Why Accreditation

Education plays a vital role in the development of any nation. Therefore, there is a premium on both quantity (increased access) and quality (relevance and excellence of academic programmes offered) of higher education. The NAAC has been set up to facilitate the volunteering institutions to assess their performance vis-a-vis set parameters through introspection and a process that provides space for participation of the institution.
Benefits of Accreditation

Accreditation facilitates

Institution to know its strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities through an informed review process.
Identification of internal areas of planning and resource allocation
Collegiality on the campus.
Funding agencies look for objective data for performance funding.
Institutions to initiate innovative and modern methods of pedagogy.
New sense of direction and identity for institutions.
The society look for reliable information on quality education offered.
Employers look for reliable information on the quality of education offered to the prospective recruits.
Intra and inter-institutional interactions.

Eligibility Criteria for Assessment and Accreditation (A&A)
Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), if they have a record of at least two batches of students graduated or been in existence for six years, whichever is earlier, are eligible to apply for the process of Assessment and Accreditation (A&A) of NAAC, and fulfil the other conditions or are covered by the other provisions, if any, mentioned below:

Universities (Central/State/Private/Deemed-to-be) and Institutions of National Importance

Provided the Institutions /Deemed –to-be Universities and their off-campuses if any are approved by MHRD/UGC. NAAC will not consider the unapproved off-campuses for A&A.
Provided that these institutions have regular students enrolled in to the full time teaching and Research programmes offered on campus.
Provided further that the duly established campuses within the country, if any, shall be treated as part of the Universities / Institutions of National Importance for the A&A process.
NAAC will not undertake the accreditation of off-shore campuses.

Autonomous colleges/Constituent Colleges/ Affiliated Colleges (affiliated to universities recognised by UGC as an affiliating University)
Provided the Colleges are affiliated to a University recognised by UGC for the purposes of affiliation. Constituent colleges of a Private and Deemed- to-be Universities are considered as the constituent units of the University and thus will not be considered for A&A independently. Such constituent colleges need to come along with the University
Provided the colleges/institutions not affiliated to a University are offering programmes recognized by Statutory Professional Regulatory Councils and have been recognised by Association of Indian Universities(AIU) or other such Government agencies concerned, as equivalent to a degree programme of a Universiy

3. Accredited HEIs applying for Re-assessment or Subsequent Cycles (Cycle 2, Cycle 3, Cycle 4….) of Accreditation

Institutions, which would like to make an improvement in the accredited status, may apply for Re-assessment, after a minimum of one year and before three years of accreditation subject to the fulfilment of other conditions specified by NAAC from time to time for the purpose.
Institutions opting for Subsequent Cycles (Cycle 2, Cycle 3, Cycle 4….) of Accreditation can submit the Institutional Information for Quality Assessment (IIQA), beginning of the last quarter of the validity period subject to the fulfilment of other conditions specified by NAAC from time to time for the purpose.

4. Any other HEIs at the discretion of NAAC.
Note:

The NAAC accreditation does not cover distance education units of HEIs and off-shore campuses.
All the institutions intending to apply for Assessment and Accreditation by NAAC need to mandatorily upload the information on All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) portal. AISHE code (reference number) is one of the requirements for Registration.

IIQA
During online submission of IIQA, the following documents (if applicable) have to be uploaded in .pdf form.

(Please note the size should not exceed 1MB.)

Latest Affiliation letter from the Affiliating University.
Latest Recognition/approval letter from Statutory Regulatory Authority (SRA) like AICTE, MCI etc...
UGC 2f and 12(B) recognition certificate along with latest Plan General Development Grant release letter from UGC.
Letter from UGC regarding award of CPE/UPE.
For Autonomous colleges, UGC letter conferring Autonomous Status.
Proof of uploading All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) certificate.
If change in name, submit approvals of relevant authorities/ University/MHRD/UGC
Approval of UGC/MHRD/State government for establishment of university.
AIU or other governmental agencies approval for standalone institutes.
Upload AQAR’s in the website so as to provide URL details.
Self declaration by the HEI’s complying with rules and regulations of Central Government, State Government, UGC,Affiliating University and other applicable SRA in the format provided by NAAC.
Self declaration with respect to Affiliation status in the format provided by NAAC.

Units of Assessment

NAAC’s instrument is developed to assess and grade institutions of higher education through a three-step-process and make the outcome as objective as possible. Though the methodology and the broad framework of the instrument is similar, there is a slight difference in the focus of the instrument depending on the unit of Accreditation, i.e., Affiliated / Constituent colleges / Autonomous colleges / Universities / Health Science.
Institutional Accreditation:

University: University Central Governance Structure along with all the Under Graduate and Post Graduate Departments.
College: Any College - affiliated, constituent or autonomous with all its departments of studies.

Department Accreditation: Any department/School/Centre of the University.
Presently, NAAC is undertaking only institutional accreditation. Experts groups have been constituted to work on Program Accreditation.

Criteria for Assessment

NAAC has identified the following seven criteria to serve as the basis of its assessment procedures:

Curricular Aspects
Teaching-Learning and Evaluation
Research, Innovations and Extension
Infrastructure and Learning Resources
Student Support and Progression
Governance, Leadership and Management
Institutional Values and Best Practices

Key Indicators
Under each Criterion a few Key Indicators are identified. These Key Indicators (KIs) are further delineated as Metrics which actually elicit responses from the HEIs.

