audit report of g. h. college of engineering, nagpurghrce.raisoni.net/teqip17/au1011.pdftechnical...
Post on 20-May-2018
219 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
TECHNICAL EDUCATION QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME (TEQIP) PHASE‐II
Performance Audit Report of G. H. Raisoni College of Engineering,
Nagpur
Performance Auditor: Dr. P.D. Porey
Director, SVNIT, Surat
20th June to 22nd June 2013
NATIONAL PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT (NPIU) EdCIL House, 4th Floor, Plot 18‐A, Sector 16‐A
NOIDA ‐ 201 301, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh
3
Name of Performance Auditor : Dr.P.D.Porey, Director SVNIT Surat
Dates of Performance Audit : 20‐06‐2013 to 22‐06‐2013
Name of Institution with location : G.H.Raisoni College of Engineering Nagpur, Maharashtra
Table‐1: Project Implementation
Sl. No.
Aspect
Perceived score,
out of 10
Performance Auditors Observations/Suggestions
1. Progress in securing Autonomous Institution status from the affiliating University & the UGC within 2 years of joining the Project OR Effectiveness of utilization of academic autonomy possessed/ obtained ( see Table‐26 in PIP)
08.00
Institute is Autonomous since May 2010 vide UGC Letter No. F.22‐ 1/2010(AC) dated 25/5/2010.
Institute has opted for one Complete Autonomy in One go.
Institute has adopted National knowledge commission’s 2008 report for designing scheme and syllabus.
The BOS has representatives of industry, professors from eminence repute like IIT and NIT, student representatives, alumni, and in house specialized faculties.
2. Sufficiency and quality of academic buildings
08.00
Sufficient Academic buildings are available with reasonably good quality and ambience. Institute has well air‐cooled Auditorium of 1000 capacity and air cooled gym, Indoor sports room, Conference rooms, Board room, Smart classrooms, laboratories.
4
3. Progress/achievement in starting new PG programs as evidenced by:
Securing AICTE approval
Establishment of
laboratories
Adequacy of student
enrolments
Cumulative number of
assistantships granted
08.00
As mentioned in PIP, Institute could start 3 programs out of 5.
AICTE has approved 3 PG Programes. They are Mobile Technology, Transportation Engineering and Communication Engineering.
AICTE has been approached For approval of 2 PG Programes in Structural Engineering and Power Electronics & Drives.
Three Specialized laboratories related to new Post Graduate programmes are established.
Almost all Post Graduate seats are filled up.
Institute has offered total 10 teaching assistantship for 2012‐13.
4. Progress/achievement in strengthening existing PG programs as evidenced by:
Establishment of proposed laboratories
Adequacy of student enrolments
Cumulative number of assistantships granted
08.00
All laboratories are for existing PG programmes are having requisite equipments and software.
All existing Post Graduate seats are filled upto 2012‐2013, admission process is still going on.
For 2012‐2013 total 10 teaching assistantships have been provided. Good practices of RRC, RPC, PG project review at desired stages of PG
rogrammes.
At least One Technical Paper is mandatory for submission of dissertation.
5. Progress/achievement in strengthening existing UG programs in Govt funded andaided institutions only as evidenced by: Establishment of proposed
laboratories Adequacy of student enrolments
N A
Not Applicable since it is only for Govt funded and aided institutions only
5
6. Improvements in Faculty Development as evidenced by:
Percentage/ increase in percentage of faculty benefiting from the Core Module of pedagogical training
Percentage of / increase in percentage of faculty benefiting from the Advanced Module of pedagogical training
Percentage of faculty with UG qualification registered/deputed for improving their qualification ( see Section‐3, 4(b) on page 20 of PIP)
Percentage of faculty deputed for subject domain training, seminars,etc. (faculty benefiting from subject domain training are required to share their gains with peers and also put their report on training on institution’s web site)
07.00
40% of faculty members are benefited in pedagogy training. 20% of faculty members are benefited in Advanced Module of
pedagogical training.
15% of faculty with Under Graduate qualification is deputed for improving their qualification.
35% the faculty deputed for subject domain training, seminars, etc.
