1. RATIONALE

Accreditation is going to be mandatory for educational programmes and institutions. The institutes are applying to accreditation agencies for getting accreditation of the programmes offered by them. The institutes make rigorous preparation to satisfy the requirements of accreditation agencies. Basically, preparation is required to design outcome-based education, implement learner-centric teaching-learning approaches, and assess the performance of the students with reference to outcomes.

Institutes need to establish that they are proactive and organizing the whole spectrum of activities and producing results at par with the accreditation criteria and sub-criteria. There is adequate evidence available in the literature on the need, importance, and impact of accreditation on the quality of performance of the programme and institute (Ibrahim, 2014), (J. Fredericks Volkwein, 2007), (Pradeep Kumar, 2020), (Mathew J Manimala, 2020), (NBA, 2019), (G. Srinivas, 2020), (Supreeta Naik, 2016), (MHRD, 2020).

2. CURRENT STATUS:

The NBA coordinator at the institute level plays a significant role to prepare the whole institute for obtaining accreditation or reaccreditation. The role and competencies of the accreditation coordinator at the institute and programme level are not suggested by accreditation agencies and not available in the literature. Generally, accreditation coordinators at the institute level perform this role in addition to their assigned roles. The accreditation coordinator role is different from the routine role. It is related to change management, assessment, and evaluation, planning, and development, training, mentoring, coaching, guidance and counseling, communication, presentation, organization, facilitating and motivating others in the context of accreditation. The accreditation coordinators in most of the institutes are not professionally trained to prepare the institute for accreditation.

3. ASSUMPTIONS:

The following assumptions are made for deriving the role and competencies of the accreditation coordinator at the institute level.

1. Institute is already having systems and subsystems related to quality education.

2. Institute has been performing well in preceding years and wants to further improve the performance for accreditation.

3. Institute will appoint the right person as accreditation coordinator and empower the designated coordinator to take decisions related to quality and implement them effectively and efficiently. Considering the wide spectrum of roles, the coordinator is appointed on a full-time basis.

4. Institute has a formal structure or cell (Steering committee, accreditation coordinator at institute level, and programme level) for doing preparation for getting accreditation.

5. Institute has a culture for adapting innovations and experimentation.

4. ROLE OF ACCREDITATION COORDINATOR:

The role of the accreditation coordinator is derived from the requirements of the accreditation agency (manual, guidelines, pre-qualifiers, self-assessment report, evaluation guidelines, and status of the institute with reference to these requirements (NBA, 2019). The role of the accreditation coordinator is crucial in getting accreditation for the programmes of the institute (PHAB, 2012). The accreditation coordinator needs to perform a wide spectrum of roles during various stages of the accreditation process such as the preparation phase, implementation phase, pre-visit phase, during the visit, and after the visit of an expert team. These roles may be classified as preparatory roles, facilitating roles, implementing roles, presentation roles, collaborative roles, documentation roles, and the like. These roles depend on the status of the institute with reference to accreditation requirements (Azza Abou-Zeid, 2014), (Gupta, B. L., 2011), (Gupta, 2007).

5. FACTORS AFFECTING COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK:

The effectiveness and efficiency of the competency framework approach in any organization are affected by numerous factors. These factors are classified as facilitating factors and restraining factors. If the magnitude and intensity of facilitating factors are more than the magnitude and intensity of restraining factors the task of developing and using a competency framework becomes easy for the team and organization. Otherwise, it will find a place in the documents of the organization. The team sincerely works to channelize the facilitating factors during the process of competency framework development. At the same time, it designs and uses strategies to minimize the effect of restraining factors. The general facilitating and restraining factors are stated in Fig. 1.

6. CHALLENGES TO GET ACCREDITATION:

Most of the institutes function traditionally but the accreditation is granted to those institutes who have successfully implemented outcome-based education in letter and spirit. So, institutes face the following challenges when they prepare themselves for the accreditation process.

6.1 Traditionally designed syllabus by university or Board of Technical Education:

The syllabus is designed based on the content approach and not outcome-based approach so affiliating institutes have to transform complete curriculum using the outcome-based approach. Affiliating institutes are expected to satisfy the requirements of the university at the same time requirements of the self-assessment report of the accreditation agency. These requirements increase the work of the institutes and faculty members to maintain records for two different approaches. Some universities have modified their curriculum, but it is not scientifically developed considering the principles of an outcome-based approach. So, in most of the cases, it is maintaining the same contents and writing outcomes for the same, which is almost content-based syllabus only.

