Self-Assessment Report

Self-Assessment Committee Department of Urban and Regional Planning

Submitted By: Professor Golam Moinuddin, PhD. Head, Self-Assessment Committee Professor Dr. M. Shafiq-Ur Rahman Member, Self-Assessment Committee Mohammad Mizanur Rahman Member, Self-Assessment Committee

Submitted To Institutional Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC), Jahangirnagar University University Grants Commission, Bangladesh Ministry of Education, Government of Bangladesh The World Bank

Jahangirnagar University Savar, Dhaka - 1342

December 2017

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The Self-Assessment Committee (SAC) of the Department of Urban and Regional Planning acknowledges - with gratitude – the role of Institutional Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) of the Jahangirnagar University, Bangladesh for the initiative to explore the status of academic, research, administrative and extra-curricular activities of different departments of Jahangirnagar University.

The Committee also acknowledges for the fund, instructions and other logistical support given by the IQAC; JU to carry out such work.

The SAC gratefully acknowledges all the stakeholders: students, staffs, employers and alumni that took part in the self-assessment process through their important opinions for further development and quality enhancement of the department.

The SAC would also like to express its sincere appreciation and gratitude to the Hon’ble Vice Chancellor Professor Dr. Farzana Islam, Pro-Vice Chancellor Professor Dr. Md. Abul Hossain, Pro-Vice Chancellor and Dean, Faculty of Social Science Professor Dr. Md. Amir Hussain, Director of IQAC-JU Professor Dr. Ajit Kumar Mazumder, Deputy-Directors Professor Dr. Shahedur Rashid and Professor Tapan Kumar Saha and chairman of DURP for their constant supports and active guidance on the way of preparing this report. Without their support, it would not have been possible to complete the SA report.

Finally, the SAC acknowledges HEQEP, UGC and Ministry of Education for being with the same line to assess the health of the universities or higher institutions in Bangladesh.

i

SUMMARY

Present status of academic, research, administrative and extra-curricular activities at the Department of Urban and Regional Planning has been evaluated through self-assessment under the guidelines ordained by Institutional Quality Assurance Cell, Jahangirnagar University, Bangladesh. The aim in this regard has been to know the standard of the department – where exactly it stands today?. Surveys over the issues such as governance, curriculum design, quality and progress of students, teaching-learning, staff development, physical facilities, student support services, research, process management and continuous improvement, SWOT analysis have been carried out by the DURP Self-Assessment Committee. Stakeholders or the respondents of questionnaire survey included DURP faculties, students, non-academic-staffs, alumni and employers. The grand mean of the mean scores of different investigated issues/concerns have been found to be 3.38 – which can be considered satisfactory with rooms for improvement. Precisely, the findings reveal that there are scopes for improvement in physical facilities, students support service and staff facilities. This report can be considered as the foundational step for initiating detailed improvement/excellence achievement plan to enhance the quality of education and research of the department.

ii

CONTENTS

Acknowledgement i Summary ii Abbreviations and Acronyms x

Title Page no

Chapter 1: Introduction……………...………………………….……………………… 1-10

1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Significance of program Self-Assessment 2 1.3 Self-Assessment (SA) Process 3 1.4 Overview of the Jahangirnagar University 4 1.4.1 History 4 1.4.2 Purpose 5 1.4.3 Organizational Structure 5 1.5 Overview of the Department of Urban and Regional Planning 7 1.5.1 History 7 1.5.2 Mission and Vision 7 1.5.3 Programs 8 1.5.4 Resources and Facilities 8 1.6 Intended Learning Outcomes of the Programs 8 1.7 Brief Descriptions of the Programs under Review 9 1.7.1 Credit Requirements 9 1.7.2 Conduction of Semester Final Examination 9 1.8 Conclusion 10

Chapter 2: Governance…… ………………………………………….…...….………. 11-21

2.1 Program Management 11 2.2 Academic Documentation 12 2.3 Peer Observation and Feedback Process 13 2.4 Internal Quality Assurance Process 13 2.5 Survey Results 13

iii

2.6 Conclusion 21

Chapter 3: Curriculum Design and Review……………………………..…………… 22-26

3.1 Need Assessment 22 3.2 Curriculum Design 22 3.3 Curriculum Review Process 23 3.4 Curriculum Alignment/Skill Mapping 23 3.5 Gaps in Curriculum: Adequacy to meet the needs 24 3.6 Survey Results 24 3.7 Conclusion 26

Chapter 4: Student ………………………...………………………………..….…...... 27-31

4.1 Entry Qualifications 27 4.2 Admission 28 4.3 Progress and Achievement 28 4.4 Survey Results 30 4.5 Conclusion 31

Chapter 5: Physical Facilities …………………………………...... 32-35

5.1 Survey Results 32 5.1.1 Classroom Facilities 33 5.1.2 Library Facilities 33 5.1.3 Laboratory Facilities 34 5.1.4 Internet Facilities 34 5.1.5 Office Facilities 35 5.1.6 Other Facilities 35 5.2 Conclusion 35

iv

Chapter 6: Teaching Learning and Assessment...... 36- 51

6.1 Quality Staff 36 6.2 Teaching Methods 36 6.2.1 Theory Courses 36 6.2.2 Sessional Courses 36 6.2.3 Teaching Learning Methods 36 6.2.3.1 Interactive Teaching 39 6.2.3.2 Class Size 40 6.2.3.3 Modern Device 40 6.2.3.4 Diverse Method 41 6.2.3.5 Practical Exercise 42 6.3 Use of Lesson Plan 43 6.4 Technology Integration 44 6.5 Focus 44 6.6 Skill Development 45 6.7 Assessment of Student Performance 46 6.7.1 Class Assessment/Continuous Assessment and Submission of 46 Assessment 6.7.2 Semester-end Examination 47 6.7.3 Assessment of Semester-End Examination 47 6.7.4 Assessment of Thesis/Dissertation 47 6.7.5 Viva-Voce 47 6.7.6 Grading System 48 6.7.8 Class Attendance 48 6.7.9 Survey Results of Assessment Process 48 6.8 Conclusion 51

Chapter 7: Student Support Services ……………....…...... 52-57

7.1 Co-curricular and Extra-curricular Activities 52 7.2 Academic Guidance and Counseling 52 7.3 Carrier and Placement 53 7.4 Alumni Services 53

v

7.5 Survey results 53 7.5.1 Guidance and Counseling 54 7.5.2 Financial grants to the students in case of hardship 55 7.5.3 The entity provides co-curricular and extra-curricular exposures to the 55 students 7.5.4 Alumni 56 7.5.5 Collection of alumni feedback by the entity to update the learning outcomes 56 of the program 7.5.6 Community service opportunity 56 7.6 Conclusion 57

Chapter 8: Staff and Facilities ……………………………...... …………...... … 58-68

8.1 Entry Qualifications 58 8.1.1 Academic 58 8.1.2 Entry Qualifications of Non-academic Staffs 59 8.2 Recruitment 59 8.2.1 Academic 60 8.2.2 Non-academic Administrative 60 8.2.3 Non-academic Technical 61 8.3 Staff Development 61 8.3.1 Development of Academic Staff 61 8.3.1.1 Institutional Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) 61 8.3.1.2 Study Leave 61 8.3.1.3 Sabbatical Leave 62 8.3.2 Development of Non-academic Staff 62 8.4 Key Responsibilities 62 8.4.1 Key Responsibilities of Academic Staffs 62 8.4.2 Key Responsibilities of Non-academic Staffs 63 8.5 Key Performance Indicators 63 8.5.1 Key Performance Indicators of Academic Staffs 63 8.5.2 Key Performance Indicators of Non-academic Staffs 63 8.6 Survey Results 64 8.7 Conclusion 68

vi

Chapter 9: Research and Extension …………………...... …………...... ……... 69-74

9.1 Policy and Program 69 9.2 Fund and Facilities 69 9.3 Fund Hunting 72 9.4 Dissemination of Research Findings 73 9.5 Survey findings 73 9.6 Conclusion 74

Chapter 10: Process Management and Continuous Improvement ……….....…….. 75- 82

10.1 List of some major academic processes 75 10.2 Self-assessment 76 10.3 Use of all feedback 78 10.4 Improvement plans 79 10.5 Conclusion 82