2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13
From Externally Funded 2991880 2334106 20861404
From Consultancy Rendered 109672 4000 215825
From Training Programs Conducted 1943636 1946288 3800391
From Rental of Institutional Facilities 923000 1036000 102900
From Interest Earned Bank 910277 2218433 3637132
From Others 58395681 26582909 6413825
7. Generation, retention and utilization of the non‐tuition fee revenue generated through various activities
07.00
(e.g. any saving from block grant, Donations from alumni & charitable organization etc.)
6
8. Engineering faculty positions in terms of:
Reduction in vacancies
Increase in faculty appointed on regular basis
Increase in the number of faculty with at least a Masters degree
07.00
174 out of 256 faculties are appointed on regular basis (68%)
12% Increase in the number of faculty with at least a Masters degree.
9. Improvements in placement rate of UG pass outs
08.00
For UG Programmes it is Good
For post graduate placement is 100
10. Enhanced interaction with industry as evidenced by:
Increase in industry personnel registered for Masters & Doctoral programs
Increase in industry personnel trained by the institution in knowledge and/or skill areas
Increase in the number of consultancy assignments secured by the institution
Increase in the number of students’ and faculty visits to and/or training in industry
Increase in involvement of industry experts in curricula & syllabi improvements, laboratory improvements, evaluation of students and delivering expert lectures
Increase in the number of sandwich programs between industries and the institution
07.00
There is increase in industry personnel registered for Masters & Doctoral programs
69 industry personnel trained by the institution in knowledge
and/or skill areas
13 consultancy assignments secured by the institution
More than 100% Increase in the number of students’ and faculty visits to and/or training in industry
Good involvement of industry experts in curricula & syllabi improvements, laboratory improvements, evaluation of students and delivering expert lectures
7.55
7
Name of Performance Auditor : Dr.P.D.Porey, Director SVNIT Surat
Dates of Performance Audit : 20‐06‐2013 to 22‐06‐2013 Name of Institution with location : G.H.Raisoni College of Engineering Nagpur, Maharashtra
Table 2. Performance Audit ‐ Implementation of Institutional Reforms
Sl. No.
Aspect
Perceived Score, out
of 10
Performance Auditors Observations/Suggestions
1. Effectiveness of faculty evaluation bystudents as evidenced by:
Percentage/ increase in percentage of faculty evaluated by students in one or more subjects
Are results of evaluation properly used for teacher improvement?
10.00
100% of faculty evaluated by students in one or more subjects
Yes, results of evaluation properly used for teacher improvement by HoD & Dean‐Academics. Counseling of faculty is done and if required training is provided.
2. Establishment of four funds and their sizes
10.00
Corpus Fund : 11 lacs, Faculty Development : 11 Lacs, Equipment replacement Fund : 11 Lacs, Maintenance Fund : 11 Lacs
8
3. Offer of incentives to faculty for participation in consultancy, R&D and continuing education programs offered by the institution
10.00
Institute has well defined norms approved by BOG for promoting external interface and faculty competency.
10% incentive of the research grant from management’s share for getting grant from external agency.
Rs.5000/‐ for each referred journal publication. Rs.10000/‐ for each Ph.D. awarded under faculty
Rs.5000/‐ each for guiding Ph.D. student. Rs.30000/‐ for each patent in two stages – Rs.15000/‐ at the time of
filing patents and Rs.15000/‐ on grant of patent.
Reimbursement of publication fee / print fee of journal. Reimbursement of registration fee and TA/DA for attending
National & International Conferences. Book grant
Seed Money for R & D project. 70% of consultancy revenue to faculty. 50% fee concession for Ph.D.
50% of revenue generated out of CEP to faculty. And so on
10.00
9
Performance Auditors Report Name of Performance Auditor : Dr.P.D.Porey, Director SVNIT Surat
Dates of Performance Audit : 20‐06‐2013 to 22‐06‐2013 Name of Institution with location : G.H.Raisoni College of Engineering Nagpur, Maharashtra
Table‐3 Performance Audit ‐ Improvement in Administrative and Managerial Efficiencies
S. No. Aspect Perceived
Score, out of 10
Performance Auditors Observations/Suggestions
1. Modernization and decentralization of administration and financial management
07.00
Organization chart available and administrative powers are decentralized.
