.png){kind=logo}
.png){kind=logo}
Quality Enhancement Cell GCWUF, was established in 2013. Since its inception, QEC is rigorously devoted to the task of providing quality education to students. Dr. Aasma Khalid is currently holding the portfolio of Director, QEC, GCWUF. Quality Enhancement Cell in Government College Women University has been assigned with responsibility of the implementation of rules and regulations laid by Higher Education Commission. It aims to maintain proper check and balance to improve the quality of ongoing academic and research activities. It acts as a productive source to provide better chances to teachers and students excel in their respective fields.
In this competitive world, Quality and Relevance are identified as the key components of the educational and research progress of any Higher Education Institution across the world. Ultimately they have become an essential part of the strategic planning of HEIs at Pakistan as well. To meet this end, Higher Education Commission has also established high standards of quality with respect to the criteria of offered degree programs, faculty development, governance and management, physical and technological infrastructure development, leading to excellence in learning and research at higher education institutions. Quality Enhancement Cell is specifically deputed with the task of the effective implementation and cultivation of a quality culture at par with the standard metrics established by the national governing bodies. In addition to this, QEC strives to create conditions which are significant to meet international standards of quality mechanism to get acknowledged by Ranking Agencies at global level. And here lies the real worth of QEC, i.e. achieving new milestones and setting new targets to attain by adhering to a quality process which is continuously evolving and constantly progressing forward to a brighter future of the main stakeholders (students). QEC, at GCWUF is fully sensitized to its obligations to the institution and society at large. It is striving hard to materialize the targeted objectives by taking stringent measures for the maintenance of internal and external quality mechanism. It is also performing an instrumental role in the effective implementation of the Vision and Mission of the institution.
Quality Enhancement Cell is focused to position Govt. College Women University Faisalabad among the top-ranking institutions of the world through best teaching practices, research opportunities and maintenance of an effective internal and external quality mechanism.
To enhance, maintain and monitor the quality of higher education in the university.
Quality Enhancement Cell in Government College Women University has been desires to achieve the following objectives:
1. To promote public confidence that the quality and standard of the award of degrees are enhanced and safeguarded.
2. To review the quality standards and the quality of teaching and learning in each subject area.
3. To review the academics affiliation with other institutions in terms of effective management and quality of programmes.
4. To define clear and explicit standards as points of reference for the reviews to be carried out.
5. To develop qualification framework by setting out the attributes and abilities that can be expected from the holder of a qualification, i-e. Bachelors, Bachelors with Honors, Masters, M.Phil and Doctoral.
6. To develop program specifications in order to clarify what knowledge, understanding skills and other attributes, a student needs to develop on successfully completing a program.
7. To enhance quality assurance process and methods of evaluating to affirm the quality of provision and the standard of awards are being maintained.
8. To develop curriculum, subject and staff Calibre together with research and other scholarly activities
Director Quality Enhancement Cell (QEC)
Doctorate Degree PhD Mathematics
Deputy Director QEC, Quality Enhancement Cell (QEC)
Doctorate Degree Agri Extension
Assistant, Quality Enhancement Cell (QEC)
M-Phil (18 Years) Degree M.Phil Education,
Assistant, Quality Enhancement Cell (QEC)
Master 16 Years Degree MA Urdu
Assistant, Quality Enhancement Cell (QEC)
Qulification Not Present
Assistant, Quality Enhancement Cell (QEC)
Master/ MS (18 Years) Degree MBA. Executive (Human Resource Management)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
SDG_Report_2020
SDG_Report_2021
SDG_Report_2022
SDG_Report_2023
SDG_Report_2024
The QEC, Government College Women University, Faisalabad has following memberships with National and International Quality Networks
International Networks of Quality Assurance Agencies for Higher Education (INQAAHE)
NATIONAL Level MEMBERSHIP OF QEC, GCWUF
Institutional level quality assurance is concerned with the RIPE Standards set out in the Quality Assurance Framework, against which each institution is required to align.
The RIPE Standards as set out in the Quality Assurance PSG Framework are as follows. Higher education institutions are expected to use all RIPE Standards in framing the institutional approach to quality assurance.
The Higher Education Commission has taken a significant initiative of performance based Institutional recognition and started up with primary step of outlining the Performance Evaluation Standards for the HEIs to be used for the purpose. A total of Sixteen Standards are prepared and each one of these articulates a specific dimension of the institutional quality.