Chapter 11: SWOT Analysis ………………………………………..……….....……. 83 - 85

Chapter 12: Conclusion, Recommendation and Strategic Improvement Plan ...... 86-88

12.1 Conclusion 86 12.2 Recommendation 87 12.3 Strategic plan for further improvement of the institution 87 12.3.1 Excellence in Teaching/Education 87 12.3.2 Research and Scholarly Activities 87 12.3.3 Service for Students and Faculty 88 12.3.4 Physical Facilities Improvement 88 12.3.5 Community Engagement 88

References ………………………………………………………….…………...... ……...... 89

vii

List of Tables

Table 2.1 Academic programs in DURP 11 Table 2.2 Statutory position/committee for program management in DURP 11 Table 2.3 Vision, Mission and Objectives of the entity are clearly stated 14 Table 2.4 Practice of fairness and transparency by the entity in academic 14 decisions making Table 2.5 The ILOs satisfy the stated vision, mission and objectives of the entity 15 Table 2.6 Adequacy of infrastructure for satisfying entity’s mission and 15 objectives at the entity Table 2.7 Strict maintenance of academic calendar by the entity 16 Table 2.8 Timely publication of results in compliance with the ordinance 16 Table 2.9 Entity reviews policy and procedures periodically for further 17 improvement Table 2.10 Code of conducts for students and employees are well communicated 18 Table 2.11 Disciplinary rules and regulations are explicitly defined and well 18 circulated Table 2.12 Website is updated properly 19 Table 2.13 The entity provides comprehensive guidelines to the students in 19 advance by means of a brochure/handbook Table 2.14 Proper documentation is maintained 20 Table 2.15 Decision making process in the entity is participatory 20 Table 2.16 Entity ensures a conducive learning environment 20 Table 2.17 Students’ opinion regarding academic and extra-academic matters are 21 addressed properly Table 3.1 Overall response of the stakeholders on various aspects of curriculum 25 design and review process Table 4.1 Overall response on students’ entry qualifications, admission 30 procedure, progress and achievements from three different stakeholders. Table 5.1 Overall responses obtained from three stakeholders for different 32 physical facility Table 5.2 Classroom facilities in DURP 33 Table 5.3 Laboratory facilities in DURP 34 Table 6.1 The overall responses of teaching learning assessment done by 37 students, academics and alumni Table 6.2 The overall responses of learning assessment done by students, 38 academics and alumni Table 6.3 Assessment systems are duly communicated to students at the outset of 49 the term/semester Table 6.4 Assessment procedures meet the objectives of the course 49 Table 6.5 Review of the assessment system at regular intervals 50 Table 6.6 Both formative (quizzes, assignment, term papers, continuous 50 assessments, presentations etc.) and summative assessment (final examination) strategies are followed

viii

Table 6.7 Use of diverse methods for assessment 51 Table 6.8 Provide feedback to the students immediately after assessment 51 Table 7.1 Scores obtained from the survey for various student services 54 Table 8.1 Entry Qualification of Non-Academic Staff 59 Table 8.2 Key Responsibilities of Faculty by Designation 62 Table 8.3 Key Responsibilities of Non-Academic Staffs by Designation 63 Table 8.4 Good recruitment policy and practices for recruitment of competent 64 academic and non-academic staff Table 8.5 The attractive salary and incentives to retain the academic and non- 64 academic staff Table 8.6 Good team spirit exists among different academic staff 65 Table 8.7 A congenial atmosphere prevails to enhance professional knowledge 65 through research and higher studies Table 8.8 Academics have enough opportunities to take part in different 66 seminar/workshop/training programs for skill development Table 8.9 Non-academics have enough opportunity to take part in different 66 training programs for skill development Table 8.10 Policy of entity to provide mentoring/continuous guidance for new 66 academic staff Table 8.11 Practice of seminars and workshops by the entity to share knowledge 67 and experience among the faculty members Table 8.12 Performance award policy of the entity to inspire academic staff 67 Table 8.13 Performance indicators are the criteria for promotion/up-gradation 68 Table 9.1 Overall response on various aspects of research and extension. 73 Table 10.1 Survey result for the individual areas of process management and 76 continuous improvement. Table 11.1 SWOT Analysis of DURP 83

List of Figures

Fig. 4.1 Progress report of students of 16th batch (session 2013-14) in exam held 29 in year 2014, 2015 and 2016 Fig. 4.2 Progress report of students of 17th batch (session 2014-15) in exam held 29 in year 2015 and 2016 Fig. 4.3 Progress report of students of 18th batch (session 2015-16) in exam held 29 in year 2016 and 2017 Fig 6.1 The overall responses in interactive teaching of teaching learning 39 assessment Fig 6.2 The overall responses in optimum class size for interactive teaching and 40 learning Fig. 6.3 The overall responses in modern devices used to improve teaching- 41 learning process

ix

Fig. 6.4 The overall responses in diverse methods are practiced to achieve 42 learning objectives Fig. 6.5 Entity provides adequate opportunities for practical exercises to apply in 43 real life situation Fig. 6.6 The overall score in the use of lesson plan 44

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

DURP Department of Urban and Regional Planning HEQEP Higher Education Quality Enhancement Project IQAC Institutional Quality Assurance Cell MoE Ministry of Education PoE Program Offering Entity JU Jahangirnagar University BURP Bachelor of Urban and Regional Planning MURP Masters’ of Urban and Regional Planning SAC Self-Assessment Committee UGC University Grants Commission

x

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Introduction Human learning is a challenging phenomena and has started to evolve for over 2000 years (Deubel, 2003). It is important to conceptualize learning and to realize how it occurs because such knowledge supports the way people to be learnt. Learning was seen as changes in behavior brought about by experiences (Deubel, 2003) while learning can also be defined as an internal and active mental process that develops within the learner that needs to examine the mental process e.g. memory, perception or judgment (Sweller, et al, 1998). Learning theories put forward different instructional strategies for promoting effective learning.

In pursuit of promoting effective learning, self-assessment process is such an initiative made by the Government of Bangladesh and World Bank through University Grants Commission (UGC) under Institutional Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) in each university funded by Higher Education Quality Enhancement Project (HEQEP) that can entail the current status of an academic unit. It is assumed that the process can also enhance and ensure the quality higher education in the country (MoE, et al, 2014). The concept is ingrained with the very perception of tertiary education. More specifically, the purpose of university is to produce graduates. However the quality of the graduates in terms of knowledge, skills, attitudes and performance vary between universities, institutes, departments or between places. This implies that the capacity or the fitness of an institute should attain a reasonable level through which the graduates of the entity can earn meaningful education. Institutional fitness may enhance with the following matters such as: learners commitment, interest, friendly- environments along with course-curricula, teaching-learning mechanism, governance, physical facilities, quality of students, course reviewing process, assessment etc. Self - Assessment concept is a practical measure based on specific indicators based analysis through which the capacity of a university or academic program can be estimated.

In quest, an Institutional Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) has been established at the Jahangirnagar University. Under the IQAC, Self - Assessment Committee (SAC) has been formed in the department of Urban and Regional Planning (URP) with the approval of the departmental academic committee and finally the Honorable Vice-Chancellor to review the

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 1 offered undergrad and masters programs.

1.2 Significance of program Self - Assessment Currently, quality assurance in higher education is a global practice. With the changes in higher education environment and emerging needs of the stakeholders, there is an urgency to look into the effectiveness of the academic programs. Higher education must be more closely aligned to the needs of the society. Universities should focus on preparing graduates with positive mindset, skills and competence, which eventually will help them to find a good fit into the social system. In order to gain quality education the SA process is intended to meet up the following issues:

 Understanding the current quality level of education that the institution is providing.

 Identifying the areas and issues that are to be addressed and improved to enhance, maintain the quality in education.

 Integrating the concerns of major stakeholders into the educational system for providing better experience.

 The SA exercise is an effective approach to gain a clear understanding of current situation by an informative SWOT analysis. The self-assessment exercise helps to judge the overall effectiveness of academic program and educational processes. It provides an opportunity to attain a deeper understanding of the areas that may need improvement. Thus, SA becomes one of the core activities of the quality assurance process.

