The Curriculum Evaluation on Master of Education in Research and Evaluation Apply to Criteria of ASEAN University Network Quality Assurance (AUN – QA) at Program Level

Abstract

The objectives of this research were evaluate the curriculum on Master of Education in Research and Evaluation apply to criteria of ASEAN University Network Quality  Assurance (AUN - QA) 11 criteria : 1) Expected Learning Outcomes 2) Programme Specification 3) Programme Structure and Content 4) Teaching and Learning Approach 5) Student Assessment 6) Support Staff Quality 7) Academic Staff Quality 8) Student Quality and Support 9) Facilities and Infrastructure  10) Quality Enhancement 11) Output . Evaluating follow A 7 - point rating scale is used for  AUN - QA. The research resources were stakeholders including alumni, current students, users, graduates, teachers and experts. The data collection tools include : structured interview questionnaires and focus group discussion. Statistic is used means of mean, standard deviation and descriptive analysis.

The findings were as follow :

1. Expected Learning Outcomes : Overall, it was found that expected learning Outcomes are appropriate. Compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 3, as the QA practice to fulfill the criterion was defined and implemented but minor improvement was needed to fully meet them. Documents were available but no clear evidence to support that they have been fully used. Performance of the QA practice showed inconsistent or some results. And there was a passing result compared to the target value of the course.


2. Programme Specification: Overall, it was found that the program specification is appropriate. Compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 3, as the QA practice to fulfil the criterion was defined and implemented but minor improvement was needed to fully meet them. Documents were available but no clear evidence to support that they have been fully used. Performance of the QA practice showed inconsistent or some results. And there was a passing result compared to the target value of the course.


3. Programme Structure: Overall, it was found that the programme structure and content is appropriate. Compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 3, as the QA practice to fulfill the criterion was defined and implemented but minor improvement was needed to fully meet them. Documents were available but no clear evidence to support that they have been fully used. Performance of the QA practice showed inconsistent or some results. And there was a passing result compared to the target value of the course.


4. Teaching and Learning Approach : Overall, the program structure and content are appropriate. Compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 4, as the QA practice to fulfil the criterion was adequate and evidences support that it has been fully implemented. Performance of the QA practice showed consistent results as expected. And there was a passing result compared to the target value of the course.


5. Student Assessment: Overall, it was found that the Student assessment is appropriate. compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 3, as the QA practice to fulfill the criterion was defined and implemented but minor improvement was needed to fully meet them. Documents were available but no clear evidence to support that they have been fully used. Performance of the QA practice showed inconsistent or some results. And there was a passing result compared to the target value of the course.


6. Academic Staff Quality : Overall, it was found that the quality of academic staff quality is appropriate. Compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 2, as the QA practice to fulfil the criterion was still at planning stage or is inadequate where improvement is necessary. There is little document or evidence available. Performance of the QA practice showed little or poor results. And there was a failing result compared to the target value of the course.


7. Support Staff Quality: Overall, it was found that the quality of support staff quality is appropriate. Compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 2, as the QA practice to fulfil the criterion was still at planning stage or is inadequate where improvement is necessary. There is little document or evidence available. Performance of the QA practice showed little or poor results. And there was a failing result compared to the target value of the course.


8. Student Quality and Support : Overall, it was found that the student assessment is appropriate. Compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 3, as systematically collected, able to perform tasks against targets. And there was a passing result compared to the target value of the course.


9. Facilities and Infrastructure: Overall, it was found that the student assessment is appropriate. Compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 3, as the QA practice to fulfill the criterion was defined and implemented but minor improvement was needed to fully meet them. Documents were available but no clear evidence to support that
   they have been fully used. Performance of the QA practice showed inconsistent or some results. And there was a passing result compared to the target value of the course.


10. Quality Enhancement: Overall, it was found that the quality enhancement is appropriate. Compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 2, as the QA practice to fulfil the criterion was still at planning stage or is inadequate where improvement is necessary. There is little document or evidence available. Performance of the QA practice showed little or poor results. And there was a failing result compared to the target value of the course.


11. Output: Overall, it was found that the output is appropriate. Compared to the AUN-QA criteria, was in Level 3, as the QA practice to fulfill the criterion was defined and implemented but minor improvement was needed to fully meet them. Documents were available but no clear evidence to support that they have been fully used. Performance
    of the QA practice showed inconsistent or some results. And there was a passing result compared to the target value of the course.