Strategic Development
• Standard 1: Vision, mission, goals and strategic planning
• Standard 2: Governance, leadership and organization
• Standard 3: Institutional resources and planning
• Standard 4: Audit and finance
• Standard 5: Affiliated colleges/institutions
• Standard 6: Internationalization of higher education and global engagement
Academic Development
• Standard 7: Faculty recruitment, development and support services
• Standard 8: Academic programmes and curricula 7
• Standard 9: Admission, progression, assessment and certification
• Standard 10: Student support services
• Standard 11: Impactful teaching and learning and community engagement
• Standard 12: Research, innovation, entrepreneurship and industrial linkage
Institutional Development
• Standard 13: Fairness and integrity
• Standard 14: Public information and transparency
• Standard 15: Institutional effectiveness, quality assurance and enhancement
• Standard 16: CQI and cyclical external quality assurance
The institutional review process that consists of a Review Institutional Performance Report (RIPE) and a team visit provides the institution with performance indicators which will permit to look at the university critically, to have input from an external review team, and to take the necessary steps towards continuous quality improvement. This review process which will take place periodically is of vital importance to all universities that desire to meet international standards.
In order to achieve the desired Expectations of RIPE Reviews, the university must provide the answers to the questions listed in conjunction with each of the standards as well as the university data which is requested by the university. This University (IPR) Report needs to be prepared before the visit of IPR Panel. The RIPE Panel will be at university for three days.
The purpose of such a review is not to bestow praise nor is it just to find fault. It is to be an honest appraisal of where there are existing strengths and where there is a need for improvement. External peer review is vital to a high quality university that seeks to nurture a culture of continuous appraisal and improvement.
Role of IQAE/QEC within the Institution:
Leadership: IQAE/QEC provides leadership and strategic direction for quality assurance initiatives within the institution, working closely with IQC, senior leadership, academic departments, and administrative units.
Coordination and support: IQAE/QEC serves as the central coordinating and supporting body for quality assessment activities, ensuring alignment with institutional goals, objectives, and accreditation standards.
Facilitate Assessment and improvement:
IQAE/QEC facilitates and oversees the design, implementation, and evaluation of institutional assessment processes, including program reviews, student learning outcomes assessment, and institutional effectiveness evaluations.
Major Functions of IQAE/QEC:
Compliance: IQAE monitors institutional compliance with regulatory requirements, accreditation standards, and best practices in higher education, identifying areas for improvement and implementing corrective actions as needed.
Improvement: IQAE/QEC facilitates institutional improvement efforts by analyzing assessment data, identifying trends and patterns, and recommending evidence-based strategies and interventions to enhance performance and outcomes.
Communication: IQAE/QEC communicates assessment findings, recommendations, and best practices to stakeholders across the institution, promoting transparency, accountability, and shared ownership of quality assurance efforts.
Data Collection and analysis: IQAE/QEC collects, analyzes, and interprets institutional data to assess performance, identify strengths and weaknesses, and inform decision-making processes.
Report Preparation: IQAE/QEC compiles a comprehensive QA annual reports or IPER summarizing assessment results, findings, and recommendations for various stakeholders, including senior leadership, accreditation bodies, and external agencies.
Continuous Improvement: IQAE/QEC collaborates with academic and administrative units through IQC to develop and implement action plans for continuous improvement, monitoring progress and evaluating the effectiveness of interventions over time.
Professional Development: IQAE/QEC provides training, workshops, and resources to faculty, staff, and administrators in collaboration with IQC on quality assessment methods, data analysis techniques, and best practices in institutional effectiveness.
External Relations: IQAE/QEC represents the institution in interactions with external stakeholders, accreditation agencies, government bodies, and other institutions, ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements and maintaining institutional accreditation status.
The process of institutional internal quality assurance (institutional self-assessment) is illustrated in the Table and Figure below.
Pre-visit activities
|
Pre-visit activities |
||
|
Step 1 |
Institutional Quality Circle (IQC) initiates the process for self-assessment and constitutes Institutional Performance Report (IPR) preparation/updating and a follow-up committee. |
|
|
Step 2 |
IPR committee prepares/compiles IPR for current assessment year as per instruction of IQC. |
Follow-up committee prepares follow- up report as per instruction of IQC. |
|
Step 3 |
IQAE/QEC reviews IPR report to check that all the Standards and questions are addressed, and proper documentary evidence provided. If not, report will be sent back to Committee. |
IQAE/QEC reviews follow-up report to check status of all observations and whether they all are addressed or not: · current progress status against each finding/recommendation · timelines defined for each corrective action is being followed · if not, then proper justification and revised timelines provided · constraints affecting the progress are properly documented.