Weightages

The NAAC has categorized the Higher Educational Institutions into three major types (University, Autonomous College, and Affiliated/Constituent College) and assigned different weightages to these criteria under different key aspects based on the functioning and organizational focus of the three types of HEIs.
The criterion-wise differential weightages for the three types of HEIs are:

Curricular Aspects	150 (U)	150 (Au)	100 (Aff)
Teaching-learning and Evaluation	200 (U)	300 (Au)	350 (Aff)
Research, Innovations and Extension	250 (U)	150 (Au)	120 (Aff)
Infrastructure and Learning Resources	100 (U)	100 (Au)	100 (Aff)
Student Support and Progression	100 (U)	100 (Au)	130 (Aff)
Governance, Leadership and Management	100 (U)	100 (Au)	100 (Aff)
Institutional Values and Best Practices	100 (U)	100 (Au)	100 (Aff)

Grading

Institutions are graded for each Key Aspect under four categories, viz. A, B, C and D, denoting Very good, Good, Satisfactory and Unsatisfactory levels respectively. The summated score for all the Key Aspects under a Criterion is then calculated with the appropriate weightage applied to it and the GPA is worked out for the Criterion. The Cumulative GPA (CGPA), which gives the final Assessment Outcome, is then calculated from the seven GPAs pertaining to the seven criteria, after applying the prescribed weightage to each Criterion.
Advantages of CGPA

Letter grades converted to Numerical Grade Points (overall score in Cumulative Grade Point Average)
Qualitative measurements converted to grade points
Wider scope for normalizing the scores
Extreme biases (if any) could be minimized
A one point difference between two letter grades, with 50 or 100 points assigned between two successive letter grades results in appreciable fine-tuning of the process.
Relative evaluation would be more exact, due to a reduction in variations and standard deviations
Inter-Peer Team variations are substantially reduced
With scare scope for adjustment at any stage, the peer team judgment would be more accurate

The Assessment indicator guidelines are used for arriving at the Key Aspect Grade Points. The Key Aspects under each criterion have their own weightages according to the relative importance of the said key aspect in the context of the type of institution. Finally, at the criterion level, there are specified differential weightages according to the type of institution. Therefore, the grade points assigned to different Key Aspects and Criteria get normalized at two levels, before the final CGPA is calculated for the institution. The CGPA is thus calculated with the application of weightages at two different levels of assessment.
Assessment Outcome

There are two outcomes of Assessment and Accreditation:
1.Peer Team Report
The qualitative part of the outcome is called Peer Team Report (PTR) which is an objective report prepared by the Team highlighting its evaluative judgements, mostly using precise keywords instead of long sentences.
2.Institutional Grading
The quantitative part of the outcome comprises the criterion-wise quality assessment, resulting in the final Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA), a letter grade and a performance descriptor. The CGPA and letter grade constitute the certification by the NAAC on institutional accreditation. Thus, at the end of A&A process, each applicant institution will be awarded with a Letter Grade to represent its quality level along with its Performance Descriptor and Accreditation Status, based on the CGPA earned by it through the assessment process, as mentioned below:

Range of institutional Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA)	Letter Grade	status
3.51 - 4.00	A++	Accredited
3.26 - 3.50	A+	Accredited
3.01 - 3.25	A	Accredited
2.76 - 3.00	B++	Accredited
2.51 - 2.75	B+	Accredited
2.01 - 2.50	B	Accredited
1.51 - 2.00	C	Accredited
<= 1.50	D	Not accredited

Institutions which secure a CGPA less than or equal to 1.50 will be intimated and notified by the NAAC as “assessed and found not qualified for accreditation”.
Period of validity of accreditation The accreditation status is valid for five years from the date of approval by the Executive Committee of the NAAC.
Re-assessment

Institutions, which would like to make an improvement in the accredited status, may volunteer for Re-assessment, after completing at least one year but not after the completion of three years. The manual to be followed for re-assessment is the same as that for the Assessment and Accreditation. However, the institution shall make specific responses based on the recommendations made by the peer team in the first assessment and accreditation report, as well as the specific quality improvements made by the institution. The fee structure would be the same as that for Assessment and Accreditation.
Cycles of Accreditation

When an institution undergoes the accreditation process for the first time it is referred to as Cycle 1 and the consecutive five year periods as Cycles 2, 3, etc.
For Cycle 1, please refer ‘Process of accreditation’
For Cycles 2, 3, etc. the following are essential:

IQAC to be functional.
Timely submission of AQARs annually.
Institutions to submit IIQA, six months before the expiry of the accreditation status.
Other steps remain the same as first cycle.

Grievance Redressal

The NAAC views the process of assessment and accreditation as an exercise in partnership, done jointly by the NAAC and the institution being assessed. Every stage of the process is marked by transparency. The institution is consulted at various stages of the process – eliminating conflict of interest with the peers, planning the visit schedule, sharing the draft peer team report before the team leaves the campus etc. In spite of this participatory approach, there may be institutions that might have grievances to be addressed. Therefore, to provide a review mechanism for institutions who are aggrieved about the process or its outcome or any other issues related thereof, the NAAC has evolved Grievance Redressal Guidelines.
On announcement of the A&A outcome, the institution not satisfied with the accreditation status may submit:

The letter of intent for appeal along with a request to provide the criterion wise scores so as to reach NAAC within 30 days from the receipt of the letter intimating the accreditation status from NAAC.
The application for Appeal in the format prescribed by NAAC (refer Grievance Redressal Guidelines) should reach NAAC within 30 days from the date of receipt of the criterion wise scores from NAAC. The application for appeal should be submitted along with the requisite non-refundable fee of Rs. 1,00,000/- plus service tax (GST @ 18%).

No correspondence (including phone calls) will be entertained on the matter till the appeal is disposed of by the "Appeals Committee/EC of NAAC. An Appeals Committee constituted for the purpose will consider the appeal and make recommendations to the Executive Committee (EC). The decision of the EC shall be binding on the institution.
Scope of Appeals Committee Extended

The Executive Committee (EC) reiterated during 53rd meeting on September, 4th 2010, that Appeals Committee is meant to consider not only the appeals from the Institutions but also to consider cases referred to it by the EC, in case of any deviation from the process of Assessment and Accreditation, violations, complaints, etc.

A college being accredited usually signifies that it has met certain standards of excellence across its operations.
There are three major benefits for students due to an accreditation:

Exchange Programs: The possibility of a tie - up with a good university abroad increases if the college is ‘A’ accredited. There is also a higher chance of incoming exchange / foreign students, both of whom help to build a more culturally diverse environment in college (of which the impact on individual growth cannot be understated).
Placements: Many companies, as part of their campus recruiting programs, only look at ‘A’ graded colleges. An accreditation, consequently, increases the number of companies coming on campus, thereby increasing the diversity of career opportunities available to students on campus.
Further Studies: While applying abroad, colleges often look at the grading of your college to gain a better understanding of your performance as a student relative to your peer group. The higher the accreditation, the better it increases your chances for a favourable reply.
Universities abroad (especially in US) will review your academic/SAT scores and extra-curricular activities for admission into UG courses. For admission to PG courses ,the consideration is around your UG academic score, GRE/GMAT score and Research/Publication/Industry Internship.
There is no explicit consideration of the 'reputation' of the institute by these Universities.
NAAC accreditation is pretty much an 'Indian' affair and signals a level of compliance and quality of the institute to students/parents.