 The quality of education can be measured by the employability of the graduates and their capacity to launch startup business and becoming successful entrepreneurs. The quality of education can also be judged by the extent of its contribution to organizations and national development as well as to local and global communities. In an ever changing environmental setting the definition of quality education and requirements for quality education are also changing continuously. With the changes in the definition of quality education, there is an urgency to look into the effectiveness of the existing academic programs and appropriateness of institutional capacity to maintain quality in education. SA uses observable performances as the basis or evidences for judgment that underpins program or institution to become responsive (Loacker, 2004).

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 2

SA becomes a very important exercise to the academic institutions for continuous improvement and quality assurance in education. It refers to comprehensive and systematic processes of collecting and analyzing information from major stakeholders on the QA areas and related aspects of the educational institution. The SA process allows the entity to identify the strengths and areas in which improvements are required for quality education. It also provides information to participants, allowing them to evaluate and understand the overall quality of academic programs. SA provides a direction and guidelines to prepare comprehensive improvement plan addressing the issues critical to quality assurance. The understanding and practice of SA promotes developmental process. It is never exhaustive in its ability to grow. It enables the participants of the program and/or institution to observe the situation precisely and to identify the deficiencies between expectations and actual performances (Loacker, 2004).

1.3 Self - Assessment (SA) Process The SA process involves gathering information, opinions, suggestions from the stakeholders, reviewing these, identifying difficulties and devising necessary development plan for quality education. In pursuit, the approved Self - Assessment Committee (SAC) of DURP has been briefed along with SAC committees from other departments of the university at the early part of 2017. Being advised about the assessment necessities by the IQAC directorate of the university, the SAC of DURP organized a briefing session for the departmental faculties. Thereafter, survey with structured questionnaire amongst five stakeholders was initiated by a number of faculty members of DURP. The aim of the survey has been to gauge on the perception of relevant stakeholders regarding the program, its governance, teaching-learning environment, involvement of the stakeholders in entity’s various affairs etc. and finally to assemble, analyze the opinions and develop improvement plans for DURP. Hence, this report intends to evaluate the fitness of the department through leaning outcomes in terms of knowledge, skills and professionalism that are expected to be gained by the graduates. The stakeholders, as decided by the IQAC cell of the university, included DURP academic staffs, students, non-academic staffs, alumni and employers and they were requested to fill in structured questionnaires so that the SAC committee could gaze on their views on the existing features of DURP. In pursuit, 11 DURP faculties out of 13 to 15 actively serving at the time of questionnaire survey, 165 students out of 180, 16 alumni, 5 employers and 7 out of 7 non-academic DURP staff responded.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 3

1.4 Overview of the Jahangirnagar University Jahangirnagar University (JU) is a public university located in Savar, in north-western part of greater Dhaka Statistical Metropolitan Area. The University was established in 20 August, 1970 - the fourth university to be established in the then East Pakistan (Saleheen, 2012). There are 34 departments organized under six faculties and 4 independent institutes. In addition to hosting programs in the arts and humanities, mathematical and physical sciences, social sciences, life science, business studies and law faculties, the university lodges a number of institutes of higher studies in the Institute of Business Administration (IBA), Institute of Information Technology (IIT), Bangabandhu Institute of Comparative Literature (BICL). Alongside, the university has a language center that offers training courses in foreign languages on regular basis. Institute of Remote Sensing (IRS), Wajed Miah Scientific Research Center have been established as center for excellence in research. The area of the university campus is of 697.56 acres and 31.4 kilometers away from the Dhaka city center - that is, the zero point (http://www.juniv.edu/administration?roleType=VICE_CHANCELLOR&roleName=Vice%2 0Chancellor; retrieved on 12/10/2017). According to the education section of registrar’s office, with more than 17000 students, 755 teachers, and 1,430 other employees, this is one of the largest universities in Bangladesh. The university does have notable infrastructures, which include academic buildings, administrative buildings, museum, residential halls, sporting complex, staff quarters etc. It is the only residential university of the country.

1.4.1 History The Jahangirnagar University, being one of the four largest University in Bangladesh, is a public university in Bangladesh, located in Savar Upazila, Dhaka. It is the only one fully residential university in Bangladesh. The university was established in 1970 by the government of Pakistan by the Jahangirnagar Muslim University Ordinance, 1970 (Saleheen, 2012). During the first two years, it operated as a project. Its first Vice-Chancellor, Professor Mafiz Uddin Ahmad (PhD in Chemistry, University of Illinois, Chicago) took up office on September 24, 1970 (Saleheen, 2012). The first group of students, a total of 150, was enrolled in four departments: Economics, Geography, Mathematics and Statistics (Saleheen, 2012). Its formal inauguration was delayed until January 12, 1971, when the university was launched by Rear Admiral S. M. Ahsan, the Chancellor. Until 1973, it operated as a project. In 1973 Jahangirnagar Muslim University Act was amended as Jahangirnagar University Act (Saleheen, 2012). In 2016 the university had a total of 12,500 students, 672 teachers and 2100

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 4 other employees.

Officially, the University was launched on 12 January, 1970 under the Jahangirnagar Muslim University Ordinance, 1970 and this day is observed as University Day (Saleheen, 2012). At the time of starting, its name was Jahangirnagar Muslim University, and the initial plan was to operate this university as like as Aligarh Muslim University. But after the independence of Bangladesh, its name changed as Jahangirnagar University under the act of Jahangirnagar University Act' 1973 (Jahangirnagar University Act of 1973, Act no. XXXIV of 1973) (Saleheen, 2012). The master plan of Jahangirnagar University is designed by Mazharul Islam in 1967 to 1971 (Saleheen, 2012)).The university stands on the west side of the Asian Highway, popularly known as the Dhaka-Aricha Road, and is 32 kilometers away from the capital. Spread over a land area of 697.56 acres (2.8 km²), the campus surrounded by the Bangladesh Public Administration Training Centre (BPATC) on the south, and the Savar Cantonment on the northeast, on the north of which is the National Monument and a large dairy farm on the east (Saleheen, 2012). The topography of the land with its gentle rise & plains is shooting to the eye. The water bodies sprawling around the campus makes an excellent habitat for the winter birds that flock in every year in thousands and bird watching here is a favorite pastime for many.

1.4.2 Purpose The purpose of the university is to contribute, improve teaching and research in order to produce skilled manpower that can contribute to the national development continuously.

1.4.3 Organizational Structure The university is run according to the Jahangirnagar University Act 1973.The act, passed in 1973, and allows the university - along with Dhaka, Rajshahi and Chittagong universities - considerably more autonomy. The president of Bangladesh is the Chancellor of the university. The highest executive of the university - after the Chancellor - is the Vice- Chancellor, who gets selected by the Chancellor from a panel of three selected by secret votes of the senate members of the university after every four years. The key executives of the university are as following:

i. The Chancellor ii. The Vice-Chancellor

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 5

iii. The Pro-Vice-Chancellor iv. The Treasurer v. The Deans vi. Registrar vii. The Librarian ix. The Director of Students Counseling and Guidance (Student Advisor) x. The Provosts xi. The Proctor xii. The director (Planning and Development) xiii. The University Engineer xiv. The Deputy Registrar (Academic) xv. The Deputy Registrar (Administration) xvi. The Controller of Examinations xvii. The Director of Accounts xviii. The Director of Physical Education, and

Such other officers as may be declared by the Statutes to be officers to the University. There are five highest bodies for taking decisions and making statues, rules and regulations for the university. These are -

i. The Senate ii. The Syndicate iii. The Academic Council iv. The Finance Committee v. The Faculty Committee

The Vice-Chancellor shall be a full-time principal academic and executive officer of the University and shall be an ex-officio member and the Chairman of the Senate, the Syndicate, the Academic Council, the Selection Boards and the Board of Advanced Studies. S/he shall be entitled to be present and to speak at any meeting of any Authority of other body of the University. Please see Annexure A: Relevant Rules and Regulations for relevant documents.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 6

1.5 Overview of the Department of Urban and Regional Planning Urban and Regional Planning (URP) program is one of the major departments at the Jahangirnagar University under the faculty of Social Science. BURP graduates started coming out of the department since 2006. URP places emphasis on the interaction of teaching and research, ensuring that teaching is set with current thinking and that students develop a critical and inquiring approach broadening their professional perspective.