If anything is missing, the report will be referred back to the concerned committee. If not, move to step 6. |
|
Step 4 |
IQC constitutes RIPE committee by meeting the conditions below:
· review committee shall consist of five to seven members (internal and external) · at least one external member shall be included from HEC’s pool of experts · the internal members should preferably comprise seasoned and senior academics and administrative heads. |
|
|
Step 5 |
An orientation session will be organized by IQAE/QEC to brief the RIPE committee members, that include: · RIPE Standards · Expectations of HEC · review process. |
|
|
Step 6 |
Finalized IPR and follow-up report will be shared with all RIPE committee members. |
|
|
Step 7 |
IQAE/QEC finalizes the schedule for RIPE after consent by RIPE committee and university’s administration. |
|
|
Review the documentary evidence against the claims made in IPR for validation and list the questions/probing questions to be asked of different stakeholders. |
||
|
Hold separate meetings with: · students (bachelor’s, master’s, PhD) · faculty (senior & junior faculty members) · academic heads (Deans/HoDs/Principals, and so on) · administrative staff (Registrar, Controller of Examinations, Treasurer, Director of ORIC, Director of Research, and so on) · Directors of Campuses (in case of sub-campuses), Heads of selected affiliated colleges (in case of affiliated colleges)
to have an insight on institutional performance in accordance with their respective domains and to get feedback about any issues that may be inhibiting progress. |
||
|
Visit to assess classrooms, libraries, laboratories, studios, cafeteria, student accommodation, sports, auditoriums, transport, and so on, in order to get a clear picture of all the facilities. |
|
|
Meeting of the RIPE committee members in a separate space for finalization of findings before the visit ends. |
|
|
Post-visit activities |
|
|
Step 1 |
Based on observations finalized during visit, RIPE Committee prepares the report reflecting all the findings/suggestion/recommendations as per QAA guidelines. |
|
Step 2 |
· RIPE Committee submit reports to IQAE/QEC. · IQAE/QEC ensures that report is signed by all RIPE Committee members. · In case of any conflict, IQAE/QEC moderates to resolve the conflict and finalizes report with mutual agreement of all members. |
|
Step 3 |
IQAE/QEC submits report to IQC for signing off/review and approval. |
|
Step 4 |
IQAE/QEC disseminates report to departments for implementation and IQAE/QEC will monitor the implementation through IQC as per institutional CQI policy. |
M.Phil(Mathematics)
|
M.Phil, English (Applied Linguistics)
|
M.Phil (Chemistry)
|
M.Phil (Food & Nutrition)
|
M.Phil (Botany)
|
M.Phil (Islamic Studies)
|
M.Phil (Zoology)
|
M.Phil (Urdu)
|
M.Phil (Physics)
|
M.Phil (Food Science & Technology)
|
PhD (Chemistry)
|
PhD (Botany)
|
PhD (Food Sci & Technology)
|
PhD (Urdu)
|
PhD (Zoology)
|
0Faculty File Check List
|
1Student File Check List
|
2Course File Check List
|
3Employer Survey
|
4(Teacher Evaluation Form)
|
5(Faculty Resume)
|
6(Alumni Survey)
|
7(Survey of department offering PhD Programs)
|
8(Faculty Survey)
|
9(Research Student Progress Review Form)
|
10(Survey of Graduating Students)
|
11(Faculty Course Review Report)
|
12 (Student Course Evaluation Questionnaire)
|
Minimum Experience of a PhD Faculty Member to Supervise a PhD Thesis.pdfSupervision of MS-MPhil Research Thesis by MS-MPhil Qualified Faculty Members.pdfWeightage of Revised Assessment Criteria For Quality Enhancement Cell.pdfViolation of Rules in the Award of PhD Degrees.pdfViolation Rules Award PhD degrees.pdfSupervision MS MPhil Programmes.pdfMinimum PhD Faculty Supervise a PhD thesis.pdfREVISED CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENTOF QECs.pdf