Statutory and non statutory committees Dean‐Structure is exist. Financial powers are given to Deans, Heads
2. Responsiveness to students academic and non‐academic requirements
04.00
Various Committees do exist but feedback from students reveals that there is need to improve the system for Students Response.
3. Responsiveness to faculty requirements
04.00
Various Committees and processes do exist but feedback from Faculty Members reveals that there is need to improve Responsiveness for the requirements of Faculty Members.
4. Utilization of institutional resource s 08.00
Optimal utilization of institutional resources.
10
5. Maintenance of academic and non ‐
academic infrastructure and facilities
08.00
Maintenance Cell takes care of infrastructure and facilities required for academic and non‐academic purpose.
Maintenance of computer and hardware, printer is in‐house.
Annual Maintenance contract system is in place
6. Extent of delegation of administrative and financial decision making powers to senior functionaries
08.00
Delegation of powers and responsibilities to senior functionaries like Deans & HoDs in the form of various portfolios being handled and committee incharges. 1. Board of Governors Unlimited 2. Head of Institution for: (a) single purchase of equipment, and (b) recurrent expenditure Unlimited 3. Dean Rs. 50,000/‐ 4. Heads of Department Rs. 50000/‐
6.50
11
Performance Auditors Report Name of Performance Auditor : Dr.P.D.Porey, Director SVNIT Surat
Dates of Performance Audit : 20‐06‐2013 to 22‐06‐2013 Name of Institution with location : G.H.Raisoni College of Engineering Nagpur, Maharashtra
Table 4. Performance Audit ‐ Quality of Education and Research
S. No. Aspect Perceived
Score, out of 10
Performance Auditors Observations/Suggestions
1. Improvements in curricula and /or syllabi N A Since First batch of Student is in Final, It is not applicable
2. Relevance of curricula and syllabi
08.00
Care has been taken to include requirements of Industry by involving persons from Industry in the relevant BOS. Emphasis has been given on interdisciplinary contents. Open electives are also introduced. General proficiency courses are also part of curriculum.
3. Improvement in teaching ‐learning processes as evidenced by:
Use of teaching aids Continuous evaluation through quizzes, assignments, mid‐semester examinations, etc.
Sharing of answer scripts with students and explanation of the evaluation carried out Introduction of flexibility in program offerings Increased availability of adequate electives
07.00
Interactive smart boards, LCD Projectors, NPTL Lectures, Online Journals are used, activity based learning is adopted. Continuous Evaluation System do exist Answer sheets are shown to the students after examination and grievances if any are resolved.
number of electives are as below for each department
Department Electives Choices
Electrical Engg 3 5
Civil Engg 3 6
Mechanical Engg 3 6
IT 3 5
CSE 5 5
ETC 3 5
ETRX 3 5
12
4. Progress in securing accreditation of eligible UG & PG programs ( institutions are to achieve target of 60% of eligible UG & PG programs accreditedand/or applied for within 2 years of joining theProject)
10.00
All the eligible Under Graduate programmes are accredited and re‐accredited ad applied for second cycle of reaccreditations in December 2012. Out of nine eligible Post Graduate Programs, three are accredited upto 2014, for six programmes visit is over and result is awaited
5. Increased collaboration with industry in R&D as evidenced by:
Increase in number of joint and industry sponsored R&D work undertaken
Increase in financial contribution by industry for R&D
02.00
There is a need to improve the R&D activity in association with Industries.
6. Increase in percentage of revenue fromexternally funded R&D projects and consultancies in the total revenue of
05.00
8.5% Increase in percentage of revenue from externally funded R&D projects and consultancies in the total revenue of the institution from all sources
7. Increase in the number of publications in refereed journals
03.00
There is a need to improve upon publication of Research Papers in Referred Journals.
