Section 5 Summary of Self-Assessment

Summary of Self-Assessment

Assessment Results Based on Quality Assurance Standards

Curriculum Standards B.E. 2565 (A.D. 2022)

Requirement  Bachelors Program / Graduate Diploma ProgramMasters Program / Doctoral ProgramPass/Fail
1. Number of Full-Time Program Instructors5 – Pass
2. Qualifications of Instructors Responsible for a Curriculum/Program of Studies5 – Pass
3. Qualifications of Full-Time Program Instructors5 – Pass
4. Qualifications of Teaching Instructors5 – Pass
5. Qualifications of Main Advisor for Thesis and Independent Study – –
6. Qualifications of Coadvisors for Thesis and Independent Study (if applicable) – –
7. Qualifications of Thesis and Independent Study Examiners – –
8. Publication and Dissemination of Graduate Academic Output – –
9. Workloads of Thesis and Independent Study Advisors in Graduate Programs – –
10. Specified Period of Time Within Which Curriculum Must Be Revised5 – Pass

Result………………….Pass……………………

Summary of Quality Assessment Results

The internal quality assurance at the program level has been evaluated based on the ASEAN University Network Quality Assurance (AUN-QA, Version 4.0) framework.

CriteriaItemScore
1.Expected Learning Outcomes ( 5 item )55
2.Programme Structure and Content ( 7 item )75
3.Teaching and Learning Approach ( 6 item )65
4.Student Assessment ( 7 item )75
5.Academic Staff ( 8 item )85
6.Student Support Services ( 6 item )65
7.Facilities and Infrastructure ( 9 item )95
8.Output and Outcomes ( 5 item )55
total5
Average Score5
Result……………….Pass………………………

Overall Performance Summary

Strengths of the Program

  • The programme benefits from qualified academic staff with recognized research publications.
  • Student assessment includes timely feedback that supports learning development.
  • A well-established information technology system enhances teaching and learning and ensures accessibility for both staff and students.

Weaknesses of the Program

  • Lack of clear stakeholder identification and involvement in determining expected learning outcomes.
  • Absence of a systematic review of teaching methods and curriculum relevance to industry trends.
  • Limited clarity in teaching strategies that support lifelong learning, creativity, and innovation.
  • Inadequate planning and development in student support services and co-curricular activities.
  • Staff development and performance management systems are not clearly demonstrated or implemented.

Areas for Improvement or Program Enhancement in the Next Academic Year

  • Clearly define and engage stakeholders in curriculum and outcome development.
  • Regularly review curriculum content and update based on industry feedback.
  • Establish clear teaching strategies that promote lifelong learning, creative thinking, innovation, and entrepreneurship.
  • Align student assessment with industry expectations and expected learning outcomes (ELOs).
  • Conduct a systematic needs analysis for academic staff development and implement performance management frameworks.
  • Develop short-term and long-term plans for student support services, enhance co-curricular activities, and improve support staff competencies.
  • Introduce benchmarking practices for both student support and programme outcomes to monitor quality and competitiveness.