academic staff show concern for their students and students appear to
have a good level of interaction with them. The Panel was shown a small number of course
surveys for courses for bachelor degree students. The results of this small sample showed the
overall satisfaction level of NYIT-Bahrain students to be higher than average. The Panel could
not verify if this is consistent with all other surveys as data were not provided by the
University.
In respect of academic advising at NYIT-Bahrain, the Panel heard that the role of advisors is
limited to the registration period where faculty are required to sign the registration form for the
students. The Panel heard during interviews with students that this has resulted in many cases
where students were left to rely on each other without timely academic advice on pre-requisite
requirements and optimum course pathways. This is seen by the Panel as a serious weakness in
the information and advice provided to the students by the University. The Panel heard that
proposals for the re-organisation of the registration/advising system had been presented at the
campus level, but that these had not ultimately been approved. The Panel strongly advises the
University to activate its academic advising practice in a more practical and effective way.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 20
Recommendation 25
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain implement appropriate
academic advising mechanisms to ensure that students receive advice on matters such as pre-
requisite requirements and optimal course pathways.
Whilst NYIT has stated that the average “Tawjihi” score for its admitted students in
undergraduate programmes is as low as 70% and its minimum requirements for entry into
Master Programmes is an average of “C” in the bachelor degrees, the University has not
developed a mechanism to monitor and identify students who are at-risk of failure. Moreover,
even if an ‘at-risk’ student is identified, NYIT-Bahrain has not provided support mechanisms
for such students. The Panel encourages the University to develop and implement policies and
procedures to identify and support academically weak students.
The SER states that NYIT has an Office for Career Services. The Panel, however, learned that
this Office is not visible at the Bahrain campus, nor are students aware of the services it
provides. The Panel noted that NYIT-Bahrain does not provide many of the typical student
support services that are expected from an institution of higher learning, such as counselling,
career planning, health services, and internship placement at the Bahrain campus. Neither were
students whom the Panel met aware of any formal complaints or academic appeals procedures.
Recommendation 26
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain provide the necessary
student support services, including professional counselling services, to students to contribute to
their academic and well-being and prepare them for life-long success.
While there is a Student Life Organisation (SLO), this is primarily a group which organises
social and charitable events. There is no student representation on the Council. The Panel
encourages NYIT-Bahrain to appoint a student representative to serve on this body. The
institution should also consider strengthening student participation on key committees within
the University. This would ensure that the needs of students are taken into account in formal
decision-making processes.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 21
Recommendation 27
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain provide for student
participation on the governing body as well as other appropriate committees within the
institution.
8. Human resources
The Panel faced many challenges in identifying the exact number of full-time faculty currently
working at NYIT-Bahrain. The University provided confusing and conflicting information. This
is symptomatic of inefficiency of the NYIT-Bahrain management information system.
Recommendation 28
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain maintain accurate records of
its teaching faculty and update them on a semester basis. The institution should, furthermore,
make use of appropriate indicators such as student-staff ratios to determine the sufficiency of the
academic staff to ensure the quality of teaching and learning.
It is the Panel’s view that the numbers given by the local Deans and most closely confirmed by
the list of faculty with their teaching loads is the most reliable one, namely 26. If faculty with a
full-teaching load is only counted this puts into question the numbers reported to the HEC for
compliance purposes. The Panel noted with great concern that, by their own admission, NYIT-
Bahrain falls short of fulfilling the HEC requirements with regard to the provision of faculty in
the various programmes, but was encouraged to learn that efforts are being made to meet this
important requirement.
As stated in the SER, there are four different types of faculty with the 4 categories operating side
by side and fulfilling different contractual obligations. Other than the usual Part-time/Fulltime
split which is found in most universities, NYIT distinguishes itself through local vs. New York
contracts for faculty, and two types of full-time New York faculty, namely: ‘visitors’ and
‘Bahrain permanent’. The Panel found that the contractual conditions including teaching loads
are more favourable for New York faculty than the local faculty, which means that teaching
loads generally exceed 10 courses for the latter. Moreover, permanent Bahrain faculty are
attached to the Bahrain campus and not included in the NYIT faculty handbook.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 22
Recommendation 29
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain create one category of
faculty and ensure that all faculty members are subjected to the same working conditions.
The Associate Chairs (or Local Deans) of the four schools in Bahrain evaluate their faculty at the
end of the year upon submission of their annual report. However, only ‘class visitations’ are
included as the evaluation component for teaching, with no input from the student evaluations.
In several meetings with faculty, the Panel was told that there was no systematic feedback from
the student evaluations. Students also confirmed that they received no feedback on action that
was taken in response to their evaluations.