AAC’s process of assessment is towards holistic, systematic, objective, data-based, transparent and shared experience for institutional improvement. NAAC has formulated a three stage process for assessment and accreditation as given below:
1. The First-Step: ‘Institutional Eligibility for Quality Assessment (IEQA): In the first step of Assessment and Accreditation, “Institutional Eligibility for Quality Assessment” (IEQA) is required to be obtained by an applicant institution at the beginning, while it is still in the planning stage for assessment. The benefits of this step for an applicant institution are:
• To get recognized as eligible to apply for the second step comprehensive Assessment and Accreditation process;
• To get feedback from NAAC if it does not qualify in the first step, about specific improvements to be made for reaching the required quality level
• To receive assistance and suitable mentoring from NAAC in the latter case, for enabling it to qualify for IEQA in due course of time.

2. Preparation of the Self-Study Report by the institution, its submission to NAAC and in-house analysis of the report by NAAC.
3. Peer Team Visit to the institution for validation of the Self-Study Report followed by presentation of a comprehensive assessment report to the institution.
4. Grading, Certification and Accreditation based on the evaluation report by the peer team.

NATIONAL MISSION ON EDUCATION THROUGH INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY (NMEICT) For India to emerge as a knowledge super power of the world in the shortest possible time it is imperative to convert our demographic Advantage into knowledge powerhouse by nurturing and honing our working population into knowledge or knowledge enabled working population.¡ ¡
Higher education in India Philip G. Altbach INDIA IS rushing headlong toward economic success and modernisation, counting on high-tech industries such as information technology and biotechnology to propel the nation to prosperity. Unfortunately, its weak higher education sector constitutes the Achilles' Heel of this strategy. Its systematic disinvestment in higher education in recent years has yielded neither world-class research nor very many highly trained scholars, scientists, or managers to sustain high-tech development.¡ ¡ ¡ ¡
. The recent London Times Higher Education Supplement ranking of the world's top 200 universities included three in China, three in Hong Kong, three in South Korea, one in Taiwan, and one in India (an Indian Institute of Technology at number 41— the specific campus was not specified). These countries are positioning themselves for leadership in the knowledge-based economies of the coming era.¡
India has significant advantages in the 21st century knowledge race. It has a large higher education sector — the third largest in the world in student numbers, after China and the United States. It uses English as a primary language of higher education and research. It has a long academic tradition. Academic freedom is respected. There are a small number of high quality institutions, departments, and centres that can form the basis of quality sector in higher education. The fact that the States, rather than the Central Government, exercise major responsibility for higher education creates a rather cumbersome structure, but the system allows for a variety of policies and approaches.¡
The rise in the number of part-time teachers and the freeze on new full-time appointments in many places have affected morale in the academic profession. The lack of accountability means that teaching and research performance is seldom measured. The system provides few incentives to perform. Bureaucratic inertia hampers change. Student unrest and occasional faculty agitation disrupt operations. Nevertheless, with a semblance of normality, faculty administrators are able to provide teaching, coordinate examinations, and award degrees.¡
Few in India are thinking creatively about higher education. There is no field of higher education research. Those in government as well as academic leaders seem content to do the "same old thing." Academic institutions and systems have become large and complex. They need good data, careful analysis, and creative ideas¡
India has survived with an increasingly mediocre higher education system for decades. Now as India strives to compete in a globalised economy in areas that require highly trained professionals, the quality of higher education becomes increasingly important. So far, India's large educated population base and its reservoir of at least moderately well-trained university graduates have permitted the country to move ahead. But the competition is fierce. China in particular is heavily investing in improving its best universities with the aim of making a small group of them world class in the coming decade, and making a larger number internationally competitive research universities.¡
The bigger challenge is that the students do not choose to study in fields that will best contribute to economic growth — or to their own job prospects. Also, employers regularly complain that graduates are not adequately prepared for available jobs.¡
While it is true that Indian academics, by international comparisons, are relatively well paid, they are not necessarily effective. Academics, and especially college teachers, are constrained by rigid bureaucracy. Further, their work is not carefully evaluated — salary increases and pr¡omotions are awarded rather on the basis of seniority. Unfortunately, when salaries were increased in 2006, this boon was not accompanied by any reforms in the teaching profession or requirements for evaluation. A System of Academic Performance Indicators for promotion and appointment of professors and lecturers is yet to take roots. It appears that Indian academics want to do a good job and most are committed to their profession. However, structural impediments and an ossified culture get in the way.
Weaknesses Identified: 1. Abundance of un-nurtured talent. 2. Lack of timely and easy availability of knowledge resources to all. 3. Opportunities lost because of difficult access to information and guidance. 4. Mismatch between demand and supply of knowledge and skills 5. Lack of collaborative learning 6. Questionable quality of teaching at various places 7. Non-standardized testing¡
8. The lack of a legal framework that links the qualification and certification framework to the prescribed requirements for the job and a regular performance appraisal of those who prepare the content and of those who deliver and teach it. 9. The growing digital divide 10. A lack of personalized monitoring and long term tracking of growth and enhancement in learning, skill and performance. 11. A very low percentage of digital literacy 12. Lack of encouragement to excel
13. Substantial duplication of efforts at various levels 14. Time mismatch between school hours and employment hours for those learners who have to simultaneously earn the livelihood for their families. 15. Alack of access to institutions 16. A lack of access devices to digitally bypass shortcomings of Institutions and teachers 17. A lack of multi-layered networks for knowledge absorption and knowledge propagation. 18. The lack of a strong contingent of motivated teachers. 19. Inefficient functioning of the knowledge delivery mechanism.
1. A large human resources of high intellectual caliber 2. A large number of expert faculty in almost every field 3. A growing middle class with a high priority for education 4. A number of world class institutions of learning & research 5. Technological and Communication backbone to take their advantage in the field of knowledge empowerment of the mass of learners
To make quality the defining element of higher education in India through a combination of self and external quality evaluation, promotion and sustenance initiatives.¡
1. To arrange for periodic assessment and accreditation of institutions of higher education or units thereof, or specific academic programmes or projects; 2. To stimulate the academic environment for promotion of quality of teaching-learning and research in higher education institutions; 3. To encourage self- evaluation, accountability, autonomy and innovation in higher education; 4. To undertake quality-related studies, consultancy and training programmes, and 5. To collaborate with other stakeholders of higher education for quality evaluation, promotion and sustenance.
To promote the following core values among the HEIs of the country: 1. Contribution to National Development 2. Fostering Global Competencies among Students 3. Inculcating a Value System among Students 4. Promoting the Use of Technology 5. Quest for Excellence
NAAC,IQAC and – objectives and significance Importance and methods of systematic documentation and innovative practices in SSR preparation/ presentation Teaching Learning Methodology- innovative practices Role of IQAC in Monitoring the Path of Excellence. Best practices and governance Science Education¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡
Our Speakers Dr. Bhavesh Patel Dr. Narendra Chouteliya Dr.S.N. Yadav Dr. S.L. Garg Dr. Mangal Mishra Dr. Ramesh Mangal And Large participation from Principals, IQAC co-ordinators and faculty members.¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡
This seminar is hopefully going to stir the teaching community and might help the colleges to understand the process, utility and significance of NAAC accreditation in a positive and healthy mood¡.
“….We need a metamorphosis of education-from cocoon a butterfly should emerge. Improvement does not give a butterfly, only a faster caterpillar.”¡
Thanks Best of luck to all of us.¡ ¡