6.2 Traditional management of the institute:

The institutes are being managed by experienced principals and directors who have not been exposed to the recent practices of governance and management of the institutes for assuring the quality of education and sustaining performance from the outcome-based education point of view. Institutes use the reactive approach of management, but accreditation requires a proactive approach to management. Institutes are expected to have quality systems in all areas of their functioning.

6.3 Traditional teaching-learning methods:

The faculty members use traditional methods of teaching-learning, which focus on the completion of the syllabus by teachers and facilitating students to get a high score in the final examination. Accreditation requires a paradigm shift from teacher-centered to learner-centered approach for which adequately trained faculty members are not available. In most of the institutions, teachers are employed on a contract basis or visiting which have less commitment for quality, co-curricular activities, extra-curricular activities, and other activities that enhance the corporate image of the institute.

6.4 Traditional resources:

The well-established institutes that were established five years back and produced two batches of pass outs are eligible for the accreditation of their programmes. So many of them are having traditional resources to satisfy the requirements of the content-based curriculum. But the requirements of the outcome-based curriculum are much higher than the content-based curriculum. The laboratories must create industrial resemblance and must have the latest equipment and machines. There should be a project lab, incubation center, and research laboratory. Similarly, the classroom must be equipped with information communication technology facilities and the institute must have a learning management system. These resources require huge money, but institutes operate with a minimum budget.

6.5 Low level of awareness on outcome-based education among students:

The students join the engineering programmes from the traditional education system. They are not aware of outcome-based education. They expect a teacher to spoon-feed them everything and the examination system should also be memory-based. The institute requires an outcome-based education climate, which will be created by teachers and students.

6.6 Low level of contribution by industry:

The institutes are not situated near the industrial zone and many are in remote areas. These institutes do not have adequate funds to establish project laboratories and production centers. Therefore, there are barriers to working with the industry. The institutes and industries need to work collaboratively and cooperatively to help each other and effectively implement outcome-based education. However, both work in isolation so lack understanding of mutual expectations.

6.7 Low level of research and development initiatives:

The institutes are set up with a mindset to offer the academic programmes to make money and use it for expansion of institutions or some other purpose. There is no focus on research and development goals and activities. Whatever is done is done traditionally and to satisfy the statutory requirements. Therefore, many abilities and skills related to research, problem-solving, and development of new products or processes are superficially developed in the students. These abilities and skills are critical thinking, scientific analysis, attitude of systematic investigation, thinking creatively, and like.

7. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE:

The sole objective of the research is to develop a competency framework for accreditation coordinators of higher education institutions.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

1. What are the pillars of competency framework for accreditation coordinators of higher education institutions?

2. What are the competencies required by accreditation coordinators in higher education institutions in each pillar of a framework?

8. LITERATURE REVIEW:

Literature is reviewed on competency, competency framework, and accreditation. A brief review is given below:

Benayoune defined a competency framework as a set of selected competencies for a specific organization needed to achieve business results (Benayoune, 2017). He stated competency framework is used for recruitment and selection, evaluation of the performance of employees, training of employees, promotion of employees, development of employees’ career, and management of employee information. He defined the key terms associated with competency. He has stated that structured interviews, expert panels, desktop analysis, external benchmark data and focus group discussion techniques are used for developing the competency framework. He has discussed that lack of integration with other talent management systems and lack of appropriate level of specificity are the two major issues in implementing competency framework.

Gupta states that the competency framework for an organization is a bundle of competencies derived from the vision, missions, goals, vision reach strategies, values, policies, norms, ethics, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, resources, major achievements, customer and stakeholders expectations, etc. In order to know the nature of human resources required to carry out the business effectively and efficiently (Gupta, B. L., 2011).

