Abstract
Background. Universities have established a system of periodic evaluation and accreditation in order to manage the quality of education, enhance their physical resources and educational equipment, and improve their human resources. This study aimed to conduct an analysis of second-generation institutional accreditation standards for medical sciences universities from the experts' perspective.
Methods. The present research was a qualitative study with an inductive approach conducted at Tabriz University of Medical Sciences between the years 2019- 2022. The sampling method was purposeful, and data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 34 managers, officials of development offices, and experts involved in the accreditation programs of educational institutions. As for study validation, the four criteria of Guba and Lincoln (i.e., credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability) were used. As for data analysis, MAXQDA 20, a software program designed for computer-assisted qualitative and mixed-methods data analysis, was used. The interview texts were analyzed using the content analysis method.
Results. The results of the content analysis identified 204 initial codes, 9 subcategories, and 2 main categories (the strengths and weaknesses of the content). The subcategories of strengths included standardization, improvement of educational processes, development of assessment areas, restructuring of educational structure, benchmarking global experiences, and transparency in criteria. The subcategories of weaknesses included structural weaknesses, lack of validity, and ambiguity in criteria.
Conclusion. The process of analyzing the content of accreditation standards for educational institutions periodically and obtaining regular feedback will lead to the enhancement of the standards and the realization of activities, ultimately resulting in the improvement of educational quality and the dynamism of the community.
Extended Abstract
Background
An academic institution that provides excellent education needs to align itself with new technologies and be in line with global goals and developments. Validation and assurance of quality are ways to improve the quality of higher education and address its weaknesses and failures. However, these processes require the development of appropriate standards that are compatible with the conditions of each country, as well as the need for continuous evaluation and monitoring. In Iran, the Ministry of Health, Treatment, and Medical Education has established and implemented various systems for this purpose, but has not yet created the desired quality. Based on the results of research conducted previously and the lack of comprehensive research, this study was conducted with the aim of analyzing the quality standards of second-generation validation from the perspective of experts in the field of accrediting educational institutions. The results of this study can help improve the validation process and ensure that the quality of higher education is maintained in Iran.
Methods
The present research was a qualitative study with an inductive approach conducted at Tabriz University of Medical Sciences between the years 2019- 2022. Purposive sampling was employed, and the participants included 34 faculty members, managers, and experts from the educational development units of various faculties, as well as managers and experts from the central headquarters. Data was collected through individual interviews and semi-structured questionnaires, with interview, durations ranging from 40 to 50 minutes.
The participants were selected based on their knowledge, experience in institutional accreditation programs, and willingness to participate in the study. The emphasis was placed on the confidentiality of information, and written informed consent was obtained from the participants for the recording of interviews. The interviews were analyzed using the MAXQDA20 software. The interview data was coded in three stages: initial, axial, and selective coding. In the initial stage, 204 initial codes were identified, while in the axial stage, nine categories emerged. Subsequently, in the selective coding stage, two categories of strengths and weaknesses were identified. This study employed four criteria for ensuring the trustworthiness of the findings: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Credibility is concerned with the interpretation of participants' experiences as expressed in the interviews. Transferability has to do with the generalizability of the study's findings to similar contexts. To ensure dependability, detailed notes were recorded and transcribed immediately. Obtaining informed consent for participation, maintaining confidentiality, and ensuring anonymity and ethical neutrality in interpreting the participants' statements were among the ethical principles guiding the research.
Results
Based on the aim of the study, the collected data were categorized into 204 initial codes, 9 subcategories, and 2 main categories (strengths and weaknesses) after analysis. Strengths included six concepts: standardization, improvement of educational processes, expansion of assessment areas, restructuring of educational structures, learning from global experiences, and transparency in criteria. According to most of the participants, standardization involved standardizing educational processes, defining quantitative and qualitative indicators for educational components, standardizing external evaluation from positive descriptions, and significant content validation. Improving educational processes, the second concept, included documenting process execution and systematizing the teaching process. Expanding assessment areas, the third concept of strengths, included a platform for multi-dimensional educational assessment through comprehensive and multi-dimensional evaluation of educational components, channeling and directing assessment areas, and standardizing educational stakeholders' needs. Restructuring educational structures involved enhancing physical resources and educational equipment, expanding infrastructure for new teaching methods, purchasing practical training equipment, and training staff in line with global experiences and developments in order to update their information. Another strength necessary for achieving educational quality improvement goals was learning from global experiences, which included adopting global standards, aligning educational assessment areas, and creating infrastructure for internationalizing universities. Transparency in criteria involved the clarity, validity, and reliability of criteria, which were considered strengths in content.
The second main category was content weaknesses. Improving and enhancing standards over successive periods is only possible by identifying weaknesses. This matter included three sub-concepts: structural weaknesses, validity weaknesses, and ambiguities in indicators. Structural weaknesses involved neglecting human resource planning, not institutionalizing operational indicators, and not allocating financial resources for implementing indicators. The second sub-concept, validity weaknesses, included the lack of defining specific standards for faculties and the lack of synchronization of indicators with infrastructure requirements. Fundamentally, accreditation standards should align with specialized requirements, infrastructures, laws, indigenous cultures, and other ongoing educational programs such as transformation plans to create positive reinforcement. The third sub-concept, ambiguities in indicators, included aspects like the intangibility of indicators, the overlapping and redundancy of documents requested for indicators, and the ineffectiveness of some factors in defining educational quality due to insufficient attention to educational system outcomes such as graduate quality, job skills, industry relations, and innovations. The lack of clear goals and accreditation approaches for faculties and educational institutions are examples of ambiguities in indicators.
Conclusion
Periodic evaluation of the content of accreditation standards for educational institutions, encompassing activities and resources that significantly impact educational services, enhances learner outcomes. A systematic reengineering process based on evolving learner needs, up-to-date educational resources, and essential feedback results in elevating institutional standards to an international level. This, in turn, fulfills the diverse expectations of stakeholders within the educational system, ultimately fostering societal growth and dynamism.