Peer Team Report in

NAAC Methodology of Assessment and

Accreditation

Presentation at AIM, NAAC

23-24 December 2013

GUIDING PHILOSOPHY• QA is a process of evaluating program

and/or institutional quality that is*: comprehensive; integrated; purposeful; ongoing; continuous; and everyone’s responsibility*APQN Module Presentation at KL, Malaysia,JP

QA PROCESSES• Institutional and/or program audit Process of assessing procedures/systems of

the institution to ensure effectiveness in support of the Vision-Mission & goals of the institution

 • Accreditation (institutional and program) Process for assessing/upgrading the quality

of institution and programs through self-regulation and peer judgment

Things to do…

Before the Visit • Understand QAA’s Process• Analyze the Self-Study Report• Identify the Strengths and Weaknesses• Write a tentative evaluation note• Arrive at Criterion-wise Tentative Scores with

Justification • Ensure no conflict of interest

Things to do…During the Visit• Share your analysis of the report with the Team Members• Agree on Issues that Need Further Probing• Accept Responsibilities to Collect Evidences• Interact with the Mgt., Head, Teaching Faculty, Staff,

Students, Alumni and Parents• Check Documentary Evidence• Cross Check Non-documentary Evidence• Validate the Self-Assessment Report• Agree on the Provisional Criterion-wise Scores• Follow the Code of conduct

Things to do…At the End of the Visit

• Write a Clear Report• Arrive at the Final Scores • Share the findings with the Head of the Institution • Share the Highlights of your Report in the Exit Meeting• Maintain confidentiality [about grading] • Provide the feedback to QAA

Peer Team Report- Importance and PurposeThe importance and purpose of Peer Team Report can be

understood once we recognise that it:• is the agenda and signpost of the institution for planning and

developing strategies to sustain and enhance quality during at least the next five years;

• is a assessment of the performance of the institution in the past;• is a public document to guide other

institutions/stakeholders/freshers to make academic and administrative decisions;

• determines the status of the institution through accreditation;• facilitates or prevents external support when accreditation is

linked to funding by public or private bodies; • boosts or deflates the morale of the institution; and • sets the continuum of the quest for excellence in motion. 

Peer Team Report- Expectations

NAAC expects PTR to be:• consistent in content (assessment) and grade

(accreditation)• credible, by being factual and objective;• acceptable to the institution without reservation;• helpful to motivate quality sustenance, quality

enhancement; • fair and free from flaws of different kinds caused

by professional indiscretion, especially in spelling out directions of recommended change.

Peer Team Report- Coverage

PTR is expected to cover the following issues:• the scope and objectives of the assessment;• identification of criteria against which the assessment is

executed (the SSR)• observation made and suggestions for improvement• the institution’s ability to achieve the defined objectives;

and • the judgment of the assessment team’s on the extent of

the institution’s quality provisions, compliance with the applicable standards/regulations and related documentation.

 

Peer Team Report- NAAC FormatCurrent PTR format of NAAC has 4 parts as following :• SECTION I - GIVES THE GENERAL INFORMATION of the institution

and its context, •  SECTION II- CRITERION-WISE ANALYSIS is for recording

Observations [Strengths and/or weaknesses] on Key-Aspects, limiting to three major ones for each in short meaningful sentences. However it is not necessary to indicate all the three bullets each time. Only the relevant ones can be mentioned

•  SECTION III- OVERALL ANALYSIS, which includes Institutional Strengths, Institutional Weaknesses, Institutional Challenges, Institutional Opportunities; and  

 SECTION IV - FOR RECORDING RECOMMENDATIONS for Quality Enhancement of the Institution (limited to ten major ones).

The report is entirely based on the institution's own self-assessment on the one hand, and the criteria of NAAC on the other . Peer team brings in their rich experience to contxtualise these two aspects while finalising PTR. [ Ref page 53 and 68 of peer Team document ]

Grade Report Parity

PTR should match the institutional grade. This parity depends on :

• fact-based writing: This is nothing but the validation and authentication of claims made in the SSR;

• explicitness in writing which leaves no room for imposing an external interpretation based on impressions;

• control of writing and scoring by team consensus arrived at, after an in-depth discussion of issues;

• cross verification of outcomes of similar assessments made of the performance of the institution by responsible bodies such as the AICTE, NCTE, University, State Government etc. and assessment made by external peers on the institution's own initiative; (random surveys made by private or public agencies may not be helpful for obvious reasons); and

• a comparison of grades of similar institutions in the same area assigned by Peer Teams.

The last two are only tangential strategies that can at best help the process of verification of assessment. The grade-report parity essentially rests upon the first three.

Match grade with content of report. Let your Assessment be clear and stand firmly

on criteria of validation of NAAC. Let your assessment complement internal

quality processes. Recommend that which is helpful and practical

in the context of the institution. Validation statements should be well

authenticated. Let the report be clear, precise and positive. Let the report be organized with logical

soundness. Let the language of your report be cohesive and

precise. Maintain the perspective of the assessee-

institution. Write in a tone that is pleasant and acceptable. Be indicative in suggestions. Let the report follow the flow of ideas without

interruption.

Avoid arbitrariness in both validation and determination of scores.

Do not let your own insights supersede validation made with NAAC’s criteria.

Do not impose, directly or indirectly, any external practices not compatible with those of the institution.

Do not recommend that which violates norms of either the institution or the government.

Avoid subjective Assessment based on impressions and not on evidence.

Avoid ambiguous ideas and expressions. Avoid errors of logic in your assessment. Avoid descriptions which are not necessary for

validation. Do not assess or write from your own

perspective. Do not take a magisterial stance. Do not be prescriptive. Do not include tables, graphs, pictures, etc. in

the running text.

Good Report- Some tips Coherence , Cohesion and Style are cardinals of good report writing. Some NAAC tips are given below.

Some key Things to remember about PTR• Peer team report is posted on NAAC

website. So the quality of report, of peer team and also that of NAAC is subjected to public scrutiny

• HEI has option to go for appeal. In that case each word and sentence in PTR could be challenged to Appeals Committee.

• At the best PTR can be a vision document for HEIs. At worst it can spoil image of team and NAAC !

Parting quote !

• It is when you lose sight of yourself, that you lose your way. To keep your truth in sight you must keep yourself in sight and the world to you should be a mirror to reflect to you your image; the world should be a mirror that you reflect upon.” ― C. JoyBell C.

Thank You jp.naacindia@gmail.com

Acknowledgements- NAAC Manuals and Publications, Modules of APQN QA Package

Dr. Jagannath Patil

Deputy Adviser, NAAC,

President , Asia Pacific Quality Network