NBA states in the General manual for accreditation about outcome-based education and accreditation. It is stated that in the year 2009 NBA aligned its methodologies with international benchmarks and started accreditation on the basis of outcomes. It is stated that the impact of accreditation goes far beyond the quality assurance of an institution/programme. It enumerates eight impacts under this section. The imperatives of accreditation are enumerated out of which accountability, self-improvement, and quality assurance are emphasized. In this manual general policy on accreditation, accreditation criteria, self-assessment report (SAR), stages of the accreditation process (initial, pre-assessment, assessment, and post-assessment stage) are stated. The other administrative aspects, code of conduct, fee, and feedback are stated (NBA, 2019).

DuVernet suggested a competency model for training managers in order to fill the knowledge and skill gap at the same time perform the job effectively and successfully. The author identified the competency area as strategic alignment, manage technology, develop and deliver solutions, identify needs, select and manage resources, and optimize processes (DuVernet, 2020).

Swapan Banerjee stated that accreditation is a value-added certification achieved by institutions through a rigorous auditing process (Swapan Banerjee, 2020).

9. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

It is an exploratory type of study, so the research design encompasses all the systematic stages of this kind of study. There was no similar study on the topic available, so the researchers selected the steps from an exploratory type of study. (Usha Marath, 2015) used quantitative approach using a quasi-experimental pretest multiple posttest control group designs for assessing the impact of leadership development package on development of leadership competencies. The major steps followed in this study are stated in Fig. 2.

9.7 Identify competencies within the framework:

The document analysis resulted in a tentative list of competencies. This tentative list of competencies was discussed with the NITTTR Bhopal faculty members who are involved in conducting training programmes and offering consultancy to the institute to add value to the identified competencies. Then a focused group discussion was organized to clearly define each competency and classify it under a competency framework. Then a four-point Likert-type rating scale was used to design the research instrument. The instrument was communicated to NBA coordinators for validating the identified competencies.

9.8 Validation of competencies:

Initially 38 competencies were identified which were circulated to 44 experts working in accreditation, training, and development. The experts offered their comments related to recrafting, modifying, and adding value to the competency. It is interesting to note that they have added 23 competencies to the provided list of competency statements. The competencies recrafted considering the comments of the experts. Then it was again validated by four experts.

9.9 Design and validation of research instrument:

The research instrument is designed using validated competencies. A Likert-type four-point rating scale is used. The research instrument was again validated by four experts and based on their comments it is fine-tuned.

9.10 Data presentation and analysis:

The data were collected through Google form from April 2020 to November 2020. On completion of data collection, an excel sheet was taken out from the Google form. This excel sheet is further used for calculating the weighted mean of responses for all the eight dimensions of the competency framework and for each competency statement. The priority of the competency statement within each dimension is also identified.

10 Findings:

10.1 Pillars of competency framework for accreditation coordinators:

Eight pillars are identified for classifying the identified competencies of accreditation coordinators. These pillars of the framework are decided based on the validated competencies, the role of the coordinator, and requirements of the accreditation process. The eight pillars of the framework are plan, design, communicate, lead, facilitate, implement, monitor, and evaluate.

10.2 Competencies of accreditation coordinator:

The validated competencies of the accreditation coordinator are verified with the respondents of the study on a four-point Likert-type scale. The weighted mean of each competency is calculated and stated in table 1.

