STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING ACCREDITATION PERFORMANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTION

Kua-Hsin Peng, Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng

Abstract

Numerous studies has focused on exploring input and output indicators of accreditation system; assessment quality assurance and accreditation of higher education; reviewing the status of quality assurance and accreditation system within higher education. However, few studies have explored strategies for improving institutional accreditation performance in higher education, and preventing decision makers from obtaining valuable cues for making accurate decisions to improve institutional accreditation performance to increase the logical thinking, reasoning ability and work competitiveness of graduate students. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore strategies for improving institutional accreditation performance using a new hybrid MCDM model combined with DANP (DEMATEL-based ANP). An empirical case was to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model for evaluating institutional accreditation performance to identify institutional performance gaps and explore strategies for improving accreditation based on the influential relation map. Decision makers should increase the priority of the cause criteria in advance, to successfully improve institutional accreditation performance to achieve the aspiration levels and increase competiveness of students.

References

  1. Anaam, M., Alhammadi, A. O., Kwairan, A. A., 2009. The status of quality assurance and accreditation systems within higher education institutions in the republic of Yemen, Quality in Higher Education, 15(1), 51-61.
  2. Anthony, S., 2004. External quality assurance in Indian higher education: Development of a decade. Quality in Higher Education, 10 (2), 115-127.
  3. Aqlan, F., Al-Araidah, O., Al-Hawari, T., 2010. Quality assurance and accreditation of engineering education in Jordan, European Journal of Engineering Education, 35 (3), 311-323.
  4. Campbell, C., Rozsnyai, C., 2002. Quality assurance and the development of course programmes, Papers on Higher Education Regional University Network on Governance and Management in Higher Education in South East Europe, UNESCO, Bucharest.
  5. Cavaller, V., 2011. Protfolios for entrepreneurship and self-evaluation of higher education institutions. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 12, 19-23.
  6. Chen, Y. C., Lien, H. P., Tzeng, G. H., 2010. Measures and evaluation for environment watershed plans using a novel hybrid MCDM model, Expert Systems with Applications, 37(2), 926-938.
  7. Eaton, J. S., 2006. An Overview of U.S. Accreditation, Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
  8. Foroughi Abari, A. A.,Yarmohammadian, M. H., Toroqi, J., 2004. Effectiveness in Higher Education, Encyclopedia of Higher Education, Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology, Tehran, Iran.
  9. HEEACT, 2008. 2007 HEEACT annual report. Taipei: Higher Education Evaluation & Accreditation Council of Taiwan.
  10. Ho, W. R. J., Tsai, C. L., Tzeng, G. H., Fang, S. K., 2011. Combined DEMATEL technique with a novel MCDM model for exploring portfolio selection based on CAPM, Expert Systems with Applications, 38(1), 16- 25.
  11. Hou, Y. C., Morse, R., 2009. Quality assurance and excellence in Taiwan higher education- an analysis of three major Taiwan college rankings, Evaluation in Higher Education, 3(2), 45-72.
  12. Hung, Y. H., Chou, S. C. T., Tzeng, G. H., 2011. Knowledge management adoption and assessment for SMEs by a novel MCDM approach, Decision Support Systems (forthcoming). Available online 5 February 2011.
  13. Kuan, M. J., Hsiang, C. C., Tzeng, G. H., 2011. Probing the innovative quality system for NPD process based on combining DANP with MCDM model, International Journal of Innovative Computing. Information and Control (special issue) (forthcoming).
  14. Lee, W. S., Tzeng, G. H., Cheng, C. M., 2009. Using novel MCDM methods based on fama-French threefactor model for probing the stock selection. APIEMS, Dec. 14-16: 1460-1474.
  15. Lin, C. L., Tzeng, G. H., 2009. A value-created system of science (technology) park by using DEMATEL. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(6), 9683-9697.
  16. Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G. H., 2004. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 445-455.
  17. Opricovic, S., 1998. Multicriteria Optimization of Civil Engineering Systems: Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade.
  18. Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G. H., 2003. Fuzzy multicriteria model for post-earthquake land-use planning, Natural Hazards Review, 4(2), 59-64.
  19. Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G. H., 2007. Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 178(2), 514-529.
  20. Ou Yang, Y. P., Shieh, H. M., Leu, J. D., Tzeng, G. H., 2008. A novel hybrid MCDM model combined with DEMATEL and ANP with applications, International Journal of Operations Research, 5(3), 1-9.
  21. Prasad, G., Bhar, C., 2010. Accreditation system for technical education programmes in India: A critical review, European Journal of Engineering Education, 35 (2), 187-213
  22. Saad, G., 2001. Strategic performance evaluation: descriptive and prescriptive analysis, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 101, 390-399.
  23. Saaty, T. L., 1996. Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA.
  24. Sadlak, J., 2010. Quality challenge in a changing landscape of higher education: Place and impact of academic rankings, Evaluation in Higher Education, 4(1), 1-12.
  25. Tsaur, S. H., Tzeng, G. H., Wang, K. C., 1997. Evaluating tourist risks from fuzzy perspectives, Annals of Tourism Research, 24(4), 796-812.
  26. Tzeng, G. H., Chiang, C. H., Li, C. W., 2007. Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL, Expert Systems with Applications, 32(4), 1028-1044.
  27. Tzeng, G. H., Lin, C. W., Opricovic, S., 2005. Multicriteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation. Energy Policy, 33(11), 1373-1383.
  28. UNESCO, External quality assurance: Options for higher education managers, Modules 1-3, 2007. www.unesco.org/iiep
  29. Wang, T. C., Lee, H. D., 2009. Developing a fuzzy TOPSIS approach based on subjective weights and objective weights, Expert Systems with Applications, 36(5), 8980-8985.
  30. Wild, C., 1995. Continuous improvement of teaching: A case study in a large statistics course, International Statistical Review/Revue Internationale de Statistique, 63, 49-68.
  31. Yang, J. L., Tzeng, G. H., 2011. An integrated MCDM technique combined with DEMATEL for a novel cluster-weighted with ANP method, Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 1417-1424.
  32. Yarmohammadian, M. H., Mozaffary, M., Esfahani, S. S., 2011). Evaluation of quality of education in higher education based on academic quality improvement program (AQIP) model, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2917-2922.
  33. Yu, P. L., 1973. A class of solutions for group decision problems, Management Science, 19(8), 936-946.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Peng K. and Tzeng G. (2012). STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING ACCREDITATION PERFORMANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTION . In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU, ISBN 978-989-8565-07-5, pages 211-221. DOI: 10.5220/0003900902110221


in Bibtex Style

@conference{csedu12,
author={Kua-Hsin Peng and Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng},
title={STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING ACCREDITATION PERFORMANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTION},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,},
year={2012},
pages={211-221},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0003900902110221},
isbn={978-989-8565-07-5},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,
TI - STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING ACCREDITATION PERFORMANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTION
SN - 978-989-8565-07-5
AU - Peng K.
AU - Tzeng G.
PY - 2012
SP - 211
EP - 221
DO - 10.5220/0003900902110221