MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1901660990 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.3589

Implementing Quality Management Standards in Conducting Courses at Higher Education Institutes (HEI)

2011· article· en· W1901660990 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ijlal Haider, Muhammed Yahya

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Management Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliverableQuality (philosophy)Work (physics)Quality assuranceQuality managementBusinessHigher educationKnowledge managementService (business)Quality management systemStrategic planningEngineering managementPublic relationsProcess managementEngineeringPolitical scienceComputer scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The only doubt in saying that education is a key to sustainability of any nation is Quality. Education has experienced a major paradigm shift in recent years. It has become a service industry affecting its various stakeholders from faculty and students to society. Its vast impact has intrigued the application of management principals such as project management and quality management to assure best results in terms of its various deliverables. Higher education, in particular, for its direct and immediate applicability in society needs a concrete quality assurance system. According to foreign researchers and practitioners, future is the age of knowledge, knowledge organizations, new economy that forces organizations to create new methods of work, competences, processes, management methods and the principles of strategic management. Knowledge is obtained through thinking, experience, observation, information channels and other sources. Quality management standard ISO 9000 has already been investigated and implemented in educational institutes which has resulted in development of IWA2 (International Workshop Agreement). However most of such work is focused on assuring quality in organizational structure of higher education institutes. In this research we will investigate various aspects of implementing quality management standards in various activities of conducting a course at a higher education institute. These activities should be based on the 4 P’s of management i.e. Performance through Planning and managing People and Processes, where people concerned are instructors and students and processes range from instruction to assessment. Quality in conducting courses can be ensured by leadership and customer satisfaction from the stakeholders and planning processes, documenting and implementing them followed by auditing. Our work will follow the three stages of (a) preparation work for the creation of quality management system, (b) the preparation and implementation of the documents of the quality management system and (c) the preparation of the quality management system for certification as suggested by earlier research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicQuality and Management SystemsFrench-language works237,207