Strategic Assessment for Higher Education Excellence

Veena Dutta

Doon Business School, Dehradun, India

Keywords: Higher Education, Quality Metrics, Performance Evaluation, Educational Outcomes, Faculty-Student Ratio.

Abstract: This study investigates comprehensive quality metrics for assessing Higher Education Institutions (HEIs),

focusing on performance and educational outcomes. Employing a quantitative research design, data trends in

quality metrics including faculty-student ratio (FSR), research and publication metrics, and student

perceptions of technology in education are analysed. The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF)

criteria provide a framework for evaluation. Results reveal a positive trajectory in FSR improvement,

indicating efforts to enhance the teaching environment. Research publications demonstrate exponential

growth, indicative of a thriving research landscape. Student feedback on technology underscores satisfaction,

particularly with interactive exercises and machine learning-powered assistants, enhancing engagement and

overall contentment. This research highlights the significance of holistic evaluation metrics for HEIs, offering

insights crucial for continual enhancement and policy formulation. The findings advocate for a multifaceted

approach to evaluating HEIs, recognising the interconnectedness of teaching quality, research output, and

technological integration.

1 INTRODUCTION

Higher education institutions play a vital role in

shaping the intellectual and professional development

of individuals, thereby contributing significantly to

societal progress (Noaman, A. Y., et al., 2017).

Maintaining the quality of education provided by

these institutions is crucial for nurturing a

knowledgeable and skilled workforce. Effective

quality metrics are essential for this purpose. This

research focuses on three key dimensions: faculty-

student ratio, research and publication metrics, and

the evolving role of technology as perceived by

students. These dimensions collectively influence the

educational landscape.

The faculty-student ratio is a foundational metric

that offers insights into the balance between academic

staff and enrolled students. This ratio is pivotal in

determining the level of personalized attention and

mentorship students receive, directly impacting their

learning experience (Koc, N., & Celik, B., 2015).

Institutions striving to foster an environment

conducive to intellectual growth must understand the

nuances of faculty-student interactions. A favourable

ratio can lead to more meaningful engagement and

support for students, while an imbalance may result

in diminished academic support and opportunities for

mentorship.

Another important dimension of examination

revolves around research and publication metrics,

acknowledging the significant role of scholarly

activities in shaping an institution's academic

reputation (University Grants Commission, 2019).

Beyond numerical indicators, the depth and impact of

research, as well as the frequency and quality of

publications, provide valuable insights into an

institution's commitment to advancing knowledge. In

an era marked by a relentless pursuit of innovation,

an institution's research landscape reflects its

intellectual vibrancy and contributions to the broader

academic community. Effective quality metrics in

this realm can help institutions gauge their research

productivity and impact accurately.

2 OBJECTIVE

• Examine and analyze a range of

comprehensive quality metrics utilized in

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) for

evaluation purposes.

• Assess the overall performance and

educational outcomes of HEIs based on the

618

Dutta, V.

Strategic Assessment for Higher Education Excellence.

DOI: 10.5220/0012907800003882

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 2nd Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies (PAMIR-2 2023), pages 618-622

ISBN: 978-989-758-723-8

identified quality metrics to provide insights

into their effectiveness and areas for

improvement.

3 LITERATURE REVIEW

Table 1: Insights into HE Dynamics: TEF, Engagement, and Sustainability.

Author Findings

Gunn, A. (2018)

- Analyzes the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) in UK HE, its methodologies, and outcomes. -

Discusses TEF's dual agendas: performance quantification and student consumer positioning. -

Concludes on TEF's multi-

urpose nature driven by teaching quality and market dynamics.

Mandernach, B.

J. (2015)

- Synthesizes literature on student engagement in HE, emphasizing its significance and dynamic nature.

- Advocates for tailored assessment methods for engagement. - Discusses tools for evaluating student

engagement.

Findler, F., et al.

(2018)

- Investigates sustainability assessment tools (SATs) in HEIs, noting their effectiveness internally but

shortcomings in measuring external impacts. - Identifies a gap in current sustainability assessment tools,

estin

the need for u

dates or new develo

ments.

4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study employs a quantitative research design to

explore the intricate realm of quality metrics within

higher education (HE). Specifically, it aims to

scrutinize key aspects such as faculty-student ratios,

research metrics, and student attitudes towards

technology in education. Secondary data from

reputable sources including McKinsey and the

National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) is

meticulously analysed. A selective approach is

adopted to handpick relevant reports and datasets for

thorough examination. Through rigorous quantitative

analysis, this research seeks to unearth meaningful

patterns and insights that illuminate the performance

and educational outcomes of HE institutions. By

shedding light on the development and

implementation of comprehensive quality metrics,

the study contributes to a deeper understanding of the

intricacies and impact of such metrics within the

dynamic landscape of higher education.

5 ANALYSIS

Numerous reports and ranking data have been

analysed to scrutinise comprehensive quality metrics

for assessing Higher Education (HE) and appraising

the overall performance and educational outcomes of

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). The outlined

sub-criteria outlined by the National Institutional

Ranking Framework (NIRF) hold significant

importance in this investigation.