Recommendation 30
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain put in place a transparent
faculty evaluation system with clear performance indicators and criteria for contract renewal and
other rewards. Retention decisions, both positive and negative, should be duly justified and based
on facts drawn from the faculty files.
Faculty recruitment is initiated locally with advertising positions in the region. Pre-selection
and interview of candidates is done in New York through a videoconference link and final
decisions are made in New York. The Bahrain campus does not have a search committee per se,
and involvement of local faculty in the recruitment process is very limited. Moreover faculty
recruitment happens late in the academic year.
Faculty resumés, both for full-time and part-time, were provided during the site visit and
overall they showed that NYIT-Bahrain’s faculty are appropriately qualified in their respective
disciplines. In the School of Management where the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools
of Business (AACSB) accreditation is a strategic objective, faculty are also required to be
qualified professionally. This was verified in the faculty annual reports wherein some faculty
members were reminded of the necessity of obtaining professional qualifications to keep their
contracts. The Panel nevertheless heard about instances of ‘low quality teaching’ by some of the
faculty members. Both students and staff characterised some of the faculty members as ‘easy
graders’, more particularly among the part-time faculty.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 23
Recommendation 31
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain put in place mechanisms to
ensure an acceptable quality of teaching delivery by all categories of faculty, with a particular
focus on the part-time faculty who teach on a recurrent basis.
Faculty in Bahrain do not participate in the NYIT Senate because the faculty in New York are
unionized, and this is a requirement for membership of the Senate. The Panel heard from
interviews with the senior management that there is a move to register the Bahrain faculty with
the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), which is expected to pave the way
for their participation in the Senate. The Panel encourages the institution to give this matter
urgent attention.
NYIT-Bahrain has no clear teaching load policy, but the Panel learned during interviews with
staff that the New York Full-time faculty carry a load of 10 courses whereas Bahrain full-time
faculty carry a load of 12 courses. Regarding teaching conditions for faculty, faculty reported
class sizes ranging from 35 to 40, and even more in the School of Management.
Part-time faculty appeared to be the most dissatisfied as there seems to be no commitment to
them from the institution. They had no offices, were not set up on NYIT Blackboard, and did
not have the level of access to University resources that they require to carry out their academic
work in a way that provides students with a quality learning experience. Moreover they are
always unsure whether their contracts would be renewed. The Panel also heard that there are
no formal orientation programmes for this category of NYIT-Bahrain faculty.
Recommendation 32
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain introduce a formal
orientation programme for all staff members as part of its staff development programme.
The Panel had the impression of an overloaded and demoralised faculty that enjoyed little
recognition for performing their teaching duties. The Panel heard with great concern of
interference with grades from the registration department, and cases of student unruliness not
appropriately dealt with by the University, both of which could compromise negatively on
academic standards. Though these instances were not individually investigated by the Panel,
such matters were reported by several people and frequently and consistently enough to raise
concerns in the Panel. However the University showed little evidence that these matters have
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 24
been officially investigated and dealt with. The Panel recommends that the University
investigate these matters with a view to identifying the potential risks that they represent and
develop a strategy for dealing with such matters appropriately.
Recommendation 33
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain urgently investigate
potential risks from practices undermining the integrity of the academic process and develop a
strategy to put an end to such practices.
NYIT-Bahrain faculty are afforded limited opportunities to avail themselves of professional
development grants. The Panel heard that some faculty have benefitted from partial funding
for conference attendance provided they have a paper accepted for presentation. However,
these are limited to ‘nearby and moderately priced destinations’.
A new professional development fund is being made available for activities that would be
undertaken during the summer for which a global amount of US$ 20,000 has been earmarked.
While this amount seems to be very limited for a global venture like NYIT with a large faculty
body, this could constitute the beginning of a positive initiative.
Affirmation 1
HERU affirms the initiative of New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain to make funds
available for the professional development of its faculty, and encourage the University to increase
the funding level for this initiative.
The biggest stumbling block to faculty development at NYIT-Bahrain is the excessive teaching
load of faculty. While it can be understood that the core activity of the University is teaching, a
system of release time for research purposes needs to be put in place to support the
development of scholarship.
The institution seems to encourage faculty to move through its global campus network as it
relies on faculty visits from one campus to the other to provide both students and faculty with a
positive experience.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 25
The Centre of Teaching and Learning (CTL) is supposed to provide faculty with the means to
develop themselves not only pedagogically but also by developing a scholarship of teaching
and learning. Despite the claims in the SER that some faculty in NYIT-Bahrain have benefitted
from the services of the CTL, not a single faculty member (among a sample of more than 20
faculty members) seemed to be cognizant of the existence of this centre. A recent visit by the
Dean of Operations, Assessment and Accreditation from New York tried to engage faculty into
a path of quality teaching. She visited faculty during class sessions and held a workshop to
discuss issues related to implementing Quality Assurance in the teaching process. However
this does not seem to be part of a sustainable strategy to develop faculty at NYIT-Bahrain.