SSESSMENT AND ACCREDITATION:REVISED PROCESS -AFFILIATED/CONSTITUENT COLLEGES

1. REVISED PROCESS OF ASSESSMENT AND ACCREDITATION: AFFILIATED/CONSTITUENT COLLEGES (EFFECTIVE FROM JULY 2017) DR. ABHAY KHANDAGLE Co-ordinator, Internal Quality Assurance Cell Pune District Education Association’s Prof. Ramkrishna More Arts,Commerce & Science College, Akurdi- Pune-411044 (MS) ajkhandagle@gmail.com Mob.No. 9370333535 NATIONAL ASSESSMENT AND ACCRIDITATION COUNCIL
Revised Aü NAAC-Core values ü NAAC- Vision and Mission üHighlights of the Presentation & Grading Systemü Assessment Outcome ü Assessment Process ü Criterion Wise Key Indicators ü Quality Indicator Framework ü Focus of Assessment üA Framework
VISION: To make quality the defining element of higher education in India through a combination of self and external quality evaluation, promotion and sustenance initiatives. MISSION: • To arrange for periodic assessment and accreditation of institutions of higher education or units thereof, or specific academic programmes or projects; • To stimulate the academic environment for promotion of quality in teaching-learning and research in higher education institutions; • To encourage self-evaluation, accountability, autonomy and innovations in higher education; • To undertake quality-related research studies, consultancy and training programmes, and • To collaborate with other stakeholders of higher education for quality evaluation, promotion and sustenance. The NAAC methodology for A&A is very much similar to that followed by QA agencies across the world. It consists of self assessment by the institution along with external peer assessment organized by NAAC. VISION AND MISSION OF NAAC
The accreditation framework of NAAC is thus based on five core values detailed below. (i) Contributing to National Development (ii) Fostering Global Competencies among Students (iii)Inculcating a Value System among Students (iv)Promoting the Use of Technology (v) Quest for Excellence CORE VALUES OF NAAC
Boosting benchmarking as quality improvement tool through comparison of NAAC indicators with other international QA rameworksüRevised Assessment and Accreditation Framework • It represents an explicit Paradigm Shift making it ….. ICT enabled, objective, transparent, scalable and robust. The Shift is: • from qualitative peer judgement to data based quantitative indicator evaluation with increased objectivity and transparency • towards extensive use of ICT confirming scalability and robustness • in terms of simplification of the process drastic reduction in number of questions, size of the report, visit days, and so on
CONTINUED……. • Introducing pre-qualifier for peer team visit, as 30% of system generated score. • Introducing System Generated Scores (SGS) with combination of online evaluation (about 70%) and peer judgement (about 30%). • Introducing the element of third party validation of data and the possibility of roping in multiple agencies. • In adopting a 100% off site evaluation of HEIs applying for 4th cycle accreditation; on-site visits in exceptional cases. • In providing appropriate differences in the metrics, weightages and benchmarks to universities, autonomous colleges and affiliated/constituent colleges. • In revising several metrics to bring in enhanced participation of students and alumni in the assessment process.
FOCUS OF ASSESSMENT: • The NAAC continues with its focus on quality culture of the institution in terms of Quality Initiatives, Quality Sustenance and Quality Enhancement, as reflected in its vision, organization, operations and the processes. • Quality Assessment can better be done through self-evaluation. • The self-evaluation process and the subsequent preparation of the Self Study Report (SSR) to be submitted to NAAC involves the : • participation of all the stakeholders – management, faculty members, administrative staff, students, parents, employers, community, alumni.
QUALITY INDICATOR FRAMEWORK (QIF) • The Seven Criteria to serve as basis for assessment of HEIs are: 1. Curricular Aspects 2. Teaching-Learning and Evaluation 3. Research, Innovations and Extension 4. Infrastructure and Learning Resources 5. Student Support and Progression 6. Governance, Leadership and Management 7. Institutional Values and Best Practices • Revised framework- Inclusion of the academic and administrative aspects along with the emerging issues. • Under each Criterion a few Key Indicators are identified. • These Key Indicators (KIs) are further delineated as Metrics which actually elicit responses from the HEIs.
Criterion I: - Curricular Aspects (100) • The Curricular Aspects are the pillars of any educational institution. • An Affiliated/Constituent College is principally a teaching unit which depends on university for legitimizing its academic and administrative processes. • A wide range of programme options and courses that are in tune with the emerging national and global trends and relevant to the local needs. • Apart from issues of diversity and academic flexibility, aspects on career orientation, multi-skill development, feedback system and involvement of stakeholders in curriculum updation are also judged.
1.1 *(U) Curriculum Design and Development The development of relevant programmes with flexibility to suit the professional and personal needs of the students and realization of core values. The good practices of the institution in initiating a range of programme options and courses that are relevant to the local needs and in tune with the emerging national and global trends. N A 1 .1 *(A) Curricular Planning and Implementation The way Curriculum is carried out– activities, who, how, when etc. Concern of the college for quality in the form of values emphasized, sensitivities focused on, etc. and makes the college unique. 20 1.2 Academic Flexibility The freedom in the use of the time-frame of the courses, horizontal mobility, inter- disciplinary options. Supplementary enrichment programmes ,as an initiative of the college, credit system and choice offered in the curriculum, in terms of programme, curricular transactions and time-frame options are also considered in this key indicator. 30 1.3 Curriculum Enrichment Provision for added courses and activities(“value-added’’) which contribute to sensitizing students to cross-cutting issues such as gender, environment and sustainability, human values and professional ethics, development of creative and divergent competencies 30 1.4 Feedback System From all stakeholders in terms of its relevance and appropriateness in catering to the needs of the society, economy, environment helps in improving the inputs. Collecting feedback from all stakeholders, analyzing it and identifying and drawing pointers to enhance the learning effectiveness. 20 Criterion I: - Curricular Aspects (100)