1.5.1 History The historical background of the Department dates back to late 1990’s when the need to establish a department of the kind was felt by the university. The Department began its journey in July 1999 without any core faculties, syllabus and ordinance but with 20 graduate students under the temporary chairmanship of Dr. A.K.M. Abul Kalam (a core faculty from the Department of Geography and Environment, Jahangirnagar University then) - which, by no means, was normal. However, the department was left abandoned by the then chairman in the late 1999 - without any core or temporary appointed faculty. Later, in year 2000, under the chairmanship of Professor Dara Shamsuddin, two permanent core faculties were recruited - Golam Moinuddin with two and half years of university teaching experience in Urban and Rural Planning at Khulna University and Md. Akter Mahmud with professional planning background at the Khulna Development Authority (KDA). Initially, the department’s degree program was designed to run in year system. However, to maintain consistency with other URP programs offered by different Bangladeshi universities, it was changed to a semester system. From year 2000 and onwards - including the first batch of admitted students - the department offers 4 years undergraduate course on urban and regional planning. Today the department has a team of twenty faculties of which fourteen are actively engaged in teaching and research within the department. Students entering this department leave with self- confidence on the subject matter to meet the demand and challenge of the jobs market.

1.5.2 Mission and Vision Mission of the department is to produce professionally skilled, enthusiastic graduates who can competently serve the nation and render services to the international communities. To materialize the vision, the curricular, co-curricular and extra-curricular activities of the department are updated on regular basis. The department has designed its curricula to help students to develop their skills as competent planners to face upcoming challenges in the diverse fields of urban and regional planning, to inspire them to get engaged in research and

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 7 knowledge creation, and to encourage them to acquire ethical values and humane qualities.

1.5.3 Programs The department offers four year/eight semester long undergraduate program and a twelve month/two semester long masters’ program. The bachelor degree is titled as Bachelor of Urban and Regional Planning (BURP) and the masters’ program is titled as Masters in Urban and Regional Planning (MURP). In addition to these, the department of Urban and Regional Planning offers research degrees - namely Masters of Philosophy (MPhil.) and Doctor of Philosophy (PhD).The outline of the BURP, MURP, MPhil and PhD degree courses is presented in Annexure - B: Syllabuses and Ordinances.

1.5.4 Resources and Facilities Department is equipped with skilled faculty members who are actively engaged in teaching and research within and outside the country. A number of support staffs (administrative, technical) are also working in this department. Key departmental facilities are mentioned below:  Seminar Library  Computer Laboratory  Design Studio  Scholarships and Prizes Jahangirnagar University Scholarships Scholarship/prize from different associations, private banks, NGOs etc.

 Student Support Service Student Counseling /Mentoring

1.6 Intended Learning Outcomes of the Programs The developing countries are continuously struggling to attain a better standard of living for their people. Bangladesh has already passed more than four decades since her independence. But the country still needs to go a long way to ensure a decent standard of living for its people. To move ahead, a trained Urban and Regional Planner well equipped with knowledge and ideas can best contribute in utilizing resources of the country properly. This discipline started its academic activities in 1999 to produce well-trained manpower in the field of Urban and Regional Planning. The faculty members of the discipline are contributing to the

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 8 concerned developments activities of the nation, particularly focusing on the capital Dhaka through research and development since its inception. DURP graduates are employed in a wide range of national and international organizations.

1.7 Brief Descriptions of the Programs under Review The Department of Urban and Regional Planning currently offers two degree programs - four year long Bachelor of Urban and Regional Planning (BURP) and twelve month long Masters’ in Urban and Regional Planning (MURP). Short sketch on these are presented below under several sections.

1.7.1 Credit Requirements A. BURP Program The students enrolled in BURP degree must complete their studies within 6 (seven) years of registration to obtain their degree. The minimum credit to be earned for the degree is 158 (one hundred and fifty-eight) along with completion of all courses. The minimum CGPA requirement is 2.50 to obtain the degree. To be promoted to a higher semester, a student must secure 2.50 GPA on semester end examination. However, if a student obtains a GPA of 2.00, s/he will be promoted to higher semester on probation provided that on the proceeding semester end examination the incumbent must have to secure a CGPA of 2.50 to be promoted to higher semester. Details of the requirements can been found on Annexure- B: Program Syllabuses and Ordinances.

B. MURP Program The students enrolled in MURP degree must complete their studies within 2 (two) years of registration to obtain their degree. The minimum credit to be earned for the degree is 36 (thirty six) along with completion of all courses. The minimum CGPA requirement, promotion to higher semester, probationary regulations are similar to that of BURP. Details of the requirements can been found on Annexure- B: Program Syllabuses and Ordinances.

1.7.2 Conduction of Semester Final Examination A. BURP Program The duration of semester final examination shall be of 4 (four) hours for 3 (three) credit hour courses 2.5 (two and half) hours for 2 (two) credit hour courses. The concerned examination committee will set up the semester final examination schedule and notify the department

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 9 office, batch students, examination office with the approval of the chairman. There will be one internal paper setter (course teacher) cum examiner and one external paper setter cum examiner for each course. After receiving all the questions from the question setters, the examination committee will declare moderation date for the received question papers and hence will decide on the questions that are to be set for each course. There must be at least 3 (three) days gap between 3(three) credit hour course-end examinations and 2 (two) days for 2(two) credit hours course-end examination. Details of the requirements can been found on Annexure- B: Program Syllabuses and Ordinances.

B. MURP Program The examination rules for the MURP degree program are similar to that of BURP. Details of the requirements can been found on Annexure-A: Program Syllabuses and Ordinances.

1.8 Conclusion In short the current chapter provided an introduction on the Self - Assessment process, requirements, Jahangirnagar University’s identity, DURP’s history, functions and operations. Such an introduction will assist the readers to proceed to next chapters with a foundational knowledge on the objective of the project.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 10

Chapter 2 Governance

Governance – in context of this project – refers to how the degree programs - offered by the department of Urban and Regional Planning - are run. Governance facilitates with the achievements of the mission and objectives of the program and institution. It is one of the most important Quality Assurance (QA) areas that play a vital role for establishing policies, enhancing the potentiality and capability of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). It also ensures the accountability and transparency of the entity as well as institution. The factors involved in ensuring the governance at the university include all the administrative layers from top management to the program level management. Therefore, governance is considered as the first criterion of Quality Assurance areas in the current Self-Assessment process.

2.1 Program Management The academic programs offered by the DURP are listed in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1: Academic programs in DURP Program Duration

1. Bachelor of Urban and Regional Planning (BURP) 4 Years 2. Masters’ in Urban and Regional Planning (MURP) 1 Year

The programs listed in Table 2.1 are conducted as per the rules and regulations of the Jahangirnagar University and Academic Ordinance of the Department of Urban and Regional Planning. The statutory positions and bodies are responsible to manage all these programs. The formation and the responsibilities of the different bodies and the Chairman of the department are presented in Table 2.2. Please see Annexure A: Rules and Regulations for supporting documents.

Table 2.2: Statutory position/committee for program management in DURP Statutory position/Committee Formation/Appointment Responsibilities Academic Committee All faculty members of the  Decision making concerning department the programs and other relevant issues  Course curriculum design  Course distribution  Formation of examination committee  Formation of other relevant

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 11

Statutory position/Committee Formation/Appointment Responsibilities committees that are necessary for performing different tasks at the department  Co- and extra-curricular activities Chairman Appointed by the Vice Supervision of the Department Chancellor for a period of 3- and execution of routine year from amongst the matters teachers not below the rank of Assistant Professor by rotation in order of seniority.

2.2 Academic Documentation Documentation is essential at all levels of university administration from central to individual faculty member. The Jahangirnagar University has an established practice of maintaining documentations at the above-mentioned levels. Apart from that, the department itself maintains a substantial volume of documents – of which following are major:

 Academic ordinance

 Syllabus

 Brochure

 Resolution of academic, non-academic committees meeting

 Orientation program for the fresher

 Different notices from the Chairman, Proctor, Student Advisor, Provost, etc.

