Develop mechanisms to ensure the quality of the university

Purposeful work on forming the image and enhance the attractiveness of the university involves determining the main factors and blocks functional areas of the university , the greatest impact on the level of attractiveness. They shall be kept in view and analyzed and evaluated first. Proposed to allocate blocks of seven factors to diagnosis in the analysis and evaluation of the attractiveness of the university : a resource block ; satisfaction of stakeholders ; international component ; communication with the public ; pricing policy; quality of recruitment and official rating of the university.

Resource block includes a set of indicators that measure the state and dynamics of the material- technical base and skill level of high school faculty . Given that internal assessment appeal university aims to increase its ranking in an external socio-economic assessment , it is appropriate for this group of factors used similar figures for unit factors used in the evaluation of MES ranking of higher education institutions .

Satisfaction of stakeholders in educational services , despite its subjectivity - one of the key indicators in the study and evaluation of the attractiveness of the university. The methodology of the study of the degree of satisfaction of educational services - questioning . Survey materials are necessary and mandatory information for SWOT- analysis of the satisfaction of stakeholders. Group survey respondents procedure : students, alumni , faculty and university employers . Content profiles should reflect the specific interests and socio- economic expectations groups of respondents. To identify specific patterns profiles of students and teachers to structure identical to block packets : resource , social, informational. By the same principle should be structured questionnaires for graduates and employers . This will not only see some pros and cons in the organization of the university , but also to evaluate the effectiveness of its overall policy on specific areas of work.

For example, social block package satisfaction scores identical for all respondents issues characterizing the state and performance of the university in this area are:

- The educational process by technical means;

- Comfortable working conditions / training , student life and leisure;

- Equipment jobs PPP / classrooms and laboratories ;

- Conditions for the implementation of scientific activity ;

- Effectiveness and availability of information resources;

- Wage / cost of training ;

- Effectiveness of the co-financing of research activities and professional development of teachers and staff / financial support for students ;

- A package of social assistance programs , etc.

The international component of the university - one of the activities to increase its attractiveness to students - consumers of educational services . Institution determines its own direction and indicators for assessing the state of its development.

Communication with the public should be analyzed and evaluated in terms of efficiency of the organization of corporate communications with employers , local community ( power structures , schools, social and professional organizations ) and graduates. Institution determines its basic shape and direction of relationships with employers , the local community and alumni , and evaluates their effectiveness.

Pricing policy of the university , as a rule, determined by the objectives of pricing. Most often, the price is used as a tool for the university to generate demand or as an indicator of the quality of its educational services. With elastic demand lower prices set to increase , and higher - cut . Therefore, the statistics and dynamics of a set - one of the main indicators of price attractiveness of the university. Along with the cost of training , number of indicators to price attractiveness of the university should include indexing terms of tuition fees over the years and a system of financial support to students (including the system of benefits ) .

Set and its quality should be considered a two-pronged : as a result of the effectiveness of preliminary work on the organization of a set of ( and in this respect as one of the functional areas of the university ) and as a general indicator of assessing the attractiveness of the university. The indicators for this block , in our view , should include : the percentage of the number of enrolled applicants to the university ; percentage enrolled in school among students who participated in complex testing and competition for state education grants ; number enrolled in university government education grants; GPA certificate ( UNT ) enrolled in school ; passing score for admission ; proportion credited to the office with the official language of instruction. As criteria for performance evaluation of preliminary work on the organization set advisable to determine the percentage enrolled in the school of the base classes and the number of students in the preparatory courses , and the percentage enrolled in college in the context assigned to departments ( faculties) schools.

Indicators and evaluation criteria may be specified depending on the attractiveness of the existing de facto high school (including in comparison with competitors ) and the importance of a factor for the evaluation of its image formation . Have their own specific and university forms and mechanisms of formation and evaluation of its attractiveness .

In Innovative University of Eurasia , as in most universities of Kazakhstan, the most widespread in evaluating the quality and attractiveness of the various aspects of the university received quantitative methods , based benchmarks - as the mechanism of formation and the standard assessment appeal system and standards for the calculation of the current parameter level appeal.