5.1 Comprehensive Quality Metrics

The sub-criteria encompass an extensive array of

factors, embracing student enrollment, faculty-to-

student ratio, faculty credentials and tenure, financial

resources, research output, patent portfolio, project

involvement, graduation rates, diversity, and both

peer and public perception. These metrics are

designed to furnish a comprehensive evaluation of an

institution's efficacy, contemplating numerous facets

that shape the standard of education and research. By

scrutinizing these multifaceted dimensions, a

nuanced understanding of an institution's

performance can be attained, encapsulating its

capacity to deliver high-quality education and

contribute meaningfully to the academic and research

landscape.

5.2 Evaluation of Overall Performance

The sub-criteria play a vital role in evaluating an

institution's overall performance comprehensively.

Key elements such as teaching and learning

resources, research output, and outreach initiatives

are indicative of the institution's dedication to

academic excellence. Furthermore, graduation

outcomes, encompassing placement and

entrepreneurship metrics, serve as benchmarks for

assessing how effectively the institution equips

students for the professional realm. Additionally,

inclusivity measures, such as student population

diversity and support for economically and socially

disadvantaged students, are integral in providing a

holistic evaluation of the institution's impact on a

varied student demographic.

Strategic Assessment for Higher Education Excellence

619

5.3 Peer and Public Perception

The incorporation of peer and public perception

metrics acknowledges the significant role external

stakeholders play in shaping an institution's standing.

This perception mirrors the institution's reputation

and sway within academic and professional circles.

Such qualitative metrics enrich a comprehensive

evaluation framework, transcending mere academic

feats to gauge the holistic impact of Higher Education

Institutions (HEIs) on students, research, and society

overall. This multifaceted approach ensures a

nuanced comprehension of an institution's strengths

and identifies areas necessitating improvement, thus

fostering continuous enhancement in the educational

landscape.

6 TEACHING AND LEARNING

QUALITY METRICS

6.1 Faculty-Student Ratio

The Faculty-Student Ratio (FSR) serves as an

objective gauge due to its ability to offer a

quantifiable comparison between the number of

faculty members and students within educational

institutions. A lower FSR is often perceived as

advantageous, as it typically correlates with smaller

class sizes. Such smaller classes tend to foster

enhanced class participation and foster improved

communication between educators and students.

Consequently, a lower FSR tends to signify a more

conducive environment for effective teaching and

learning. Analysis conducted on FSR trends across

engineering institutions spanning from 2017 to 2020

reveals a promising development. Notably, there has

been a discernible enhancement in FSR, particularly

within the 11 to 40 range. This improvement is

underscored by a growing number of institutions

falling within these FSR brackets, indicating a

concerted effort towards achieving a more desirable

and acceptable FSR. This trend reflects a

commitment within the academic community

towards optimising educational environments, thus

potentially enhancing the quality of education

provided within engineering institutions.

6.2 Research and Publications

Assessment

The data pertaining to publications holds pivotal

importance in the scrutiny of comprehensive quality

metrics and the assessment of overall performance

within higher education establishments. The

quantification of publications, alongside the ratio of

publications per faculty member, stands out as

principal indicators of output, widely acknowledged

by both national and international ranking systems.

The notable exponential surge in cumulative

publications spanning various subject domains over

the span of four years denotes a favourable upswing

in research endeavours, substantially contributing to

the holistic evaluation of these institutions.

Furthermore, the examination of publications

emanating from the top 100 institutions in contrast to

the remainder unveils a dynamic landscape,

characterised by a diminishing proportion of

contributions from the top 100 and a burgeoning

share from other institutions. Such a trajectory

intimates towards a more inclusive and diverse milieu

for research pursuits. In essence, the data concerning

publications furnishes invaluable insights into the

research productivity of higher education institutions,

aligning seamlessly with the overarching objectives

of assessing comprehensive quality metrics and the

overall institutional performance.

6.3 Technology and Infrastructure

The data suggests that students are actively seeking

educational tools that combine entertainment with

efficiency. Since the onset of the COVID-19

pandemic, a majority of students (over 60 percent)

have expressed that the learning technologies

employed in classrooms have positively impacted

their academic performance. This indicates a general

satisfaction with the integration of technology into

their educational journey, particularly given the

increased reliance on remote learning. Notably,

among the plethora of technologies in use, two have

emerged as particularly influential in enhancing

academic outcomes. Firstly, 80 percent of students

highlighted the significance of classroom exercises.

This underscores the role of interactive and engaging

activities, whether conducted virtually or in a

physical classroom, in improving their understanding

and retention of course materials. Secondly, 71

percent of students identified machine learning–

powered teaching assistants as valuable tools. These

assistants likely utilize artificial intelligence

algorithms to offer personalized and adaptive support

to students, including answering queries, providing

additional explanations, and tailoring the learning

experience to individual needs. The integration of

engaging classroom exercises and machine learning–

powered teaching assistants aligns with several key

PAMIR-2 2023 - The Second Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR

620

quality indicators for Higher Education Institutions

(HEIs), including improved engagement,

personalized learning experiences, enhanced

academic performance, adaptability to changing

circumstances, and overall student satisfaction. These

factors contribute to a positive perception of the

institution's quality and effectiveness in delivering

education.