 Register book (locally known as peon book)

The code of conduct, leave rules for the faculty and non-faculty staffs are explicitly laid out in the Jahangirnagar University Service Regulation. For students’ code of conduct, a detailed regulation is at place and it is amended from time to time as per the decision of the university (Annexure A: Rules and Regulations).

The academic program, admission procedure, examination rules, promotion criteria from one year to another year, course evaluation and GPA calculation processes are presented in the Academic ordinance and Syllabus (Annexure B). The academic members as well as students can access these along with the information on exam routine, result publication notice etc.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 12 from the departmental notice board as well as departmental office.

2.3 Peer Observation and Feedback Process As per the Jahangirnagar University Act, 1973 and the statutes, the process of evaluation and advancement of the degree programs ought go through the peer observation process in the design and review of course curriculum. In pursuit, the department has to form a Committee of courses incorporating all the faculty members and relevant peers from outside the department and university. There is a syllabus committee in the department formed by the academic committee after every three years to review the running syllabus and ordinance and to incorporate the feedback from all faculty members that accrues through relevant and formal meetings/workshops.

Apart from course curriculum design, there is a statutory obligation to include external members in the examination committee. The external members attend in the moderation process of question papers and viva-voce.

2.4 Internal Quality Assurance Process So far, quality assurance is a new concept for the discipline. The formation of DURP Self- Assessment Committee and its approval by the Hon’ble Vice-Chancellor has been described in chapter 1. Three faculties namely Professor Golam Moinuddin PhD, Professor Dr. Shafiq- ur Rahman and Mohammad Mizanur Rahman are working as in the committee. Professor Golam Moinuddin PhD is serving as the head of the committee and Professor Dr. Shafiq-ur Rahman and Mohammad Mizanur Rahman are serving as members of the committee. They committee with the support from other faculty members of the department, has conducted survey among the existing faculty members, students, alumni, employers, non-academic staffs. They have organized workshop and are entitled to do more of the kind. Such interventions are gradually developing a self-assessment process and also a data base which will enhance self-assessment procedure for the department in future.

2.5 Survey Results The process of evaluation conducted a purposive survey among the four stakeholders, such as academic staff, student, non-academic and alumni out of five to explore the current state of the governance in the department. The percentage scores on individual concerns of governance obtained from the stakeholders are presented in the following tables below -

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 13

Table 2.3: Vision, Mission and Objectives of the entity are clearly stated Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 63.6 18.2 9.1 9.1 100% Student 18.7 40.4 22.3 16.3 2.4 100% Non-Academic 42.9 57.1 100% Alumni 25 31.3 43.8 100%

Table 2.3 reveals that overwhelming majority responses of academic, students and non- academic staffs on the opinions/questions “Vision, Mission and Objectives of the entity are clearly stated”, have ranged between “strongly agree” and “agree” categories e.g. more than 80 percent collective response of the academics, more than 90 percent collective response of the non-academics and 59 percent collective response of the students. Whereas for the alumni’s response, these have been majorly on “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories e.g. collectively 75 percent. Such an outcome might have steamed from the fact that academics, students and non-academic staffs are enlightened and have higher experience in comparison to alumni members regarding governance issues and over the years have witnessed the improvements under considerable amount of constraints. And hence these three groups have awarded better scores in the response categories.

Regarding “Practice of fairness and transparency by the entity in academic decisions making” (table 2.4), the response patterns of the academics and non-academic staffs are similar to that of the previous question/concern e.g. more that 80 percent (collective for each group) from respondents have chosen either “agree” or “strongly agree” responses.

Table 2.4: Practice of fairness and transparency by the entity in academic decisions making Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 54.5 45.5 100% Student 14.5 30.1 21.7 28.9 4.8 100% Non-Academic 57.1 28.6 14.3 100% Alumni 18.8 6.2 50 25 100%

With the students, collectively close to 45 percent had their responses categorized between “agree” and “strongly agree” options. Close to 32 percent of them responded with wither “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories. As for the alumni, a response trend similar to that of the previous question is observed and hence, the rationale can be perceived to be similar as well.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 14

“The ILOs satisfy the stated vision, mission and objectives of the entity” - for this particular question, the response trend of all the stakeholders have surfaced to be similar to that of the previous two questions/concerns (table 2.5) and hence a conclusion of previous types can be drawn.

Table 2.5: The ILOs satisfy the stated vision, mission and objectives of the entity Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 36.4 45.5 18.2 100% Student 11.4 27.7 24.7 15.1 6.6 100% Non-Academic 28.6 74.4 100% Alumni 12.5 12.5 6.3 50 18.8 100%

Table 2.6 reveals an interesting as well as a different scenario from the previous three tabulated facts comparatively concerning “Adequacy of infrastructure for satisfying entity’s mission and objectives at the entity” concern. The academics have their opinions noticeably distributed between “strongly agree” to “disagree” - with 36.4 percent emerging as undecided. As with students, collectively 45.1 percent have responded between “agree” to “strongly agree” categories though 39.8 percent tended to “disagree” to “strongly disagree”.

Table 2.6: Adequacy of infrastructure for satisfying entity’s mission and objectives at the entity Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 18.2 18.2 36.4 18.2 9.1 100% Student 11.4 33.7 13.3 26.5 13.3 100% Non-Academic 57.1 42.3 100% Alumni 31.3 43.8 25 100%

Non-academic staffs have confined their responses between “agree” and “strongly agree” categories where as alumni majorly tended to be undecided e.g. 43.8 percent; with 31.3 percent of them responded with “agree” category. The varied responses in this connection might have steamed for respective perceptions of DURP’s infrastructure capacities and relevant satisfaction deriving out of these as well as their experience while pursuing purpose/s.

With regards to the governance concern “Strict maintenance of academic calendar by the entity” by the department, academics and non-academic staffs overwhelmingly kept their responses between “agree” and “strongly agree” categories e.g. 72 percent of the academics

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 15

(collectively) and more than 85 percent of the non-academics (collectively) have been found to be of these two opinions (table 2.7).

Table 2.7: Strict maintenance of academic calendar by the entity Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 27.3 45.5 27.3 100% Student 15.7 24.7 10.8 21.7 25.9 100% Non-Academic 57.1 28.6 14.3 100% Alumni 12.5 12.5 6.3 31.3 37.5 100%

More than 45 percent of the students have their responses distributed either on “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories. Collectively 41 percent of them have it between “agree” and “strongly agree” categories. This slight majority of negative response categories probably steamed from the fact that a portion of the students suffered or are suffering from session jam due to the unwanted occurrence/s in the university in the recent past. New students are free from that and hence their response appeared to be positive. Alumni’s responses have majorly fallen in “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories. It is not known whether such a response has been whimsical or based on their experience.

Table 2.8: Timely publication of results in compliance with the ordinance Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 36.4 54.5 9.1 100% Student 19.3 16.9 15.7 22.9 22.9 100% Non-Academic 14.3 14.3 57.7 14.1 100% Alumni 12.5 12.5 43.8 25.0 6.3 100%

Table 2.8 above reveals that concerning “Timely publication of results in compliance with the ordinance”, collectively more than 90 percent of the academics expressed their opinion either in “agree” or “strongly agree” categories. Since they are well aware of the fact that without timely publishing the preceding semesters’ results, the proceeding semester cannot be commenced, that is why they have responded like that. However, it is not the departments that publish results at JU - it is the Office of the Examination Controller that is entitled to so. Hence delay at this point invariably consequences with delay in the result publication. And this fact is not well-known to both the current students and alumni - which in a way might have influenced them to respond with “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories in substantial percentages collectively e.g. 45.8 percent of the students and 31.3 percent of the

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 16 alumni confined their responses in these two categories. Though 25 percent of them have responded with either “agree” or “strongly agree” categories. As for the non-academics, more than 57 percent of the respondents have been found to be “undecided”; followed by collectively 25 percent either registering “agree” or “strongly agree” response. The rationale for such response pattern from this group remains unknown.