Control regulations in InEu formed in 9 directions of the university , including : educational-methodical and scientific- methodical work ; development of pre-university education and improvement of career guidance and recruitment ; implementation of HR policies and quality management system; implementation of the program information; research and international activities ; development of material and technical base; development of languages ​​; educational work ; financial activities . Listed for each direction , a system of benchmarking activities and specifying deadlines , performers and persons controlling their implementation. Benchmarking system in the management of the practice is the basis InEu vnutrivuzovskogo process of planning , developing and enhancing the attractiveness of the university, the mechanism of which is shown in Figure . This process is comprehensive and covers the activities of all departments of the University that allows you to manage them purposefully , defining the main strategic goals for the university as a system of benchmarking , developed on the basis of its mission and vision .

Figure 10 - The internal mechanism of the process control the attractiveness of the university

 

Within the framework of the established standards departments of the University have full autonomy to choose the form and mechanisms of their maintenance and planning additional activities that enhance the attractiveness of educational training programs ( specialties - for departments and faculties ) or individual activities ( for the infrastructure of the university departments ) .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.2 Internal quality assurance activities of the university

Efficiency and effectiveness of the quality management of university activity is largely determined by the level of organization and content of monitoring and evaluation procedures , which are its information component.

Despite this, it is an evaluation phase is currently the weakest link in the internal systems of quality management of educational activities Kazakh universities . As one of the ways to solve this problem is proposed in the study , presented in the figure model of the internal quality assurance mechanism of university activities on the basis of self-assessment procedure and is considered a conceptual approach to the development of self-assessment model , meets the basic trends in the development of the National System of quality management of higher education institutions of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Figure 11 - Model for quality assurance activities of higher education on the basis of self-assessment procedure

 

Strengthening the role of self-esteem as an internal quality assurance mechanism associated with the introduction of the system of external quality assurance and evaluation of educational activities of higher education institutions of Kazakhstan state accreditation procedures and efficiency of higher education quality management activities.

Self-assessment procedure in the internal quality assurance mechanism of university activity is a fundamentally new procedure for Kazakhstani universities internal survey and evaluation .

During its development in the study took into account the following factors:

- Foreign experience in designing self-assessment procedures ;

- Domestic experience international accreditation ;

- Destinations reform of higher education in determining trends and patterns of its development and integration into the world educational space ;

- National characteristics and the specific content of factors internal and external operating environment Kazakh universities .

Conceptual and methodological approach to develop a model of self-esteem. Methodological approach as a sequence of steps in the decision to develop internal quality assurance mechanism based on self-assessment procedure for Kazakhstani universities in the study presented in the figure and , in our view , schematically illustrate follows.

Step 1 . Basis for forming a conceptual approach to design self-assessment procedure , determining its orientation, goal setting , content and principles on which it is based , are the concept and policy documents that guide the development and reform of higher education of the Republic of Kazakhstan .

A content analysis of the new draft law on education and the State Program of Education Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2005-2010 indicate a trend towards a system of management of schools RK management through strategic planning and implementation of strategic management, which is central to the mission of the educational institution .

Hence the conclusion first : a key element of a conceptual approach to the design of self-assessment procedure of the university is to use the estimates based on the mission , strategy, strategic objectives and indicators. This does not preclude the use of a scoring system , but in the process of self-esteem , they are not dominant and priorities .

The second conclusion ( as a consequence of output 1): results of self-assessment - an information base for strategic planning and ongoing efforts to improve the quality of the educational activities of the university . Quality management more effective, the full and objective self-assessment results . Therefore, high school, primarily interested in a comprehensive and honest self-assessment .