Criterion II: - Teaching Learning and Evaluation (350) Efforts of an institution to serve students of different backgrounds and abilities, through- • effective teaching-learning, • Interactive instructional techniques, • higher order ‘thinking’ and investigation, • the use of interviews, focused group discussions, debates, projects, presentations, experiments, practicum, internship and application of ICT resources. Adequacy, competence as well as the continuous professional development of the faculty. The efficiency of the techniques used to continuously evaluate the performance of teachers and students.
KEY INDICATORS- CRITERION II (350) Key Indicators Important Aspects Points 2.1 Student Enrolment and Profile Process of Admission, ensuring equity and wide access to all students 30 2.2 Catering to Student Diversity Satisfy the needs of the students from diverse backgrounds; reach out to special learning needs. 50 2.3 Teaching-Learning Process Relevant for the learner group; The learner-centered education; Learning Management Systems and e –resources. 50 2.4 Teacher Profile and Quality Initiative to learn and keep abreast with the latest developments; quality too 80 2.5 Evaluation Process and Reforms Assessment of teaching, learning and evaluative processes and reforms, feedback; Innovative evaluation process 50 2.6 Student Performance & Learning Outcomes Student capabilities on successful completion of a course and/or a programme. 40 2.7 Student Satisfaction Survey Kinds of experiences; intellectual stimulation; effectiveness of teaching learning; Student Feedback 50
Criterion III: - Research, Innovations and Extension (120) • Information on the policies, practices and outcomes of the institution, with reference to research, innovations and extension. • Facilities provided and efforts made by the institution to promote a ‘research culture’. • Research projects useful to the society. • Serving the community through extension, • Social responsibility
KEY INDICATORS- CRITERION III (120) Key Indicators Important Aspects Points 3.1 *(U) Promotion of Research and Facilities For University/Autonomous college NA 3.2 Resource Mobilisation for Research Support - financial, academic and human resources; timely administrative decisions; interdisciplinary and interdepartmental research activities and resource sharing. 10 3.3 Innovation Ecosystem Initiatives for creation and transfer of knowledge; workshop/seminars on IPR, Industry-Academia Innovative practices. Awards on Innovations, start- ps/Incubation centres. 10 3.4 Research Publications and Awards Doctoral, post-doctoral, projects and inventions and discoveries, number of patents obtained, number of research publications. 20 3.5 *(U) Consultancy For University/Autonomous college NA 3.6 Extension Activities Developing sensitivities towards community issues, gender disparities, social inequity etc.; education which emphasizes community services 60 3.7 Collaboration Realistic perspective; expand learning experiences of students; training, student exchange, faculty exchange, research and resource sharing 20
Criterion IV: - Infrastructure and Learning Resources (100) • Optimal use of the facilities • Students, teachers and staff – benefit from these facilities. • Expansion of facilities to meet future development
KEY INDICATORS- CRITERION IV (100) Key Indicators Important Aspects Points 4.1 Physical Facilities Adequate infrastructure facilities; supportive facilities on the campus for curricular, extra- curricular and administrative activities. Budget for Maintenance 30 4.2 Library as a Learning Resource Books, journals and other learning materials and technology-aided learning mechanisms; Automation of library; use of e-journals and books; remote access to e-resources 20 4.3 IT Infrastructure Adequate technology deployment and maintenance; ICT facilities; access to technology and information retrieval 30 4.4 Maintenance of Campus Infrastructure Regular maintenance and periodic replenishment; Sufficient resources and effective mechnanism for upkeep of infrastructure facilities. 20
Criterion V: - Student Support and Progression (130) • To provide necessary - • assistance to students, to enable them to acquire meaningful experiences for learning at the campus and • holistic development and progression. • monitoring of student performance and • alumni profiles and • the progression of students to higher education and • gainful employment.
KEY INDICATORS- CRITERION- V (130) KEY INDICATORS IMPORTANT ASPECTS Points 5.1 Student Support Well structured & organized- Guidance cell, placement cell, grievance redressal cell and welfare measures to support students; Spl inputs for needy students with learning difficulties; bridge and value added courses; Various Scholarships etc 50 5.2 Student Progression Good practices for optimal progression; facilitate vertical movement of students to higher level or employment; state/national/international level exam or competitions 45 5.3 Student Participation and Activities Promotion of value- based education; Encouraging students’ participation in activities developing various skills and competencies and foster holistic development; required infrastructure for activities. 25 5.4 Alumni Engagement Financial and Non-financial support by the Alumni in academic matters, student support as well as mobilization of resources; Contribute in college development. 10
Criterion VI: - Governance, Leadership and Management (100) Institutional Policies and practices for- • Planning human resources, • Recruitment, • Training, • Performance appraisal, • Financial management and • The overall role of leadership.
KEY INDICATORS- CRITERION- VI (100) Key Indicators Imortant Aspects Points 6 .1 Institutional Vision and Leadership Formal and informal Coordination of the academic and administrative planning and implementation achieving its Vision and Mission. 10 6 .2 Strategy Development and Deployment Formulation of development objectives, directives and guidelines with specific plans for implementation by aligning the academic and administrative aspects to improve the overall quality of the institutional provisions. 10 6 .3 Faculty Empowerment Strategies Upgrade the professional competence of the staff; recruitment, performance appraisal and planning professional development programmes, appropriate feedback, analysis of responses. 30 6 .4 Financial Management and Resource Mobilization Established procedures and processes for Budgeting and optimum utilization of finance; mobilization of resources; transparency in financial management; Income-expenditure audits. 20 6.5 Internal Quality Assurance System (IQAS) Continuous improvement of quality and achieving academic excellence; mechanism for AAA; IQAC with Participatory approach. 30