Majority of the academics and students have collectively responded with “agree” or “strongly agree” categories when they encountered the question whether the entity reviews policy and procedures periodically for further improvement e.g. 91 percent of the academics and 48.2 percent of the students responded in such manner (table 2.9).

Table 2.9: Entity reviews policy and procedures periodically for further improvement Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 45.5 45.5 9.1 100% Student 10.2 38 24.1 24.1 3.0 100% Non-Academic 14.3 14.3 71.4 100% Alumni 12.5 6.3 18.8 56.3 3.3 100%

Rationale for such responses might very well be couched on the fact that the faculties are involved with such periodic review and they are aware of the fact that such must be performed per the university’s regulation/s. As for the students, they instantly experiences relevant change/s in their academic endevours when such takes place. For the non-academics, 71.4 percent remained “undecided” in response to this question. Probably they felt since they are not part of the review process hence it should not concern them.

Table 2.10 depicts percentage responses on the “communication of code of conducts for students and employees” by all four groups. Collectively more than 80 percent of the academics, more than 70 percent of the non-academics have responded either with “agree” or “strongly agree” categories. The reason is strait forward - as the appointed employees, they are provided with service guidelines from time to time by the registry and they have access to service regulation book of Jahangirnagar University. As with the students, more than 40 percent followed suits of the academics and non-academics. Code of conduct for students are available and are at times provided to them either by the respective department, or they can collect it from the proctor office, directorate of students’ welfare. Nonetheless, it is not secret and it is available for the students through multiple channels.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 17

Table 2.10: Code of conducts for students and employees are well communicated Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 36.4 45.5 9.1 9.1 100% Student 14.5 28.9 35.5 15.1 15.4 100% Non-Academic 28.6 42.9 28.6 100% Alumni 12.5 6.3 12.5 50 18.8 100%

On the other hand, collectively more than 30 percent of the students either “disagree” or “strongly disagree” with the question/concern. May be they are not well aware of the existence and relative easy availability of the code of conducts. Close to 70 percent of the alumni responded either with “disagree” or with “strongly disagree” categories. Perhaps they are not aware of the developments that took place in recent years at the university.

Table 2.11 is about circulation of defined rules and regulations. Inherently, it refers that whether the entity has made it clear to academic, non-academics, current students and former students i.e. alumni; what rules and regulations they are to comply and the consequences of non-compliance. Collectively more than 70 percent of the academics replied to either “agree” or “strongly agree” categories. More than 55 percent of the students collective responses followed suit.

Table 2.11: Disciplinary rules and regulations are explicitly defined and well circulated Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 18.2 54.5 9.1 18.2 100% Student 14.5 42.2 18.1 15.7 9.1 100% Non-Academic 28.6 71.1 100% Alumni 18.8 6.3 12.5 37.5 25 100%

As with the non-academic staffs, more than 70 percent have chosen to remain “undecided”. It may be due to the fact that out of 7 staffs, only 2 has Masters’ degree, 2 has bachelor degree and the rest are either below S.S.C. holder or have passed it without any further academic degrees. Hence, a good volume of rules and regulations are obviously beyond their understanding. Moreover, there remains considerable doubt, whether or not they have had clear understanding of the questionnaire while responding. Similar to previous questions/concerns, alumni respondent majorly towards “disagree” or “strongly disagree”

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 18 direction e.g. 62.5 percent. Perhaps they have responded basing on their experience from earlier time.

Maintaining and regular updating of an entity’s website is a compulsion - in a sense that it disseminates up-to-date information about the department and its concerned personnel to the world. Unfortunately, in this regard, the entity lacks behind. The responses from academics,

Table 2.12: Website is updated properly Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 9.1 45.5 36.4 9.1 100% Student 16.3 16.9 13.9 28.9 24.1 100% Non-Academic 71.4 28.6 100% Alumni 6.3 12.5 18.8 62.5 100% students and alumni reiterates that e.g. collectively, 45 percent of the academics, more than 52 percent of the students, more than 80 percent of the alumni either “disagree” or “strongly disagree” with the question that the entity regularly updates its website. However, another 45 percent of the academics have chosen to remain undecided in response to this question. In contrast, 71.4 percent of the non-academic staffs responded with “agree” category.

Table 2.13: The entity provides comprehensive guidelines to the students in advance by means of a brochure/handbook Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 27.3 36.4 27.3 9.1 100% Student 18.1 36.1 21.1 18.7 6 100% Non-Academic 100 100% Alumni 12.5 12.5 37.5 37.5 100%

With regards to the concern whether the entity provides comprehensive guideline to the students in advance in the form of brochure/handbook, table 2.13 above reveals that more than 60 (collectively) percent of academics, more than 50 (collectively) percent of students and 100 percent of non-academic staffs responded either on “agree” or “strongly agree” categories. DURP provides the fresher students with a copy of syllabus and ordinance on their orientation day at the department. This fact might well have encouraged these three stakeholders to respond positively in general. Whereas, collectively 75 percent of the alumni

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 19 either responded with either “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories. Probably, they have not experienced such a service at their time of studentship.

Regarding the issue of maintaining of proper documents at the entity, the stakeholder e.g. academics; responded either with “agree” or “strongly agree” categories. The reason being the fact that the entity has so far maintained documents thoroughly except for few occasions. On need basis, the registry lends its support to the entity.

Table 2.14: Proper documentation is maintained Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 54.5 45.5 100%

Per the university’s approved regulation, the departmental affairs are decided at the academic committee’s meeting in which every faculty of the department is a member. Hence, more than 90 percent the respondents e.g. DURP faculties; responded either with “agree” or with “strongly agree” categories collectively. Though 10 percent have surfaced as “undecided”. The reason for that remains unknown.

Table 2.15: Decision making process in the entity is participatory Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 72.7 18.2 9.1 100%

When it came about entity providing conducive learning environment, majority of academics, students’ responses (on collective measure) have fallen between “ agree” and “strongly agree” categories e.g. 90 percent of the academics, more than 50 percent of the students

Table 2.16: Entity ensures a conducive learning environment Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 27.3 63.6 9.1 100% Student 12.7 39.2 22.9 16.9 8.4 100% Non-Academic 6.3 18.8 56.3 18.8 100% responded in such fashion (table 2.16). The emergence of such response pattern is obvious as, no matter how dissatisfied the students are, they learn through class lectures, practical

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 20 sessions, examinations, largely from departmental library resources - that are provided to them by DURP. Hence, it is impossible to disagree or ignore this fact that the entity provides conducive learning environment. However, 56.3 percent of the non-academic staffs have remained “undecided” in response to it. Probably they felt that the question does not concern them.

Whether or not the entity addresses students’ opinion regarding academic and extra-academic matters, the academics majorly responded either with “agree” or “strongly agree” categories e.g. 65 percent (table 2.17). Such a pattern of response is quite obvious, as the faculties believe that their academic activities ultimately reflect students’ requirements hence benefitting the same.

Table 2.17: Students’ opinion regarding academic and extra-academic matters are addressed properly Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Academic 9.1 54.5 18.2 18.2 100% Student 14.5 31.3 15.1 27.1 12 100% Non-Academic 25.25 6.3 25 43.8 100%

As for the students, more than 40 percent collectively answered with “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories. The probable reason being that per the university’s norm, students’ representations at the decision-making forums are either not permitted or not practiced. Hence, it is natural for a significant percentage of them to feel unheard which has probably encouraged them to respond in such fashion. Similar reality is applicable for the non- academic staffs and thus their response followed suit.

2.6 Conclusion Administering process of the department is found to be satisfactory/good as per the explained percentage score for governance in the survey process. All the academic functions and their implementation are being performed with fair and transparent processes. However, students’ feedback process is not in practice in a formal manner rather their opinion is considered in a bit unofficial format. Again, it is due to departments’ compulsion to comply with university’s ordinance and statutes.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 21

Chapter 3

Curriculum Design and Review

In the department of URP, curriculum design and review is perceived as a continuous and cyclic inquiry process. The determinant factor in this connection has been department’s responsiveness to produce contemporarily skilled graduates to meet the needs of the profession and communities.