Step 2 . Republic of Kazakhstan in the accreditation process (and thus , self-assessment system of universities ) is an element of control and regulation of quality of the schools , including - state level. In this regard, the model of the national quality assurance system and the concept of state ( legislative ) vision content accreditation procedures are the main factors determining the model self-assessment procedure and the principles on which it is based. According to the new draft law on education accreditation procedure schools RK - is not only a mechanism for assessment and recognition of the quality of university activities, but also assess the presence of the university effective mechanisms for its continuous improvement and improve . This condition is true only if the model has a dynamic self-assessment procedure and based on an assessment of the systemic nature of intrahigh having formalized procedures ( mechanisms and processes ) quality management.

Hence the conclusion third : the base self-assessment procedure - dynamic pricing model , focused on continuous improvement and incentives to improve the quality of the educational activities of the university .

Conclusion Four : The main methodological approach for measuring the quality , content meets the accreditation procedures and self-esteem is a process approach .

Self-assessment model based on the process approach , on the one hand provides a systematic requirement in the nature and content intrahigh formalized procedures (mechanisms) for quality management. On the other hand , most fully in agreement with the contents of the process management of the university on the basis of quality management systems, the introduction of which is one of the priorities of the development and reform of higher education in Kazakhstan.

Principles of self-esteem. In view of the above, the basic principles of construction and operation of self-assessment procedure , in our opinion , are : system , process approach , complexity and integrity , flexibility , dynamism, inner focus , honesty and objectivity , involvement , resource validity, publicity.

Step 3 . Introduction of accreditation procedures , mission -oriented and based on a dynamic model of quality improvement requires a fundamentally new approach to the development of self-evaluation process of the university as a key mechanisms of control of its quality. Such an approach should take into account several important , in our view , highlights:

- There is a sequence of intentions and actions in the system of higher education of Kazakhstan aimed at its integration into the world educational space ;

- The composition and content of the activities of national universities , taking into account national specifics of the education system of Kazakhstan;

- The lack of domestic experience of accreditation and self-esteem, including legal, organizational , and other meaningful aspects of it.

On the one hand, this implies taking into account foreign experience of organizing and conducting self-assessment procedure , and on the other - accounting features activities of higher education institutions of Kazakhstan, and the specifics of the national university system of education quality management and regulation .

Hence the conclusion Five: The most feasible method for developing self-assessment procedure , consistent with the direction of state policy of Kazakhstan in the field of education , it is a design based on existing models of foreign analogues of this procedure , using the models or their constituent elements that are best suited to the specific content education system of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the modalities schools RK , with their subsequent adaptation to these conditions.

Step 4 . Orientation to improve the quality of self-confidence is not an end in itself. In its basis - aimed at increasing competitiveness and maximum satisfaction of society's needs in educational services and their quality.

Hence the conclusion sixth : the composition criteria for functional areas of self-esteem should reflect the needs ( interests ) of all stakeholders in the quality of educational services contact audiences ( persons ) : students, alumni , faculty and administrative staff of the university, employers and other corporate partners of the university.

Stages of self-esteem. Despite the variety of models of self- consistency of its implementation , in our opinion , can be represented by the universal stages of action involving organization and preparatory stage, the stage of self-assessment , the final stage of preparation of the report and the decision-making stage .

Much of the content of work organizational and preparatory phase for each university has its own specifics . This is explained by the specific factors such as : type of accreditation (institutional , specialized ) , the profile of the university ( a specialized , multi-disciplinary ) , and accordingly - the organizational structure of university management (centralized , decentralized , with a broad or narrow sphere of control ), adopted in the university system of delegation powers authority for management levels and others. Based on the characteristics of the organization of its activities the institution determines the most appropriate (optimal) solutions for themselves questions of organizational and preparatory phase of self-assessment procedure .

Self- definition format - is an important moment of preparation is the final stage , requiring special attention .

Format adopted self- determines the content , order, sequence and structure of the self-assessment and from this point of view, in our opinion, must meet the following requirements: meet the goals of self-esteem ; avoid duplication of the functional areas of evaluation; ensure logical integrity and completeness of the information in accordance with the requirements of the criteria of self-esteem ; compact, and clearly (in the most intelligible and understandable form ) reflect the content of the self-evaluation .