8. Increase in the number of patents filed 10.00 18 patents filed during TEQIP‐II as compared to 5 pre‐TEQIP.
7.14
13
Performance Auditors Report Name of Performance Auditor : Dr.P.D.Porey, Director SVNIT Surat
Dates of Performance Audit : 20‐06‐2013 to 22‐06‐2013
Name of Institution with location : G.H.Raisoni College of Engineering Nagpur, Maharashtra
Table 5. Performance Audit ‐ Performance in the Governance of Institutions
The objective of institutional Governance with review is to assist institutions, using evidence –based approach, in their self assessment of current Governance Practice. A thorough review will indicate the level of effectiveness of institutional Governance and the Governing Body and identify action points for improvement. It will also indicate that:
The conduct of the Governing Body is an accordance with the standards of behavior that the public should rightfully expect.
The Governing Body and the individual Governors are exercising their responsibilities in the interest of the institution as a whole.
The Review has been undertaking by a Group who have internal and external credibility to undertake such exercise.
INSTITUTIONAL GOVERN ANCE REVIEW TEMPLATE Perceived Score,
out of 10 Performance Auditors
Observations/Suggestions
A. PRIMARY ACCOUNTABILITIES
SELF‐REVIEW QUESTIONS
Has the Governing Body approved the institutional strategic vision, mission and plan – identifying a clear development path for the institution through its long‐term business plans and annual budgets?
10.00
Yes
Has the Governing Body ensured the establishment and monitoring of proper, effective and efficient systems of control and accountability to ensure financial sustainability
10.00
Yes
Is the Governing Body monitoring institutional performance and quality assurance arrangements?
10.00
Yes
14
Has the Governing Body put in place suitable arrangements for monitoring the head of the institution’s performance?
Yes
B. OPENNESS & TRANSPARANCY IN THE OPERATION OF GOVERNING BODIES
Does the Governing Body publish an annual report on institutional performance?
10.00 Yes
Does the Governing Body maintain, and publicly disclose, a register of interests of members of its governing body?
10.00
Yes
Is the Governing Body conducted in an open a manner, and does it provide as much information as possible to students, faculty, the general public and potential employers on all aspects of institutional activity related to academic performance, finance and management?
10.00
Yes
C. KEY ATTRIBUTES OF GOVERNING BODIES
Are the size, skills, competences and experiences of the Governing Body, such that it is able to carry out its primary accountabilities effectively and efficiently, and ensure the confidence of its stakeholders and constituents?
10.00
Yes
Are the recruitment processes and procedures for governing body members rigorous and transparent? Does the Governing Body have actively involved independent members and is the institution free from direct political interference to ensure academic freedom and focus on long term educational objectives?
10.00
Yes
Are the role and responsibilities of the Chair of the institution and the Member Secretary serving the Governing Body clearly stated?
10.00
Yes
Does the Governing Body meet regularly? Is there clear evidence that members of the governing body attend regularly and participate actively?
10.00
Yes
15
D. EFFECTIVENESS AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW OF GOVERNING BODIES
Does the Governing Body keep their effectiveness under regular review and in reviewing its performance, reflect on the performance of the institution as a whole in meeting its long‐term strategic
10.00
Yes
Does the Governing Body ensure that new members are properly inducted, and existing members receive opportunities for further development as deemed necessary?
10.00
Yes
E. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
Does the Governing ensure regulatory compliance* and, subject to this, take all final decisions on matters of fundamental concern of the institution.
08.00
Yes
Does the regulatory compliance include demonstrating compliance with the ‘not‐for‐profit’ purpose of education institutions?
08.00
Yes
Has there been accreditation and/or external quality assurance by a national or professional body? If so, give details: name, status of current accreditation etc
10.00
YesNAAC accredited with ‘A’ Grade w.e.f. 2012 and NBA Accreditation details are as belowl:
Date of Accreditation Programmes Accredited for 3/5 years File No. B.E. Electrical Engg. 3 years B.E. Electronics Engg. 3 years
6/5/2002
B.E. Mechanical Engg. 3 years
NBA/24 BRD‐AIR 2002
11/2/2003 B.E. Computer Science & Engg. 3 years NBA/ACCR‐98(11)/2001 B.E. Electronics & Telecommunication Engg. 5 years 18/5/2007 B.E. Information Technology 5 years
NBA/(Review) ACCR‐98/2002
2/3/2009 B.E. Civil Engg. 3 years NBA/ACCR‐98/2002
9.12
16
B.E. Electronics Engg. 21/3/2007 B.E. Electrical Engg.