3.1 Need Assessment The need assessment or DURP’s drive in curriculum design and review revolves around the following inquests:

 What curricular changes and improvements have been incorporated in the competing URP departments from other universities of the country?

 Considering the resources availability status as well as the necessity of new knowledge and skills, what changes and improvements can be incorporated into the curricula?, and

 What actions shall be taken to impact the changes and would be the means to improve student outcomes?

3.2 Curriculum Design DURP – as of now – have not embarked on curriculum development considering greater national vision, mission and interest independently per se. Rather, it adopted the one developed by the Urban and Rural Planning Discipline, Khulna University. Precisely, when the entity came into being, one of the two pioneer or first appointed faculties, Golam Moinuddin was assigned with the responsibility of bringing BURP syllabus and ordinance from his previous work station - Urban and Rural Planning Discipline, Khulna University. It was around middle part of year 2000. At that period, two other BURP offering universities - Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology and Khulna University - have just adopted new syllabus and “course credit system” - a one of a kind endeavor in the public universities of Bangladesh. The design process took into consideration the following concerns: national development philosophy, employers’ necessity and common syllabus for

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 22 all the current and upcoming BURP degree offering entities. As an infant entity of the stream, DURP decided to follow the syllabus and program ordinance of Urban and Rural Planning Discipline, Khulna University as it was similar to Urban and Regional Planning Department of BUET. This is, in short, the description of DURP’s curriculum design saga.

3.3 Curriculum Review Process Though an adopted one originally, per the Jahangirnagar University regulations, once a curriculum is established and endorsed by the university, there remains the scope of reviewing and remodeling from time to time. In pursuit, at every three academic year, DURP carries out a curriculum renewal process. It is proceeded through a multi-step and cyclical process aimed at designing/developing an effective curriculum (to be read syllabus). At every stage of curriculum design, there are opportunities for innovative thinking, devising novel concepts and accommodating inventions/suggestions. The process is initiated following a review of existing curriculum. The curriculum committee/syllabus committee performs such a task. Curriculum/syllabus committee collects innovative thinking, novel concepts and any other effective suggestions by making request to each and every faculty member of the department who have already taught the respective courses. Curriculum/syllabus committee primarily takes decision on different innovative thinking and suggestions to serve the purpose of improving student learning. No matter how systematic the suggestions or how inventive the thoughts are, the decision of curriculum/syllabus committee always end up not being everything that everyone would want. The committee prepares a draft of the academic curriculum by incorporating all new decisions to the existing curriculum and sends to the academic committee for further reviewing and preliminary approval. Suggestions/criticisms from the academic committee are embedded in the draft and then it is presented to the committee of courses for final review. Committee of courses of the department comprises experts from academia across a wide range of disciplines. After including/considering all opinions from the expert members and other members of the committee of courses, the draft of the new curriculum is sent to the faculty meeting. Upon approval of the new curriculum at the faculty meeting, it is proceeded to the academic council of the University for the Final Approval.

3.4 Curriculum Alignment/Skill Mapping Curriculum designing and organizing at the initial stage of launching any program; and, thereafter, any consequent modification, moderation, or reorganization of the same is mainly

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 23 based on the objective of attainment of perfection. This again, should stand on the process of skill mapping. In other words, the exercise of curriculum designing and associated tasks should address the issues such as what the objectives of the relevant program are, how well those are attained and what are the obstacles towards attainment of aspired goals. These can be traced and identified through evaluating the level of skill attained by the students who graduated through these programs. This again is reflected in the status of or position held by the graduates. Hence, skill mapping trickles down to the task of evaluating present status of the graduates in terms of nature of job they are engaged in, salary received, prospects and potential of future up-gradation therein, etc.

Regarding skill mapping of the programs offered by DURP, so far the employers or employing organizations have expressed their satisfaction with the graduates. The general perceptions held by the employers about DURP graduates have been that they are sincere, committed and with strong learning aptitude.

3.5 Gaps in Curriculum: Adequacy to Meet the Needs Academic environment and research facilities in this discipline are excellent as most (70%) of the faculty members have higher degree from various overseas institutions or in the process of attaining the same. To make the teaching-leaning process all-comprehensive, almost all courses related to urban and regional planning has been attempted to be included in the present curriculum. These include urban planning, regional planning, rural planning, transport planning and management, housing, GIS and remote sensing in urban and regional planning, urban design, landscape planning and design, development planning, planning laws, environmental planning and policy, utilities and services planning, research methods, quantitative techniques in urban and regional planning, microeconomics, macroeconomics, mathematics, urban finance etc. Details are available in Annexure - B: Syllabuses and Ordinances. In spite of this, there still remains room for incorporating courses like, urban public health, econometrics, projection techniques for urban and regional planning, community involvement techniques for urban and regional planning, issues on public-private partnership in the BURP and MURP syllabuses.

3.6 Survey Results Stakeholder groups for responding to questions pertaining to curriculum design and review process included the faculty members/academic staffs, students and alumni. It is necessary to

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 24 cite here that not all the gauged stakeholders were surveyed with all the eight themed questions as mentioned above. Academics had all the eight themes covered in their questionnaire whereas alumni had five and the current students had four. The overall score on existing curriculum design and review process is shown in table 3.1.

Table 3.1: Overall response of the stakeholders on various aspects of curriculum design and review process Response Categories Questions/Concerns Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Curriculum is Academic 81.8 18.2 100% reviewed and updated at regular intervals in compliance with the rules of the universities Opinions from Academic 18.2 54.5 27.3 100% stakeholders are duely considered during review of the curriculum Consistent Academic 36.4 63.6 100% arrangement of Student 25.9 49.4 12.0 10.2 2.4 100% courses in the Alumni 31.3 18.8 31.3 18.8 100% curriculum from lower to higher levels Teaching strategies Academic 27.3 45.5 18.2 100% are clearly stated in Student 8.4 47.0 19.3 16.3 9.0 100% the curriculum Alumni 25.0 6.3 12.5 50.0 6.3 100% Assessment strategies Academic 63.6 27.3 9.1 100% explicit in the Student 10.8 41.0 24.7 19.9 3.6 100% curriculum Alumni 25.0 12.5 56.3 6.3 100% Curriculum load is Academic 36.4 27.3 27.3 9.1 100% optimal and exerts no Student 15.1 19.9 21.1 29.5 12.7 100% pressure Alumni 12.5 18.8 25.0 18.8 25.0 100% Curriculum addresses Academic 45.5 36.4 18.2 100% the program objectives and program learning outcomes Curriculum is Academic 45.5 54.5 100% effective in achieving Alumni 18.8 6.3 43.8 31.3 100% day-one skill

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 25

It depicts that the academics hold “strongly agree” or “agree” response on each of the aspect pertaining to curriculum development and review process as all the thematic percentage scores are collectively above 70 percent - except for “Curriculum load is optimal and exerts no pressure”. This aspect has been able to register a percentage score of 60 collectively following the above direction of response categories. Since the department follows an established process to modify and update the curriculum (to be read syllabus and ordinance) that involves each and every academic members, hence they are quite satisfied with the design and review process and consequently As for students response, in general 50 or more percentage in all the aspects except for one have been found to be falling either in “agree” or “strongly agree” categories. However, “Curriculum load is optimal and exerts no pressure” aspect has obviously surfaced to be following either “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories largely e.g. 42.2 percent are of these opinions collectively. Perhaps with a more sound reading and understanding of the program syllabus and departmental ordinance, this group would have had a higher score. With the alumni, the percentage scores on all aspects emerged to be the lowest amongst the three groups of respondents either on “agree” or “strongly agree” categories. Rather out five aspects of “curriculum design and review process” (in which they were supposed to provide responses), their percentage responses on three have surfaced to be collectively belonging to either “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories. One possible reason for that might well be the fact that they are not aware or well informed about the changes that have been made on the program syllabus as well as the departmental ordinance in the last couple of years. Moreover, the students and alumni are not involved with the design and review process of the curriculum that triggered their obliviousness and thus their scores are much lower than that of the score obtained from academics.