Table 1: Competency Framework for Accreditation Coordinators

Sl. No.	Competencies	Weighted mean
	Planning
1.	Prepare an action plan for obtaining NBA Accreditation	3.85
2.	Prepare strategic, perspective, and annual plan of the institute and department	3.75
3.	Prepare an academic calendar of the institute and department	3.64
4.	Prepare formats for effectively implementing the systems and processes in the institute	3.62
5.	Prepare guideline documents for conducting students’ projects, industrial training, guidance and counseling, mentoring, placement, and the like	3.61
6.	Prepare training plan for faculty and staff members to implement outcome-based education	3.59
7.	Organize facilities and technical support required for accreditation	3.59
8.	Frame policy for undertaking consultancies, funded projects, serving as a resource person in external training and development programmes, interaction and joint working with industry, professionals, and external experts, participation in conferences, and training programmes through contact and online mode.	3.47
9.	Prepare to face on-site evaluation of the programmes of the institute by an expert team	3.46
10.	Frame policies for student participation in state and national level events, training of faculty members, performance appraisal, and documentation	3.43
11.	Frame ICT policy for introducing ICT in institute administration/ management, teaching-learning processes, development and sharing of learning resources, and hosting on institute website, website up-gradation, and maintenance, and overall continual improvement.	3.43
12.	Prepare programme articulation matrix	3.40
13.	Assess facilities and technical support required from an accreditation point of view	3.36
	Designing
14.	Design systems and processes such as curriculum development, teaching-learning, guidance, counseling, coaching and mentoring, placement, industrial training and internship, marketing the services, outcome-based assessment at the institute level to implement outcome-based education	3.62
15.	Design strategies for disseminating the vision, mission, PEOs, and other messages to stakeholders	3.61
16.	Design patterns of displaying vision, mission, PEOs, and other important messages in the institute	3.60
17.	Design system and processes for identification of weak students, and programme of remedial teaching.	3.49
18.	Design system and processes for teaching content beyond the syllabus, engaging industry experts, visiting and adjunct faculty, regular and purposeful alumni interaction, industry internships, pre-placement training, and student placement, etc.	3.47
19.	Design system and processes for institute budget development, allocation, utilization and reporting, auditing, and display of audited statements of accounts on the website.	3.34
20.	Design system and processes for institute governance as per the bylaws of trust/society and its operational mechanisms.	3.24
	Communicate and present
21.	Offer feedback on the progress of work and bring improvement in the performance	3.66
22.	Communicate the requirements of accreditation to all internal and external stakeholders	3.56
23.	Offer feedback on the progress of work and bring improvement in the performance	3.56
24.	Design formats to gather valid and reliable information from faculty members, heads, in-charges of various sections, and other stakeholders.	3.49
25.	Communicate the guidelines, systems, processes, and formats for assuring quality	3.45
26.	Communicate institutional development plan to all internal and external stakeholders	3.43
27.	Present effectively orally and in writing the quality achievements	3.38
28.	Gather valid and reliable information from faculty members, heads, in-charges of various sections, and other stakeholders	3.36
29.	Communicate the requirements of quality, innovation, research, and services	3.32
	Leading
30.	Take participative decisions for achieving quality goals	3.55
31.	Lead faculty and staff members and students to implement outcome-based education philosophy in letter and spirit	3.52
32.	Solve problems of implementation of outcome-based education	3.50
33.	Reward the achievers for their accomplishments	3.42
34.	Motivate faculty members and students to organize national and state-level events for faculty and students	3.40
35.	Encourage faculty members and students to contribute to technical magazine and newsletter	3.34
	Facilitating
36.	Facilitate the process of crafting the vision of the institute and department	3.60
37.	Facilitate the process of developing programme specific outcomes, course outcomes, outcome-based assessment tools, and techniques	3.59
38.	Facilitate the process of deriving the mission statements of the institute and department	3.57
39.	Facilitate the process of documentation at the institute and department level.	3.57
40.	Facilitate the process of finalizing the programme educational objectives	3.52
41.	Facilitate collation and analysis of marks of internal and external assessment to compute CO and PO attainment.	3.51
42.	Facilitate internal academic audit at the institute and department level.	3.48
43.	Facilitate action research and snap studies for the effectiveness of the teaching-learning process and innovations introduced, industrial training, internship, CO attainment through projects and co-curricular activities.	3.47
44.	Facilitate design and assessment of laboratory experiments for higher-order learning	3.43
45.	Facilitate budgeting at college and department levels	3.32
46.	Facilitate the organization of professional societies activities, technical events, competitions, educational games and quizzes, paper presentations, exhibitions, and the like.	3.32
47.	Facilitate resource allocation for library and online learning resources, purchase of journals, subscription of online index databases, and their utilization in line with the curriculum and research requirement.	3.32
	Implementing
48.	Conduct awareness and education programmes on accreditation for teachers, technical staff, ministerial staff, students, and external stakeholders	3.62
49.	Conduct workshops to develop outcome-based education systems and processes at the institute level	3.53
50.	Liaise with the NBA for programme accreditation, compliance reporting, and follow-up.	3.48
51.	Liaise with industry and stakeholders for removing gaps, weaknesses, and deficiencies and implement innovations with reference to NBA requirements.	3.45
52.	Ensure adequacy of infrastructure and resources, both human and physical, related academic, co-curricular, and extracurricular requirements, against the NBA pre-qualifiers and accreditation criteria.	3.45
53.	Organize discussions and presentations to share experiences of implementation of outcome-based education	3.42
54.	Establish rapport with internal stakeholders (faculty, staff, and students) and external stakeholders	3.41
55.	Ensure effective implementation of performance appraisal and development system at institute level	3.40
56.	Ensure implementation of mentoring and career guidance system in the institute	3.39
57.	Conduct SWOT, value analysis, and issue analysis of institute and department	3.36
	Monitoring
58.	Take corrective and preventive actions based on the feedback received from students and other stakeholders	3.52
59.	Implement well designed academic audit system in the institute	3.47
60.	Ensure continual improvement to become part of all system design processes, and implementation thereof.	3.44
	Evaluating
61.	Evaluate the performance of the institute and programmes against NBA criteria, sub-criteria, and parameters.	3.56