Re‐accredited for 5 years NBA/(Review) ACCR‐98/2002
B.E. Computer Science & Engg. Re‐accredited for 5 years 18/5/2007 B.E. Mechanical Engg. Re‐accredited for 3 years
NBA/(Review) ACCR‐98/2002
B.E. Civil Engg. Applied for Re‐Accreditation B.E. Electrical Engg. Applied for Re‐Accreditation B.E. Mechanical Engg. Applied for Re‐Accreditation B.E. Electronics Engg. Applied for Re‐Accreditation B.E. Computer Science & Engg. Applied for Re‐Accreditation
18/12/2012
B.E. Information Technology Applied for Re‐Accreditation M.Tech. Heat Power Engg. 19/5/2009 M.Tech. Computer Science & Engg.
3 years NBA/ACCR‐98/2008
3/6/2009 M.Tech. Integrated Power System 3 years NBA/ACCR‐98/2008 28/3/2011 M.Tech. Electronics Engg. 3 years 28‐199/2010‐NBA
M.E. Embedded Systems & Computing 22/9/2011 M.E. Wireless Communication & Computing
3 years 28‐199/2010‐NBA
M.Tech. VLSI ‐‐ 11/8/2011 M.Tech. CAD/CAM
Visit Over, Result Awaited
M.Tech. Heat Power Engg. M.Tech. Integrated Power System M.Tech. Computer Science & Engg.
‐‐
M.Tech. Environmental Engg.
Visit Over, Result Awaited ‐‐
17
Table 6. Performance Audit ‐ Support to Weak Students
S. No. Aspect Perceived
Score, out of 10
Performance Auditors Observations/Suggestions
1. Percentage of students that complete the full first year and transit successfully to Second Year
09.00
2010‐2011 – 97.70%2011‐2012 – 98.86% 2012‐2013 – 98.90%
2. Effectiveness of techniques used for identifying weak students
09.00
Following is the criteria adopted to identify weaker students:
• Three diagnostic tests were conducted for all students. • Class assessment examinations (CAE) are treated at par with diagnostic
tests. CAEs are conducted in all subjects at regular intervals. • Performance in CAE‐1, CAE‐2, CAE‐3 is assessed. Remedial teaching is
commenced immediately after CAE‐1. • Students scoring less than 40% marks (between 0‐8 marks out of 20) in
all or any of the three subjects are considered weak. • For 2013‐14, an online common diagnostic test based on 12th standard
syllabi shall be administered on all students admitted to First year B. E.
3. Conduct of remedial teaching throughout academic session
09.00
Remedial teaching is done throughout academic session. 873 (Even Semester 2011‐2012 & Odd Semester 2012‐2013)
4. Conduct of specialized soft skills and professional skills training
08.00
Specialized soft skills and professional skills training is conducted regularly.
5. Increase in the number of campus interviews
05.00
Efforts are seen for enhancement of placements but there is no improvement in campus interviews.
6. Establishment and functioning of a Finishing School
05.00
Sincere efforts have been made to teach various skills to the students so that chances of their employability will increase.
7. Increase in the number of internal and external students that attend high intensity training conducted by the Finishing School
05.00
Efforts are made by providing course on Oracle, Courses by Tata Technologies,
IBM, National Instruments, CL express course, Android course by NES Pune etc.
7.14
18
Improvements noticed on shortcomings reported during earlier Performance Audits NOT APPLICABLE SINCE THIS IS THE FIRST AUDIT REPORT
Brief statements on continuing shortcomings and reasons thereof NOT APPLICABLE SINCE THIS IS THE FIRST AUDIT REPORT
Recommendations for Mentors
MAY PROVIDE GUIDANCE FOR IMPROVING R & D ACTIVITIES SO ALSO FOR INTERACTION WITH FACULTY MEMBERS FROM INSTITUTIONS OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE FOR QUALITY RESEARCH JOINT R&D PROPOSALS, INTERACTION WITH INDUSTRY
top related