Journal Information
|
| Research Areas |
| Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement |
| Guidelines for Authors |
| For Authors |
| Instructions to Authors |
| Copyright forms |
| Submit Manuscript |
| Call for papers |
| Guidelines for Reviewers |
| For Reviewers |
| Review Forms |
| Contacts and Support |
| Support and Contact |
| List of Issues |
| Indexing |
Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) (Vol 1 No 1)
| Abstract: With the introduction of quality reviews by the national government in 2008, the Kingdom of Bahrain’s higher education institutions (HEIs) have been developing more systematic, comprehensive, and explicit processes for demonstrating and monitoring quality. This paper looks into the quality and quality efforts of the HEIs: foremost, by analyzing their ‘performance’ using the Directorate of Higher Education Reviews (DHR) Review Reports in the first ever institutional reviews conducted in the Kingdom; secondly, by analyzing the ‘progress’ made by the HEIs in the follow-up visits; and finally, by looking into their capacity-building requirements, offering a thorough analysis of their quality assurance needs. The analysis of HEI ‘performance’ has been done by looking into the number of Commendations, Affirmations & Recommendations received by each institution in the first review. Commendation refers to a judgment given by DHR for every demonstrated good practice that goes beyond the expectations contained in a quality indicator; Affirmation refers to a judgment given for any action that has been initiated but still in early phase of implementation; while Recommendation refers to a very crucial aspect of academic operation which requires immediate attention, but has been apparently neglected by the institution. Meanwhile, the analysis of HEI ‘progress’ has been done by looking into the number of Recommendations addressed by the institution, either adequately or inadequately, based on the DHR Review Reports in the follow-up visits. An ‘Adequately-Addressed’ recommendation means that an action has been initiated and successfully carried out addressing fully a particular recommendation given in the first review. On the other hand, an ‘Inadequately-Addressed’ recommendation refers to an action that has been initiated and carried out by an institution, but only partially addressing such recommendation. A ‘Not-Addressed’ recommendation suggests the institution’s inaction or inefficiency in addressing a particular recommendation. Based on DHR follow-up review reports, it is alarming to note that none among the 12 HEIs (0%) has made outstanding progress, where they should have been expected to demonstrate compliance to most, if not all, of the recommendations given in the first review. A vast majority of eleven HEIs (91.67%) has made good progress though, which means that most of the recommendations given in the first review were either adequately or inadequately addressed. Finally, one HEI (8.33%) has made poor progress, which means that most of the recommendations given by the review panel were either inadequately or not at all addressed. |
| Keywords: affirmation, commendation, recommendation, adequately-addressed, inadequately-addressed, not addressed, capacity-building |
| Download full paper |