It is found that all the competencies in all eight pillars of the framework are rated more than 80%. It can be concluded that all the competencies are significant and should be used for making decisions about accreditation coordinators at the institute level or programme level.

11. SUGGESTIONS:

The competency framework and competency statements are useful for selecting, appointing, deploying, training, mentoring the accreditation coordinators in higher education institutes. The professionally trained coordinator will facilitate the process of accreditation at all phases and ensure that the institute and its programmes get accreditation. It is suggested that the competency framework should be used for:

1. Selecting, training, deploying, and redeploying the accreditation coordinator at the institute and department level.

2. Designing and implementing training programmes and workshops for accreditation coordinators.

3. Developing training and learning material for the accreditation coordinators.

4. Granting authority to accreditation coordinators to perform their roles and responsibilities effectively and efficiently.

5. Evaluating the performance of the accreditation coordinators for ensuring accountability.

6. Devising incentive and reward system for accreditation coordinators.

7. Creating healthy competition among programme level accreditation coordinators within the institute and among the institutions of the same group.

12 AREAS FOR FURTHER STUDY:

During the study, it is felt that there is scope for conducting an impact study on selection criteria for accreditation coordinator and accreditation status of the institute or programme. The other area of study could be the impact of accreditation training on the accreditation status of the institute or programme.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST:

There is no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES:

1. Azza Abou-Zeid, M. A. (2014). Accreditation Process for Engineering Programs in Saudi Arabia: Challenges and Lessons Learned. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), (p. 1118).

2. B. L. Gupta. (2010). Preparation for Obtaining NBA Accreditation. All India Vice Chancellors’ Conference from 12th to 14th November 2010, Conference on “Governance of Higher Education”. Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University, Pune.

3. Benayoune, A. (2017). Competency Framework: The Benefits and Challenges. International Journal of Management and Applied Science, 3(9), 6-11.

4. DuVernet. (2020). Training Manager Competencies.

5. G. Srinivas, S. S. (2020). Challenges of Mandatory Accreditation. University News, Association of Indian Universities, New Delhi, 58(14), 1-7.

6. Gupta, B. L. (2007). Management of Competency-based Learning. Concept Publishing Company Pvt. Limited, New Delhi.

7. Gupta, B. L. (2011). Competency Framework for Human Resources Management. Concept Publishing Company Pvt. Ltd New Delhi.

8. Ibrahim, H. A.-H. (2014). Quality Assurance and Accreditation in Education. Open Journal of Education, Sciknow Publications Ltd, 2(2).

9. J. Fredericks Volkwein, L. R. (2007). Measuring the Impact of Professional Accreditation on Student Experiences and Learning Outcomes. Research In Higher Education, 48(2), 251-282.

10. Mathew J Manimala, K. P. (2020). Facilitation and Regulation of Educational Institutions: The Role of Accreditation. VIKALPA, The Journal for Decision Makers, 45(1), 7-24.

11. MHRD. (2020). National Education Policy. Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India.

12. NBA. (2019). General Manual. National Board of Accreditation, Government of India, New Delhi.

13. PHAB. (2012). Accreditation Coordinator Handbook. Public Health Accreditation Board, Suite.

14. Pradeep Kumar, B. S. (2020). Impact of Accreditation on Quality and Excellence of Higher Education Institutions. Revista Investigacion Operacional, 41(2), 151-167.