Recommendation 34
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain provide more practical
mechanisms for staff to develop themselves as teachers and scholars of teaching and learning.
Other than remote access to the resources of the CTL in New York, a local teaching and learning
centre needs to be created to further this objective.
The grievance procedure outlined in the faculty handbook merely amounts to lodging a
complaint with no assurance of due process or due diligence. It specifies that faculty may lodge
any grievance to the local campus Dean, and if unhappy with the outcome then onto the VP for
Global Academic Programs and finally onto the Provost for final settlement. However no
distinction is made between routine complaints and faculty grievances that are of a more
serious nature.
Recommendation 35
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain introduce formal grievance
procedures that would specify both process and outcomes, and ensure the involvement of relevant
staff at the Bahrain campus in the process.
The number of administrative staff is approximately 100, with half of them being security and
maintenance personnel. The Panel learned that academic support services such as student
admission and registration are under the control of the Campus Manager who also acts as the
local registrar. Although the local organisational chart provided as part of the supporting
material for the SER showed a reporting line to the Campus Dean, the Panel found that this was
not the case. Faculty consistently complained about a lack of responsiveness and bottlenecks in
the admissions and registration processes.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 26
Recommendation 36
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain give due regard to the
admissions and registration processes as important academic support functions and ensure that
the local Campus Dean, and not the Campus Manager, has functional responsibility in this area.
9. Infrastructure, physical and other resources
NYIT-Bahrain is currently housed in a rented building and has adapted the facilities to meet its
immediate requirements for teaching, learning and research activities as well as administrative
functions. However NYIT-Bahrain has recognized that there are pressures on the current
building especially during peak times. The Panel concurs with the institution that the physical
resources are limited. The current facilities are under severe constraints to support adequately
the delivery of academic programs, including teaching and learning spaces, library, ICT
facilities and appropriate spaces for the academic advising and other support functions.
The NYIT-Bahrain campus has an Information and Communication Technology (ICT) unit
which provides support to staff and students. The ICT unit has a number of full-time staff who
are responsible for IT support services. There is reasonable provision of computers in the
University. Most teaching venues are equipped with data and video projectors and computers.
There is also a wireless access to the internet. However, given the physical structure of the
building it is not accessible in all rooms or spaces.
A visit to the IT server room by members of the Panel raised some concerns about how access
to the server room is controlled, and the use of adequate environmental systems for cooling and
safety mechanisms for fire prevention. The institution is advised to consider how it manages
these areas of risk. The Panel is of the view that the IT department needs to develop and
implement a number of policies and processes to assure the quality of ICT at the University, for
example, off-site storage of data. ICT planning also needs to be integrated into the institutional
planning process and linked to key operational plans in teaching and learning.
The Panel noted in interviews with the ICT staff that the University is still implementing a
number of ICT processes and systems. The Panel heard during interviews with staff and
students that the facilities and equipment, including IT support services are inadequate to
support the University academic programme offerings.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 27
The Panel was concerned that back-up data is not only stored in the same building as the
system servers but in the same room. Although regular back-up procedures are in place and the
systems incorporate a measure of redundancy that provides some protection, the Panel
established that NYIT-Bahrain does not have an ICT disaster management and recovery plan.
This constitutes a serious risk for the University. As a matter of urgency NYIT-Bahrain needs to
develop and implement an ICT disaster plan which includes the storage of back-up data in a
separate location, preferably off-campus in order to ensure business continuity.
Recommendation 37
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain implement an ICT disaster plan that
includes the storage of back-up data in a separate location.
Library
NYIT-Bahrain’s library consists of a restricted physical space and an outdated and limited
collection of books and reviews. The Panel found the Library’s capacity to be constrained and
small for the number of undergraduate and postgraduate students enrolled at the Bahrain
campus. There is a limited number of computer terminals and study spaces which can
accommodate a maximum of 20 students. The Panel learned that most of the library resources
are provided online through the NYIT Connect portal. This consists primarily of access to on-
line journal databases. The Panel heard of plans to relocate the library to new and larger
premises within a new campus extension. The Panel noted that NYIT-Bahrain has not yet
developed formal mechanisms for assessing user satisfaction.
There is only one librarian who, in addition to her work as librarian, also works as a Personal
Assistant to the Associate Campus Dean and was found to be listed as an ‘administrative
assistant’ in the HR roster. The Panel noted that the library does not have a specified budget or
a strategic acquisitions plan. An annual budget needs to be allocated for library acquisitions
and a strategic acquisitions plan needs to be developed in consultation with the Deans.