inclusiveness and professional ethics. • Best Practice: addressing these issues, evolves practices that leads to improvement of its academic and administrative functioning. • The college should be proactive in the efforts towards overall development and should be known by the practices it follows.ü environmental consciousness and sustainability, ü gender equity, üCriterion VII: - Institutional Values and Best Practices (100) • Institute should be responsive to atleast a few pressing issues such as
KEY INDICATORS- CRITERION- VII (100) Key Indicator Important Aspects Points 7.1 Institutional Values and Social Responsibilities Organization of gender equity promotion programmes; display- sensitivity to issues like climate change and environmental issues; adopts environment friendly practices- energy conservation, rain water harvesting, waste recycling (solid/liquid waste management, e-waste management), carbon neutral, green practices; facilitates the differently abled (Divyangjan friendliness), concern for human values and professional ethics etc 50 7.2 Best Practices Practices internally evolved and used during the last few years leading to positive impact on the regular functioning of the institution, It could be in respect of teaching learning, office practices, maintenance and up keep of things or dealing with human beings or money matters. Should reduce difficulty or bring ease in functioning. 30 7.3 Institutional Distinctiveness Attributes which make the institution ‘distinct’, or, one of its kinds. 20
THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS It comprises three main components- 1.Self Study Report (SSR), 2.Student Satisfaction Survey 3. The Peer Team Report. The SSR has two kinds of Metrics: (QnM):-those requiring quantifiable facts and figures as data -‘quantitative metrics’ (QnM); and (QlM):- those metrics requiring descriptive responses -‘qualitative metrics’(QlM). Distribution of Metrics and KIs across Criteria Criteria 07 Key Indicators(KIs) 32 Qualitative Metrics (QlM) 42 Quantitative Metrics (QnM) 79 Total Metrics (QlM + QnM) 121 The SSR has a total of 121 Metrics for Affiliated / Constituent Colleges covering the seven Criteria
PROCEDURAL DETAILS- Points to Remember 1. Two Window System- Applications will be accepted in two specified periods in an year, i.e., May 1st – June 30th and November 1st – December 31st 2. Submit Institutional Information for Quality Assessment (IIQA) online.(1+2 attempts same fee) 3. The SSR has to be uploaded along with the IIQA. 4. Processing of the same 5 The SSR has to be submitted only online. 6. Institutions securing 30% on the quantitative metrics will qualify for onsite peer review/assessment. 7. Quantitative metrics will be subjected to validation exercise with the help of data validation and verification partners of NAAC. The responses to qualitative metrics will be reviewed by the Peer Team on site 8. Data Validation and Verification (DVV) by NAAC partners will be done in not more than 30 days.
Continued… 9. After getting the report from DVV partner, NAAC will intimate the result of clearing the pre-qualifier within 10 days; entry to the next round of assessment – by the peer team. The focus of Peer Team visit will be on the 30% qualitative metrics. 10. Concurrently with the DVV the Student Satisfaction Survey will be conducted online by NAAC. However, this is not a part of the pre-qualifier. 11. Peer Team visit shall be organized within 30 days from the date of clearing the pre-qualifier 12. Based on the size and scope of academic offerings at the HEIs, the number of days and experts for onsite visit may vary from 2-3 days with 2-5 expert reviewers visiting the institutions. 13. NAAC will not pre-disclose the details of the visiting teams and HEIs will not be responsible for Logistics for the Visiting Teams Summary: 2 window IIQA SSR DVV Pre-qualifier SSS on site visit
ASSESSMENT OUTCOME The final result of the Assessment and Accreditation exercise will be a System Generated Score (SGS) which is a combination of evaluation of qualitative and quantitative metrics PART I (Peer Team Report) • Section 1: General Information of the institution . • Section 2: Criterion wise analysis based on peer evaluation of qualitative indicators. Qualitative, descriptive assessment report presenting strengths and weaknesses of HEI under each Criterion. • Section 3: Overall Analysis which includes Institutional SWOC. • Section 4: Recommendations for Quality Enhancement of the Institution (not more than 10 major ones). PART II • It is System Generated Quality Profile of the HEI based on statistical analysis of quantitative indicators in the NAAC’s QIF • Graphical presentation would be reflected through synthesis of quantifiable indicators. PART III • Institutional Grade Sheet which is based on qualitative indicators, quantitative indicators and student satisfaction survey using existing calculation methods but it will be generated by a software. The above three parts will together form “NAAC Accreditation Outcome” document
Grading System • After assessment, the Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) of an institution is computed for those institutions which clear the grade qualifiers. • Grade Qualifiers for HEI’s:- • A grade qualifier is prepared for the institution to qualify for valid accreditation. • The grade qualifiers will be based on the overall score of the institution viz. (SGS + peer team visit score). • In order to qualify for any Grade (C to A++) Institution needs to score at least 30% of the quantitative (System Generated Score) and qualitative score in each criterion. Grade Qualifiers for Affiliated/Constituent College • Minimum CrGPA of 3.01 in Criterion 2 and 5 respectively (For A, A+, A++ Grade) • Minimum CrGPA of 2.01 in Criterion 2 and 5 respectively (For B, B+, B++ Grade) • Minimum CrGPA of 1.51 in Criterion 2 and 5 respectively (For C Grade) The scores of Student Satisfaction Survey will not be counted at Pre-qualifier Stage. However, the same would be counted at Grade Qualifier Stage. After clearing the grade qualifier the CGPA of the institution is calculated.
Continued… Calculation of Institutional CGPA: The System Generated Scores (SGS) of The quantitative Metrics which comprise About 70% of the total, the scores from the qualitative, critical appraisal by the Peer Team through onsite visit and the scores obtained on the Student Satisfaction Survey. These will be collated through an automated procedure based on ‘benchmarks’ and assessed on a five point scale. Range of Institutional Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) Letter Grade Status 3.76 - 4.00 A++ Accredited 3.51 - 3.75 A+ Accredited 3.01 - 3.50 A Accredited 2.76 - 3.00 B++ Accredited 2.51 - 2.75 B+ Accredited 2.01 - 2.50 B Accredited 1.51 - 2.00 C Accredited ≤ 1.50 D Not Accredited The Final Grade: The final grade is assigned on a seven point scale:
THANK YOU