In the context of the objectives and format of the content of self-confidence of its structure is determined by the following considerations :

- As a mechanism for continuous improvement and improve the quality of self-assessment process should provide a clear description of the contents of the university on the quality criteria to illustrate the availability of effective , formalized procedures and mechanisms for its security and to demonstrate evidence of progress in this direction ;

- As a comprehensive , objective information reflecting the state of higher education quality management activities and the basis of improving the self-assessment process should reflect the strengths and weaknesses of the university and diagnose existing and potential opportunities , barriers and threats to its development.

The format structure of self-esteem . Given the above , the structure of the self-assessment format should reflect the following sets of questions :

- Factor (sphere) self-esteem. Composition spheres of self-esteem in some models, the quality of existing accreditation procedures is presented in Table 4. Depending on the purpose of self- assessment structure factors determined by the content accreditation procedures ( quality model ) or the university itself . The number of such areas of self-esteem in foreign accreditation procedures ranges from 10 (model quality EQUAL) and above. Standards and criteria for institutional accreditation of higher education institutions of Kazakhstan (project 2006 ) provides 13 assessment areas .

Quality model	Areas of self-evaluation within the highest quality models
Quality Model EQUAL (10 areas of self-esteem)	Mission and strategic objectives, management, curriculum, faculty, students, research, corporate communication, personal development, material and financial resources, regional and international dimension.
Quality Model COMEQ, adapted for Central Asia (7 spheres of self-esteem)	Management, curriculum, faculty, students and trainees, corporate communications, material and financial resources, regional / international dimension
National Quality Model RK (project 13 areas of self-esteem)	Mission, goals and objectives; leadership and management; planning, resource allocation and self-examination; students, faculty; education programs; research work; funding and financial sustainability; material and technical base; information and library resources; educational activities of the university; corporate development and international relations

Table 4 - Composition spheres of self-confidence in the models of quality accreditation procedures

As the analysis of the quantitative composition of the spheres self-evaluation within the accreditation procedure usually depends on how detailed the content areas of self-confidence or, conversely , to enlarge . As control, for example , U.S. universities traditionally has a strategic character , the accreditation procedures are elements of strategic management as a mission , strategic goals , objectives and priorities , the vision of the university, university management are treated as independent spheres of evaluation. In the procedures for accreditation of national universities adapted to similar foreign procedures , due to lack of sufficient experience in the implementation of strategic management universities , all of the above elements of strategic planning and management , usually combined in one area of self-esteem , such as " management; leadership and management ; management and administration , and so on . " Even more perfect spheres observed in the composition self ultrahigh similar procedures.

Depending on the purpose of self-confidence within the university can taken in the national system of quality assurance procedures for accreditation of their own, more or less detailed form of self-assessment to determine the scope of their activities;

- Description of the content and status of activities criteria: in accordance with the format of the self-assessment report on its results should be possible to exclude a direct duplication of information for assessing functional areas , to ensure the logical integrity and completeness of the information in accordance with the criteria for self-assessment. In addition, information should be set out clearly , compact, in the most appropriate for a given situation , the form of text, tables, graphs , charts , etc.

Analysis of foreign experience of self-esteem of the university, especially in the framework of the accreditation procedure , indicates the presence of duplication in the content of the evaluation criteria for functional areas ( areas ) self-esteem. When this factor does not involve duplication of direct repetition of information , and is used as a tool for cross-checking and evaluation. This requires that the performers engaged in self-assessment and prepare a report on its results , a high level of competence that without breaking the logical integrity of the assessment factor and content of the report , provide a comprehensive response to the evaluation criteria , eliminating possible duplication of information . This is also one of the problems of self-esteem definition format . Her decision , in our view , is defined literacy and numeracy performers see causal relationships , which follow from the wording of the question ( parameter estimates ) , since one and the same question (parameter estimates ) for various functional areas of evaluation may assume the characteristics of various aspects ( description of the policy , system factors , maintenance procedures, processes , mechanisms, and composition of the methods and tools , etc.).