Institutional Review. Prof. Wagdy Talaat EMRO, WHO Consultant for Health Manpower Development EMRO Project Director for Accreditation in HPE. The purpose of the institutional review ?.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Prof. Wagdy Talaat
EMRO, WHO Consultant for Health Manpower Development
EMRO Project Director for Accreditation in HPE
The scope of the review
Effectiveness of quality
assurance and standards
mechanisms with evidences
Of continuous quality
improvement and working
within efficient and cost
of the published information to
a wide range of stakeholders
about the quality of learning
-Preliminary visit: 36 weeks before the visit assistant director visits and provides briefing on the review process guidance on the SED and students submission.
-12 weeks before the visit: the agency appoints the review team and notify the institution and receives the SED and the students submission.
-Briefing visit: 5 weeks before the review visit undertaken by the review team and the AD at the management level of the institution, it contains detailed lines of enquiry for the review.
-Review visit: lasts 5 days AD joins team for the final day, discussion with staff and students, and pursues selected thematic trails.
-Review visit+2 week: letter outlining the review finding sent to the
-Review visit +8 weeks:draft report sent to the institution.
-Review visit +12 weeks: institution responds to the report.
-Review visit +20weeks: report is published.
-use of reference points: the information required as part of the quality assurance and standards framework.
-the mid-cycle progress report.
-information submitted by representative of students.
-reports on the institution by the agency or other relevant bodies within the duration of the review cycle.
-information acquired during the briefing visit, and the review visit.
Broad confidence: the institution is managing quality and standards soundly and effectively and the future capacity for maintaining quality and standards appears good.
Limited confidence:the agency has doubts either about the current assurance of quality and standardsor the capacity to maintain quality.
No confidence: very occasionally the team may make such judgment.
Two areas must be given particular attention, in making such
Strong use of independent external examiners in summative
Similar use of independent external persons in the internal periodic
review of the disciplines or programmes.
The trials are concerned with testing how well institutional processes work and how effective they are in practice at the level of individual disciplines, programmes, and/or academic departments, the selection of the thematic trials is made at the briefing visit .