Recommendation 38
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain continue to improve its
resources, including the library resources, to cater for the current and projected growth in
student numbers.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 28
Recommendation 39
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain appoint an appropriately
qualified librarian.
10. Research
NYIT-Bahrain appears to be an institution that is devoid of any research strategy and doing the
minimum to comply with local and professional licensing and accreditation requirements.
There is no institutional research plan or clear targets for research. Although some faculty
members were active in research as evidenced by their resumés and annual reports, the
institution did not provide the Panel with a comprehensive report about faculty research
outputs. The SER mentions that there are ongoing discussions between faculty and
management to develop an institutional research plan. A number of research centres are being
planned at NYIT-Bahrain to support the research effort of faculty. However all are currently at
the proposal or pre-planning stage. A faculty member has recently been appointed as Head of
the Research Centre to comply with HEC requirements.
Recommendation 40
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain develop an institutional
research plan with clear KPIs and provide appropriate resources to support this core function.
NYIT-Bahrain has no specific budget earmarked for research activities at the local level.
Funding for research comes from NYIT-New York’s centralised budget, which is managed from
New York. The Panel heard that some faculty have already benefited from conference grants
through this source, though no compiled list of the number of grants awarded was provided so
the Panel was not able to form a judgment in this regard.
A new faculty summer research and creativity grant programme (GFSRC) has been made
available recently for which some faculty members from NYIT-Bahrain have submitted
applications. The total budget of US $20,000 (to be divided amongst the entire NYIT global
network) suggests that there will be limited support if any for faculty from NYIT-Bahrain. The
Panel encourages NYIT-Bahrain to request that NYIT increase the funds made available
through the GFSRC, to earmark a quota of that fund for NYIT-Bahrain, and to evaluate
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 29
proposals and inform recipients as early as possible in the Spring semester to enable them to
make timely summer plans.
The policy on Intellectual Property (IP) included in the SER as part of the supporting material is
merely a description of what IP is and cannot be considered as a proper policy for IP. However,
a more detailed policy was included as part of the policy and procedures manual. The NYIT
faculty did not seem to be aware of such a policy although many said that as professionals they
understood the concept of IP well.
Recommendation 41
HERU recommends that the policy on Intellectual Property at New York Institute of Technology-
Bahrain be integrated into the faculty handbook and made available to faculty at all times.
11. Community engagement
NYIT-Bahrain directors and faculty contribute to community engagement through participation
in societal debates organised by private and public organisations in the Kingdom of Bahrain.
While the efforts of the individuals involved are appreciated by the Panel, the institution needs
to consider formalising these activities. There are important opportunities for NYIT-Bahrain to
expand its work considerably in this regard.
While the Panel heard a number of examples of community engagement in terms of ad hoc
workshops and industry visits, they were less assured that there is a shared understanding of
community engagement, despite the reference to ‘commitment to service’ in NYIT-Bahrain’s
mission. There needs to be a shared understanding of NYIT-Bahrain‘s conceptualisation of the
‘community’ and what form of engagement with this community will take place. In particular,
NYIT-Bahrain will need to consider the curriculum implications of its community engagement
choices.
Recommendation 42
HERU recommends that New York Institute of Technology-Bahrain develop a clear conceptual
framework for community engagement as well as policies, procedures and resources for staff and
students to develop and participate in community engagement activities.
QAAET - Institutional Review Report - New York Institute of Technology- Bahrain, 10-13 May 2009 30
12. Conclusion
NYIT-Bahrain has yet to establish its identity as an institution of higher education in Bahrain. It
has still to ground itself fully in the academic project.
NYIT-Bahrain needs to reconsider its conceptualisation of the institution in order to (i) meet the
Higher Education Council regulations and other legislative requirements of the country, (ii)
strike an appropriate balance between being a business enterprise and a provider of higher
education and within which it develops and implements an appropriate quality management
system, (iii) develop further its understanding of what it means to be a quality higher education
institution in Bahrain, (iv) develop indicators to measure progress towards achieving this goal,
and (v) in the light of the findings and in conjunction with national imperatives, develop its
vision, mission and goals.
NYIT-Bahrain also needs to develop and articulate its approach to teaching and learning in a
comprehensive academic plan which will stem from its mission and will enable consistent and
robust teaching underpinned by research across the faculties and support the academic success
of students. This, together with the need for an allocation of time for research, will have
implications for the workload of academic staff. Failure to give urgent attention to these matters
constitutes a major risk to the viability, status and reputation of NYIT-Bahrain.