Abstract

This research aimed at studying problems and guidelines for the development              of an internal quality assurance system in Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University.  The authors used the qualitative research method and all data were collected by using           in-depth interviews from university administrators, internal quality audit committees and officers assigned to be responsible for the educational quality assurance of Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University.  The other data were gained from five university administrators and quality assurance staffs with the best practice for the quality assurance.

The methods employed for data collection were content analysis, in-depth interviews, and brain storming from university administrators and executives of quality assurance of Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University in order to analyze and approach three aspects in the development of internal quality assurance as 1) quality control 2) quality audit 3) quality assurance.

The results indicated that the problems of the internal quality assurance system in this university can be divided into three aspects: 1) the quality control with respect to the administration structure of educational quality assurance was not independently separate and most staff did not pay attention, lacked participation, and also had negative attitudes toward the internal quality assurance in education.  The university has no strategy for the internal quality assurance specifically. The data collecting system of the university was not in order.  The information technology system was not developed for the education quality assurance as it should be. The standard criteria and internal quality assessment did not reflect the nature of university.  2) Quality control with respect to the lack of data and evidence for conducting self-assessment reports and lack of operation monitoring according to the indicators of quality assurance. The university administrators did not focus on the improvement plan and never brought it to associate with the university’s development plan and annual action plan. 3) On the quality assessment it was found that the internal quality assurance committees have a diagnostic of different interpretations and did not follow the guidelines of the university.  As a result, the reports of internal quality assurance did not use the same standard.  

The guidelines for the development of internal quality assurance system for Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University can be divided into three parts: 1) the quality control, that is to say, the university administrators should specially appoint a person responsible for the internal quality assurance and their job description must also be understandable and focus on the development potential and a positive attitude toward quality assurance. The university’s officers should promote on the PDCA methodology (Plan, Do, Check, and Action) in their tasks. The quality assurance should be contained in the strategic development plan of this university and this will lead to the clarity in the allocation of budget management on the Quality Assurance.  The university’s database should be developed and used to full advantage for this task.  The work of other reputable universities should be studied regarding the Quality Assurance that covers the criteria of National Education Standard and Quality Assessment and/or the Higher Education Commission.  2) Regarding to the Quality Control, the system of Self-Assessment Report should be created in all levels.  An operations manual for the university’s officers should be made and their performances evaluated in accordance with the criteria of the Quality Assurance. Cross checks between departments and the annual report should be created in the form of Quality Assurance.  The Academic Council Committees should follow the result the Quality Assurance to create the plan to improve the quality in all departments in line with the university development plan.  3) On the Assessment Control, an Quality Assurance action seminar should be held regularly in order to find out the true indicators and create the expertise to audit.  The Quality Assurance staffs should be trained, and the Internal Quality Assurance committees should be convened to scrutinize the results before reporting them.