r.Yoonus salim
The Global Education scenario is rapidly transforming. Our education system basically formulated for colonial requirements also went on updating with various commissions and timely experiments under the UGC. Finally the National Accreditation and Assessment Council was set up in 1994. NAAC assess the universities deemed to be universities, autonomous colleges, Affiliated colleges and institutions recognized by competent authorities as Educational institution. At present the Country has 700 universities 38000 colleges and 25 million students. Our GER is only 18% whereas the global GER is 29, for the Asia Pacific Nations it is 37 and in developed countries still higher. It is in this context NAAC becomes relevant and essential.
All institutions intending to apply for Accreditation and Assessment by NAAC need to mandatorily upload the information on All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) portal. AISHE code is one of the requirements for registration.
NAAC is an autonomous body established by the University Grants Commission (UGC) of India to assess and accredit institutions of higher education in the country It is an outcome of the recommendations of the National Policy in Education (1986) which laid special emphasis on upholding the quality of higher education in India To address the issues of quality, the National Policy on Education (1986) and the Plan of Action (POA-1992) advocated the establishment of an independent national accreditation body. NAAC was established in 1994 with its headquarters at Bangalore.
Education plays a vital role in the development of any nation. Therefore, there is a premium on both quantity (increased access) and quality (relevance and excellence of academic programmes offered) of higher education. Like in any other domain, the method to improve quality remains the same. Finding and recognizing new needs and satisfying them with products and services of international standards. The NAAC has been set up to help all participating institutions assess their performance vis-à-vis set parameters. A rating agency for academic excellence across India, and the country's first such effort.
Quest for ExcellenceØPromoting the Use of Technology ØInculcating a Value System among Students ØFostering Global Competencies among Students ØContributing to National Development Ø
1. Institution to know its strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities through an informed review process. 2. Identification of internal areas of planning and resource allocation 3. Collegiality on the campus. 4. Funding agencies look for objective data for performance funding. 5. Institutions to initiate innovative and modern methods of pedagogy.
6. New sense of direction and identity for institutions. 7. The society look for reliable information on quality education offered. 8. Employers look for reliable information on the quality of education offered to the prospective recruits. 9. Intra and inter-institutional interactions.
To make quality the defining element of higher education in India through a combination of self and external quality evaluation, promotion and sustenance initiatives. Guided by its vision and striving to achieve its mission, the NAAC primarily assesses the quality of institutions of higher education that volunteer for the process, through an internationally accepted methodology.ØVision
Mission 1. To arrange for periodic assessment and accreditation of institutions of higher education or units thereof, or specific academic programmes or projects; 2. To stimulate the academic environment for promotion of quality of teaching-learning and research in higher education institutions; 3. To encourage self-evaluation, accountability, autonomy and innovations in higher education; 4. To undertake quality-related research studies, consultancy and training programmes, and 5. To collaborate with other stakeholders of higher education for quality evaluation, promotion and sustenance.
NAAC’s working is governed by the General Council (GC) and the Executive Committee (EC) on which University Grants Commission (UGC), All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), Association of Indian Universities (AIU), Universities, Colleges and other professional institutions are represented. Senior academics and educational administrators are nominated as members on these two bodies.
The Revised Assessment and Accreditation (A&A) Framework was launched on 7th July 2017. It represents an explicit paradigm shift making it ICT enabled, objective, transparent, scalable and robust. The shift is: 1. From qualitative peer Judgement to data based quantitative indicator evaluation with increased objectivity and transparency. 2. Towards extensive use of ICT confirming scalability and robustness. 3. In terms of simplification of the process drastic reduction in number of questions, size of the report, visit days, and so on 4. In terms of boosting benchmarking as quality improvement tool. This has been attempted through comparison of NAAC indicators with other international QA framework
5. Introducing pre-qualifier for peer team visit, as 30% of system generated score. 6. Introducing system generated scores (SGS) with combination of online evaluation (about 70%) and peer judgement (about 30%) 7. In introducing the element of third party validation of data 8. In providing appropriate differences in the metrics, weightages and benchmarks to universities, autonomous colleges and affiliated/constituent colleges 9. In revising several metrics to bring in enhanced participation of students and alumni in the assessment process
Institutional Information for Quality Assessment (IIQA) and Self Study Report (SSR) The three level accreditation processes would be more ICT enabled with Student Satisfaction Survey and Data Verification and Validation adding value to the process. The first level would be submission of Institutional Information for Quality Assessment (IIQA) which is more or less similar to the Letter of Intent (LoI) of the earlier process. Unlike in the earlier system, two specific Windows will be opened in an year for HEIs to submit their applications. The first window will be from May – June and the second window will be from November-December. Attempts have been made to make the whole process user friendly and link the formats with National databases on HEIs. Towards this providing the AISHE reference number/code is mandatory at the application stage itself and affiliating Institutions can submit a self declaration with reference to the latest affiliation status. On acceptance of the IIQA, institutions can submit their data /information online in the formats provided as Manuals for Self Study Report (SSR). There would be no requirement for submission of hard copies of the SSR. The formats for submission of online SSR are available on NAAC website.
Data Validation and Verification (DVV) and Pre-qualifier Score At the second level, data /information submitted in the SSR will be subjected to an online assessment mechanism/process with Data Validation and Verification (DVV) process. After an online evaluation generating a pre- qualifier score. Institutions securing 30% on the quantitative metrics will qualify for onsite peer review/ assessment. The pre-qualifier scores are exclusive of the Student Satisfaction Survey (SSS).