15. Supreeta Naik, G. P. (2016). A Study to Assess the Knowledge Regarding Core Competencies in Nursing among Nursing Staff Working At Selected Hospitals In Bengaluru with a View to Provide Information Booklet. Asian Journal of Nursing Education and Research, 6(3).

16. Swapan Banerjee, B. S. (2020). Importance of International Accreditation for Institutions and the Role of Private Certification Bodies. Asian Journal of Management, 11(3), 279-284.

17. Usha Marath, R. (2015). Impact of Leadership Development Package on Leadership Competencies of Undergraduate Nursing Students. Asian Journal of Nursing Education and Research, 5(2), 221-228.

Received on 11.02.2021 Modified on 09.04.2021

Asian Journal of Management. 2021;12(4):380-388.

DOI: 10.52711/2321-5763.2021.00057

Facilitating factors	Restraining factors
Well – designed quality systems in place in the institute	Bureaucratic processes are in use
Faculty and staff members welcome change and innovation	Traditional functioning
Regular training and development at all levels	Administration is for enforcing discipline
Autonomy at all levels with accountability	No fixed responsibility
Well defined roles and responsibilities at all levels	Job description with less of monitoring
Deployment and redeployment practices exists	Only promotion and delegation practices
Succession planning and development	Human resource planning not linked to institute functioning
Human resource management politician in practice	Obsolete policy
Trained team to design and implement the change	No attention on competency framework
Quality assurance is integrated with HR processes	Reactive human resource processes
Healthy culture for growth and development of faculty and staff	Employees wait for promotion
Self-assessment practices prevail	Hire and fire practices
Severe opportunities for sharing and caring	People are self – centred
Visionary and shared leadership

Competencies

Weighted mean

Planning

Prepare an action plan for obtaining NBA Accreditation

3.85

Prepare strategic, perspective, and annual plan of the institute and department

3.75

Prepare formats for effectively implementing the systems and processes in the institute

3.62

Prepare guideline documents for conducting students’ projects, industrial training, guidance and counseling, mentoring, placement, and the like

3.61

Prepare training plan for faculty and staff members to implement outcome-based education

3.59

3.59

3.47

Prepare to face on-site evaluation of the programmes of the institute by an expert team

3.46

Frame policies for student participation in state and national level events, training of faculty members, performance appraisal, and documentation

3.43

3.43

Prepare programme articulation matrix

3.40

Assess facilities and technical support required from an accreditation point of view

3.36

Designing

Design systems and processes such as curriculum development, teaching-learning, guidance, counseling, coaching and mentoring, placement, industrial training and internship, marketing the services, outcome-based assessment at the institute level to implement outcome-based education

3.62

Design strategies for disseminating the vision, mission, PEOs, and other messages to stakeholders

3.61

Design patterns of displaying vision, mission, PEOs, and other important messages in the institute

3.60

3.49

3.47

3.34

3.24

3.56

3.45

3.43

3.32

Leading

3.55

Lead faculty and staff members and students to implement outcome-based education philosophy in letter and spirit

3.52

Solve problems of implementation of outcome-based education

3.50

Encourage faculty members and students to contribute to technical magazine and newsletter

3.34

Facilitating

Facilitate the process of crafting the vision of the institute and department

3.60

Facilitate the process of developing programme specific outcomes, course outcomes, outcome-based assessment tools, and techniques

3.59

Facilitate the process of documentation at the institute and department level.

3.57

Facilitate the process of finalizing the programme educational objectives

3.52

3.51

3.48

3.47

3.43

3.32

Facilitate the organization of professional societies activities, technical events, competitions, educational games and quizzes, paper presentations, exhibitions, and the like.

3.32

3.32

Implementing

Conduct awareness and education programmes on accreditation for teachers, technical staff, ministerial staff, students, and external stakeholders

3.62

Conduct workshops to develop outcome-based education systems and processes at the institute level

3.53

3.48

3.45

3.45

Organize discussions and presentations to share experiences of implementation of outcome-based education

3.42

3.41

Ensure effective implementation of performance appraisal and development system at institute level

3.40

Ensure implementation of mentoring and career guidance system in the institute

3.39