استخدام مدخل التعلم القائم على التخطيط المستند إلى تعدد معايير صناعة القرار فى تدشين ميثاق للممارسات لضمان جودة التعليم العالى

استخدام مدخل التعلم القائم على التخطیط  المستند إلى تعدد معاییر صناعة القرار فى تدشین میثاق للممارسات لضمان جودة التعلیم العالى

المؤلف : فاطمة الزهراء سالم محمود

أستاذ أصول التربیة المساعد

قسم أصول التربیة - کلیة التربیة جامعة عین شمس

الکلمات المفتاحیة : -التعلیم العالى -میثاق الممارسات MCDM

مستخلص البحث

  یعد التخطیط بدایة التطلع إلى مستقبل أفضل . لهذا فالعدید من الدراسات المعنیة بنظام التعلیم العالى أکدت على أهمیة التخطیط الاستراتیجى فى صیاغة نموذج جدید للجامعة متمشیاً مع المعاییر العالمیة للتصنیف الأکادیمى .

ومن ثم ترکز الدراسة الحالیة على تدشین معالم میثاق للممارسات داخل الجامعة قائم على مدخل مدخل التعلم القائم على التخطیط  المستند إلى تعدد معاییر صناعة القرار.

ولتأصیل ذلک تسعى الدراسة الحالیة للإجابة على التساؤلات التالیة :-

1-لماذا نظام التعلیم العالى الحالى بحاجة إلى میثاق للممارسات ؟

2-إلى أى مدى تؤثر الجودة الأکادیمیة على الجامعات ؟

3-ما المقصود بمدخل التعلم القائم على التخطیط  المستند إلى تعدد معاییر صناعة القرار ؟

4-ما المعاییر والمؤشرات التى یتأسس علیها میثاق الممارسات الجامعى ؟

منهجیة الدراسة

تستخدم الدراسة الحالیة مدخل التعلم القائم على التخطیط  المستند إلى تعدد معاییر صناعة القرار ، وتکنیک أفضل الممارسات للإجابة على الأسئلة السابقة .

نتائج الدراسة

1-الجامعة بحاجة إلى میثاق للممارسات لإنجاز خبرات التعلم

2-تعتمد خبرات التعلم على جودة الممارسات داخل الجامعة

3-تسهم المتابعة الإستراتیجیة فى تحقیق میثاق الممارسات داخل الجامعة

Using education based planning multi -criteria decision making (MCDM) approach in establishing the university code of practice for the higher education quality assurance

Author: Fatma El Zhraa Salem Mahmoud

Associate professor, faculty of education, Ain Shams University

Key words: MCDM -Higher education -code of practice 

 Abstract

Planning means looking for the better future, many studies in the higher education system assured that; the strategic planning for building new form of the university according to the recent global academic rankings criteria.  This study concentrates on establishing code of practice in the university based on the strategic planningmulti -criteria decision making (MCDM) approach. 

                       So, the study answers on the forthcoming questions: -

  -Why the higher education system needs code of practice?

-What is the impact of the academic quality up on the universities?

-What is education based planning multi -criteria decision making (MCDM) approach?

-What are the criteria and indicators which the university code of practice based on?

Methodology

 The study uses the strategic planning multi -criteria decision making (MCDM) approach and the best practice technique for building the criteria and indicators of the code of practice.

Findings

-The university needs code of practice for fulfilling the learning experiences

-The learning experiences depend on the quality of practice

-The strategic monitoring achieves the university code of practice 

Introduction

   Indeed, the situation is changed. All the academic practices update its systems according to two paths. The first path related to the planning approach and the second one concerning with the code of practice.

  So, there is a strong relationship between the two paths. In the university world, what we need is the best practice of the university regulations and standards. The code of practice will help universities in achieving these best practices. Thus, this study discusses the code of practice in the academic society based on the planning approach.

In order to articulate code of practice for the university, one can utilize from the previous experiences.

Hence there are three elements for the study: -

The first element: The background of the academic experience in articulating the code of practice

The second element: the impact of the academic quality up on universities

The third element: The code of practice criteria based on the (Multi -criteria decision making (MCDM) approach.

The study methodology

The study uses the strategic planning multi -criteria decision making (MCDM) approach in its futuristic aspect and the best practice technique for building the criteria, indicators, and practices for articulating the university code of practice.

MCDM characteristics

 -The model is flexible and typically aims to select the most appropriate solution (W. Sutherland 2011, P432).