The introduction of Student Satisfaction Survey (SSS) is an attempt to engage students who are the main stakeholders in the quality assurance process. The SSS is conducted concurrent to the DVV. The scores obtained in the SSS will be part of the overall CGPA. For taking the Student Satisfaction Survey institutions will be required to submit the details of all the students enrolled in the institution i.e. student enrolment number, Programme, Year of Study(1st year, 2nd year etc.),email Id and mobile number. NAAC will randomly select students for the survey to be responded on the questionnaire of NAAC. Response from 10% of the enrolled students qualifies for scoring on the metric. Preparation towards Student Satisfaction Survey (SSS)
The onsite assessment will be a peer review by visiting teams nominated by NAAC and will focus on the assessment of the information provided on the qualitative metrics. Onsite Assessment - Peer Review by Visiting Teams HEIs will submit the information and data online in the formats provided by NAAC. The compiled online SSR will be used for the onsite and offsite evaluations. Institutions scoring 30% and above qualify for the third level of A&A which would have two sub processes viz. Onsite assessment by visiting Peer Teams and generation of results by the NAAC.
a.) An Onsite assessment of the qualitative components of the SSR by a visiting team resulting in generation of a qualitative report of the institution identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges(SWOC) and assigning scores as per the performance on each of the qualitative metric. b.) On completion of onsite evaluation NAAC will combine the scores assigned by the teams, the pre-qualifier scores and the SSS to arrive at overall Criterion wise Grade Point Averages (CrGPA). c.) The final outcome will be placed for approval of Executive council of NAAC before declaring the Accreditation status and the institutional Grade.
Based on the size and scope of academic offerings at the HEIs, the number of days and experts for onsite visit may vary from 2-3 days with 2-5 expert reviewers visiting the institutions. The visiting teams’ role would be very specific in the revised model limited to Qualitative Metrics (QlM). The teams would play an important role in reviewing the intangible aspects. Unlike in the past NAAC will not pre-disclose the details of the visiting teams and HEIs will not be responsible for Logistics for the Visiting Teams. NAAC will make necessary logistics.
The NAAC has identified the following seven criteria to serve as the basis for assessment of HEIs: 1.Curricular Aspects 2.Teaching-Learning and Evaluation 3.Research, Consultancy and Extension 4.Infrastructure and Learning Resources 5.Student Support and Progression 6.Governance and Leadership, and 7.Institutional Values and Best Practices
KEY ASPECTS i. Curricular Design and Development ii. Academic Flexibility iii. Feedback on Curriculum iv. Curriculum Update v. Best Practices in Curriculum Aspects
KEY ASPECTS i. Admission Process ii. Catering to Diverse Needs iii. Teaching-Learning Process iv. Teacher Quality v. Evaluation Process and Reforms vi. Best Practices in teaching & learning
Best practices in research, consultancyØCollaborations ØExtension Activities ØConsultancy ØResearch and Publication Output ØPromotion of Research ØKEY ASPECTS & extension
Best practices in the development of infrastructure and learning resourcesØOther Facilities ØICT (Information and Communication Technologies )as Learning Resources ØLibrary as a Learning Resource ØMaintenance of Infrastructure ØPhysical Facilities ØKEY ASPECTS
support and progressionØBest Practices in student ØStudent Activities ØStudent Support ØStudent Progression ØKEY ASPECTS
leadershipØBest practices in governance and Ø resource Mobilization ØFinancial management and ØHuman resource management ØStategy development and deployment ØOrganizational arrangements ØInstitutional vision and Leadership ØKEY ASPECTS
Stake holder relationshipØInclusive practices ØInternal Quality assurance system ØKEY ASPECTS
Curricular Aspects 150 (U) 150 (Au) 100 (Aff) Teaching-learning and Evaluation 200 (U) 300 (Au) 350 (Aff) Research, Innovations and Extension 250 (U) 150 (Au) 120 (Aff) Infrastructure and Learning Resources 100 (U) 100 (Au) 100 (Aff) Student Support and Progression 100 (U) 100 (Au) 130 (Aff) Governance, Leadership and Management 100 (U) 100 (Au) 100 (Aff) Institutional Values and Best Practices 100 (U) 100 (Au) 100 (Aff) ***University (U), Autonomous College(AU), and Affiliated/Constituent College(Aff)
An institution not accredited or want to improve its accreditation status can apply for re-accreditation after a period of one year not exceeding 3 years. such applicants should undergo all the original process and specifically state the remedial measures for points mentioned in earlier accreditation
Fee structure 1. Vision and Mission statements of the university and of the college to be displayed. 2. Creation of websites for all the colleges/departments.Ø Scholarships given by the state and institution Ø Infrastructure facilities available for teaching, learning, sports, residence, research and recreation Ø Examination and other assessment schedules and procedures Ø Academic calendar Ø Admission policy and process Ø Eligibility criteria Ø Program options Ø Goals and objectives ØThe websites may contain the following information:
Hand books containing information about faculty, courses, almanac, research and other facilities available in the Departments/CollegesØ Event registers to maintain all the activities of the Departments/Colleges Ø Data banks to consist of all academic activities of teachers Ø Data banks, Event registers, Hand books Ø Alumni association Ø
Creation of placement and guidance cells in all departments/colleges.Ø Creation of student councils, appointment of teacher counselors and a lady counselor for all Departments/Colleges. Ø Provide Assistance to teachers for filing patents Ø Constitute a college level Research Advisory Committee to encourage and guide teachers applying for research projects and monitor research work done. Ø Provide internet facility to all departments in the colleges and provide access to all students, teachers and research students. Ø
Organizing seminars in all colleges for students through students councils to get feedback from the students regarding the academic activities of the departmentsØ & Undertaking of community activities –each college to adopt 2 or 3 villages under NSS activity.Ø Introduction of teacher-ward system in the departments/colleges. Ø Provision of basic facilities like telephone, safe drinking water, toilet facilities in all departments/colleges. Ø Suggestions to be invited for enhancement of quality. Øcolleges and any other students problems
Undertaking programmes for soft skills and personality developmentØ Arranging parent teacher meets. Ø Collection and analysis of feedback from students and employees. Ø Creation of academic audit units in all colleges.