According to data from a McKinsey survey

conducted in November 2021, which included

responses from 634 faculty members and 818

students across various types of educational

institutions, students exhibit enthusiasm about

integrating learning technologies into their

educational experiences for several reasons. The

primary factors contributing to their excitement vary

across three specific technologies: Classroom

Interactions, Classroom Exercises, and Augmented

Reality/Virtual Reality. For Classroom Interactions,

35% of students are excited about personalized

learning, followed by 32% emphasizing access to

resources and instructors. In the context of Classroom

Exercises, 32% express excitement for personalized

learning, while Augmented Reality/Virtual Reality

sees an overwhelming 88% of students anticipating

the benefits of personalized learning. Across all

technologies, there is a consistent interest in gaining

access to resources and instructors. Additionally,

students are intrigued by the potential to improve

their learning abilities and content mastery,

demonstrating a desire for efficiency in the learning

process.

7 CONCLUSION

This study aimed to explore comprehensive quality

metrics for evaluating Higher Education Institutions

(HEIs) and to assess their overall performance and

educational outcomes. Utilising a quantitative

research design, the study employed secondary data

from McKinsey and NIRF to scrutinise key aspects

such as faculty-student ratio, research and

publications, and technology and infrastructure.

Analysis of Faculty-Student Ratio (FSR) trends

revealed an improvement over the years, particularly

in the 11 to 40 range, indicating efforts to foster a

more conducive environment for effective teaching.

Assessing research and publications as pivotal

indicators of institutional quality showcased an

exponential increase in cumulative publications

across various subject domains, mirroring a positive

trend in research activity.

The exploration of technology and infrastructure

from the standpoint of students unveiled a general

satisfaction with the integration of educational

technologies, especially amidst the backdrop of the

COVID-19 pandemic. Notably, interactive classroom

exercises and machine learning-powered teaching

assistants emerged as impactful tools, aligning with

key quality indicators such as enhanced engagement,

personalised learning experiences, and overall

student satisfaction. Students expressed enthusiasm

towards learning technology, particularly for

personalised learning, exemplified by Augmented

Reality/Virtual Reality, and for improved access to

resources. Efficiency in learning emerged as a

prevailing theme, with less emphasis on

entertainment. Overall, students perceived learning

technology as a means to customise and enrich their

educational experiences.

The discussion underscored the significance of

the sub-criteria provided by NIRF in evaluating

comprehensive quality metrics, overall performance,

and educational outcomes. These metrics encompass

a broad spectrum of factors, including faculty

qualifications, research output, graduation outcomes,

and peer/public perception, thus contributing to a

holistic evaluation framework. The study emphasises

the importance of adopting a multifaceted approach

to comprehensively evaluate HEIs. By considering

various dimensions such as teaching, research,

technology integration, and stakeholder perceptions,

the investigation provides valuable insights into the

strengths and areas for improvement of these

institutions. This holistic understanding is vital for

fostering continuous improvement and upholding

high standards in Higher Education. The findings

contribute to the ongoing discourse on quality

assessment in Higher Education and lay the

groundwork for further research and policy

development in this domain.

REFERENCES

Findler, F., Schönherr, N., Lozano, R., & Stacherl, B.

(2018). Assessing the impacts of higher education

institutions on sustainable development—an analysis of

tools and indicators. Sustainability, 11(1), 59.

Gunn, A. (2018). Metrics and methodologies for measuring

teaching quality in higher education: developing the

Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF). Educational

Review, 70(2), 129-148.

Mandernach, B. J. (2015). Assessment of student

engagement in higher education: A synthesis of

literature and assessment tools. International Journal of

Strategic Assessment for Higher Education Excellence

621

Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 12(2),

1-14.

Nassa, A. K., Arora, J., Singh, P., Joorel, J. P., Trivedi, K.,

Solanki, H., & Kumar, A. (2021). Five Years of India

Rankings (NIRF) and its Impact on Performance

Parameters of Engineering Institutions in India. Pt. 2.

Research and Professional Practices. DESIDOC

Journal of Library & Information Technology, 41(2).

Noaman, A. Y., Ragab, A. H. M., Madbouly, A. I., Khedra,

A. M., & Fayoumi, A. G. (2017). Higher education

quality assessment model: towards achieving

educational quality standard. Studies in higher

education, 42(1), 23-46.

Koc, N., & Celik, B. (2015). The impact of number of

students per teacher on student achievement. Procedia-

Social and Behavioral Sciences, 177, 65-70.

Akhtar, J., Patel, G., & Khan, N. (2013). Technology

Adoption in Management Classroom Learning.

International Journal of Management & Information

Technology, 7(3), 1110-1124.

University Grants Commission. (2019). Improving the

quality of research by faculty and creation of new

knowledge and strategies for improving research

culture in colleges/universities. Retrieved March, 31,

2020.

PAMIR-2 2023 - The Second Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR

622