-It expresses the integrated strategies of life cycles and value chain (Jen-Hung 2009, PP209: 211).

-MCDM techniques assume that a decision may impact a variety of parameters, henceforth referred to as ‘‘impact-factors. The impact of the decision on impact factors with measurable criteria is assigned through appropriate techniques using a uniform scale. (BOSE 2003, PP31, 32).

The study goals

This study aims to: -

Establish a code of practice for the higher education system.

 So, to achieve this aim, the study will:

1- Determine the institutions endeavor in articulating the code of practice

2- The impact of the academic quality up on the institutions

3-The implementation of the education based planning multi -criteria decision making (MCDM) approach

4-Articulating the criteria and indicators of the code of practice through the strategic planning approach and best practice technique

 1- Institutions endeavor in articulating the code of practice

  Lots of institutions keen to articulate its own code of practice and assured in achieving it in the real life. The University of Jordan puts its own code of practice for quality assurance in 2014. The most important two points in this code of practice are the fairness and diversity which the university puts the academic criteria to achieve them. The university put plan for the students and staff based on the intended learning outcomes of the learning competences process and university activities. (Trawana 2014, PP 19: 23). The business institution of JLL in USA (Jones Lang Lasalle) puts the code of business ethics from 2001 so far. The main principal of this institution is " nothing is harder to win or easier to lose than a company's reputation for integrity". (JLL 2016, P6).

     The University of Birmingham in London builds its own code of practice on taught program and module assessment. The code of practice applies to all undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate taught program, post graduate research program and including distance learning.  The code of practice is based on the principal academic units and the university regulations. The code of practice interests in the conduct of assessment which consists of both external and internal assessment. (Module assessment 2016).

The Leicester University in Britain put code of practice for managing higher education provision with others. The purpose of this code is to ensure that the university is able to assure the quality of academic standards and learning opportunities of awards and credit granted in its name and has in place appropriate governance arrangements for learning opportunities not provided by the university. The code of practice concentrates on the risk based framework and the indicative risk levels through the process of risk assessment. (University of Leicester 2016).    

The Flowserve Corporation has established its own code of practice for the workplace based on trust building, ethics and probity. The Flowserve code includes the criteria of safety and security preservation. For instance weapons prevention in the workplace, harassment and discrimination prohibition. The core values of its code are building good personalities for right thinking and good decisions. (Flowserve 2012, PP12:25).

The University of Edinburgh code of practice aims to foster a vibrant, successful and interactive research community. It provides guidance and practical advice for both supervisors and research students. The code insists on the academic excellence so the university puts equality and diversity strategy as guiding principles in policy and practice. (University of Edinburgh2016, 9:16)

 2-The impact of the academic quality up on universities  

     The possibility of achieving the purpose of improving the academic excellence is the academic quality. The academic quality top-flight educational programs that provide value to the higher education system are essential. So, without a central focus on quality system, university improvement is an empty promise. (American Council on education 2012, PP12: 14). 

In order to achieve the academic quality, there are three elements should put into the experts' underestimations: the academic assessment, the academic improvement and the academic status.

The academic assessment: This highlights the university internal and external strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats. It also demonstrates the points that need to improve and helps in putting improvement action plans. 

The academic improvement: This element involves in the impact of the worldwide academic quality and the ability to enhance the university accordingly. So, in order to fulfilling this target, the institution should adopt its own criteria based on actual practices.

The academic status:this related to the university position and its ranking among regional and global universities. Also, this element represents the impact and the value added of the university up on its community and up on the global community as well.

The philosophy of the academic quality: -

  The academic quality keens with university involvement in the quality process. The main question is how universities take part in the quality assurance process? And what are the best strategies of positive involvement? (ESIB 2004, P 3). But the academic quality especially in the universities ties by the policy –making in education. There is a relationship between the academic quality and the policy orientation and systems. (Husen1984, P7).

 This for maintaining of three things:

-Reserve of commitment

Reserve of ability

-Reserve of talent

To fulfilling these three goals, the key word is the unexpected performance or the distinguished performance for both academic individual and collective performance. 

The academic quality assurance shapes the future through six pillars;

1\6 design multiple indicators

2\6 consider ranking requirements

3\6 estimate future communication needs

4\6 avoid pitfalls

5\6 engage opportunities

6\6 gain market share

The following academic quality assurance matrix will show how these pillars work: -

3-Education based planning multi -criteria decision making (MCDM) approach

   The future of education is based on the planning processes. So, the planning approaches are based on learning experiences and the educational improvement plans. The idea of planning based on the paths or tracks towards the future. Furthermore, the probabilities which shaping this future. Hence, education based planning approach concerns with the tracks which education can move for achieving its goals. Basically, there are three paths for implementing education based planning approach;

Path (A): It represents the current state which means analyzing the gaps and assigning the strengths and the opportunities.

Path (B): It represents the future state which the institution aims to shape better future.

Path (C): it represents the side track which means the process of corrective actions that you can take for adapt your steps towards the future and fulfilling your goals (B).

So, the move form (C) to (A) is differ from the move from (A) to (C) because it demands certain modified actions.

 Higher Education system cannot improve its institutions without planning’ “data bank” which based on the institution experiences. Basically, educational planning concerns with the origin of the institution and its reform plans experiences.  (UNESCO1995, P30).

   Policy making is the first step in any planning cycle to enlarge the range of choices.

  Besides, the types of practice in the higher education institutions determines how the efficiency of the planning methods and the strategies through moving into the triple tracks. (Prennan, John 1988, 171).

Accordingly, leading universities demands cultivating excellence and developing the necessary norms. The process of how internalize the standards inside the university is the main target for the global higher education system. (Ibid, PP174, 175).

  Furthermore, quality assessment or quality improvement demands the possibility to provide the audits with the external environment needs and the user requirements based on the recommended standards. Also, it demands the statistical products and processes. So, the quality assessment based on the planning processes and outlooks. The quality assessment has impact upon institutional management and decision -making processes. (Brennan, John 1997, PP210:213).

Education based reform approach increases the ability to apply the education based planning approach. It also helps in putting best practices code to guarantee the reformation results. So, one can understand that the education based planning approach needs the institutional quality control, quality assessment and education based reform approach.

  The integration among these three dimensions consists the education based planning approach.

The education based planning multi -criteria decision making (MCDM) approach for the higher education reform and innovation

    Planning not only for describe the current context but to see the future as well. So, putting norms for the higher education system is a matter of doing things right in the future through education based planning approach. Many problems face the higher education administration as a result of the lake either in articulating a code of conduct or the lack of implementing the regulations inside the university system.  (Proper, Eve 2012, P49). The process in strategic planning starts with defining the organizational purpose, creating strategic objectives, strategies framework and finally the action plans development to ensure the organizational objectives are met. (Mohamad, Daud 2015, P 1).

  Besides, there is a strong relationship between the strategic planning and the decision-making process. Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) refers to making choice of the best alternative from among a finite set of decision alternatives in terms of multiple, usually conflicting criteria.

 The TOPSIS method for decision making reflects this idea. The TOPSIS stands for technique for preference by similarity to the ideal solution. It means the ability to select among the multiple alternatives to reach to the better solution that comes up with the real context.  TOPSIS was initially presented by Hwang and Yoon in 1980.  It uses to measure distance from ideal or nadir points. The idea of TOPSIS is to obtain performance data for certain alternatives over certain criteria.

  Also, to develop a set of importance weights for each of the criteria by identify the ideal alternative (extreme performance on each criterion) and identify the nadir alternative (reverse extreme performance on each criterion. (Olson 2004, P 6). 

 Hence, the process of reform in the higher education system starts through reaching the best solution for the problem. The TOPSIS method will help in choose alternative which has the shortest distance from the ideal solution and the farthest from the negative -ideal solution. To apply the TOPSIS method; the institution firstly needs to evaluate alternatives in terms of criteria. Secondly, apply one of the normative multiple criteria analysis methods, thirdly, accept one alternative as optimal (preferred). If the final solution is not accepted collect new data and information and go to the next iteration of multiple criteria optimization. (Roszkowska 2010, P201).

 4-University code of practice for the higher education quality assurance system 

  University code of practice will increase the institution’s capacity building and improves its performance and competency. So, the forthcoming code of practice consists of four criteria with its indicators and practices. These criteria are: university credibility, university adjustment, university responsibility, university marketing, and university entrepreneurship.  

The following table shows the guidelines of the university code of practice

The university code of practice

1. University Credibility              

1.1 university empowerment

1.1.1 University databank

1.1.2 Preserving cultural identity

1.2 Transnational competence  

1.2.1 Experiences’ transferable

1.2.2 Performance assessment

1.3 Taskforce commitment

1.3.1 Excellence framework

1.3.2 The accuracy of taskforce members

2. University adjustment