3.7 Conclusion Survey results indicate that the curriculum design and review process is of quite satisfaction to all the concerned stakeholders. However, the fact remains that the department so far has not embarked upon developing curriculum e.g. vision, mission and statements of the program in light of the national development objectives and goals. Or in other words, it has not actually innovated any component of curriculum. Perhaps, the perception in this regard is not clear to a considerable portion of the DURP faculties.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 26

Chapter 4 Student

Students are the key elements in higher educational institutions. University, by standard definition, is an educational institution designed for instruction and examination or both, of students in many branches of advanced learning and research, and conferring degrees in various faculties. A survey has been conducted in this regard.

4.1 Entry Qualifications For the career of the graduates, the choice of program and institution matters. At the same time, it is very important that the students’ who are interested in higher education for a particular program to have the eligibility to afford the study load, understand the subject matter and comply with the program requirements. Therefore, it is important to set some entry requirements for the admitting students which define the minimum qualifications, knowledge, skill and/or experience that an applicant must have for a particular academic program.

The eligibility requirements for entering in the Department of Urban & Regional Planning (DURP), Jahangirnagar University for the Bachelor of Urban & Regional Planning (BURP) program in 2017 were as follows:

 The four academic year of study for the BURP degree are designated as year 1, year 2, year 3 and year 4 in succeeding higher levels of study. Students are generally admitted in the year 1 class.

 A candidate for admission into the year 1 class of BURP must have passed the HSC Examination (with a minimum GPA as decided by the admission Committee of Jahangirnagar University from a Board of Intermediate and Higher Secondary Education in Bangladesh or Equivalent from home and abroad (after 12 years of Schooling) with Mathematics and English as his/her subjects of Examination and must have a minimum grade (e.g. in 2016 and 2017 it was “A-” for Mathematics & English and total CGPA for Science 8.00 and for Arts or Commerce 7.50 in 2017 but 7.00 in 2016).

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 27

 A candidate for admission into the year 1 class must also fulfill all other requirements as may be prescribed by the admission Sub-Committee of the University.

 The rules and conditions for admission into the department are framed by the Academic committee.

 Candidates are selected on the basis of merit.

A copy of Admission Condition for the year 2017 is available in Annexure - A: Rules and Regulations.

4.2 Admission Every year in Bangladesh, a good number of students are coming for higher education from many streams of secondary education. However, the opportunities for higher education in the preferred universities are very limited compared with the demand. Selecting the eligible candidates for any particular academic program is important to maintain quality in education; therefore, universities are required to select the best candidates from a very large number of diverse applicants.

Students are admitted into the undergraduate program through an admission test. The admission Committee, usually formed in the Faculty of Social Science, conducts the procedure of admission test. This is a highly competitive procedure. The DURP usually offers 30 seats (around 50 percent for female students) for admission candidates each year to enter into the BURP program. A merit list is prepared based on the admission test result and students are admitted according to the merit list.

4.3 Progress and Achievement The yearly progress of the students of the department of URP, based on their academic result, has been analyzed by collecting the yearly earned GPA points of three batches of students (e.g. 16th batch session 2013-14, 18th batch session 2015-16, and 19th batch session 2016-17). These are shown in Fig 4.1, Fig 4.2 and Fig 4.3 respectively.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 28

Fig. 4.1: Progress report of students of 16th batch (session 2013-14) in exam held in year 2014, 2015 and 2016

Fig. 4.2: Progress report of students of 17th batch (session 2014-15) in exam held in year 2015 and 2016

Fig. 4.3: Progress report of students of 18th batch (session 2015-16) in exam held in year 2016 and 2017

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 29

Amongst the three batches, as Fig 4.1 to 4.3 reveals, the number or proportion of students achieving grade points in the range above 3.25 or 3.5 much increased over the year than in 1st year 1st semester. In other word, the proportion of students achieving grade points below 3.0 or F grade decreased over the year.

4.4 Survey Results Table 4.1 shows the overall opinions of students, alumni and academics regarding some specific questions such as entry qualifications of students, admission procedure, progress and achievements. Almost all the stakeholders are quite satisfied with the present condition of the students’ entry qualification, admission procedure, as well as their progress and achievements in the DURP.

Table 4.1: Overall response on students’ entry qualifications, admission procedure, progress and achievements from three different stakeholders.

Questions/ Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total Concerns agree disagree Admission policy Academic 63.6 36.4 - - - 100% ensures entry of Alumni 50 37.5 12.5 - - 100% quality students Student 44 33.1 4.2 10.8 7.8 100% Fairness of the Academic 90.9 9.1 - - - 100% admission Alumni 75 12.5 12.5 100% procedure Student 30.7 39.2 11.4 11.4 6.6 100% Commitment of Academic 18.2 54.5 18.2 9.1 - 100% the students to Alumni 12.5 25 37.5 25 - 100% ensure desired Student 14.5 30.1 26.5 21.7 6.6 100% progress and achievement Recording and Academic 63.6 36.4 - - - 100% monitoring of Alumni 25 - 25 43.8 6.3 100% Students progress Student 11.4 39.8 19.9 19.3 9 100% Feedback of the Academic 45.5 54.5 - - - 100% teachers to the Alumni 12.5 12.5 6.3 43.8 25 100% students about Student 15.1 31.3 15.1 26.5 11.4 100% their progress Maintenance of Academic 63.6 36.4 - - - 100% individual Alumni 25 50 6.3 18.8 100% students records Student 18.1 34.9 18.1 16.9 11.4 100%

In all three groups, as seen in Table 4.1, almost the majority (around 80 percent or above) of the respondents in each stakeholder group agree that the current system of admission process do ensure quality of students and fairness in admission procedure. However, a considerable

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 30 amount of the respondents (around 50 percent), in all three categories, disagree or were neutral about commitment of students to ensure desired progress and achievement. On the other hand, about the recording and monitoring of students’ progress, teachers’ feedback, and maintaining students’ records, all the academic members either agree or strongly agree whilst almost half of the respondents from alumni and students groups disagree or neutral.

Therefore, this could be concluded that though the teachers’ are quite satisfied with the overall situation, almost half of the students’ and alumni are not satisfied or neutral for certain aspects which need to be improved for the department.

4.5 Conclusion Almost all the stakeholders consider that the existing qualifications for student entry, present admission procedure, students’ progress and their achievements are excellent. However, though the teachers’ are quite satisfied with the overall situation, almost half of the students’ and alumni are not satisfied or neutral for certain aspects which need to be improved for the department.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 31

Chapter 5 Physical Facilities

Better physical facilities are considered to be an important and integral part of the quality learning and teaching experience. The physical facilities may create a favorable learning environment and facilitate the attainment of learning objectives.

5.1 Survey Results The overall response on physical facilities of the three major categories of the stakeholders (e.g. academic staff, alumni and students) are shown in Table 5.1 . It is observed that a major portion of the respondents - from three different stakeholders - are not satisfied with existing physical facilities. Therefore, the department should focus on the improvement of physical facilities related to alumni and students’ interest. A brief description of all the physical facilities of DURP is given in the subsequent sections.

Table 5.1: Overall responses obtained from three stakeholders for different physical facility

Questions/ Response Categories Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total Concerns agree disagree Suitability of Academic 72.7 9.1 9.1 9.1 100% ensuring effective Alumni 6.3 62.5 12.5 18.8 100% learning Student 21.7 18.1 15.7 19.3 25.3 100% Congenial Academic 9.1 18.2 45.5 18.2 9.1 100% laboratory Alumni 25.0 43.8 25.0 6.3 100% facilities for Student 8.4 22.3 13.3 27.7 28.3 100% practical teaching-learning Adequate Academic 18.2 36.4 27.3 18.2 100% Facilities for Alumni 6.3 6.3 25.0 25.0 37.5 100% conducting Student 13.9 13.9 18.1 27.1 27.1 100% research Adequate up to Academic 9.1 45.5 18.2 27.3 100% date reading and Alumni 37.5 31.3 18.8 12.5 100% reference Student 12.0 35.5 20.2 17.5 13.3 100% materials in the library Adequate Indoor Academic 27.3 36.4 36.4 100% and outdoor Alumni 6.3 50.0 18.8 25.0 100% medical facilities Student 8.4 23.5 10.8 31.9 24.1 100% Adequate sports Academic 36.4 18.2 27.3 18.2 100% facilities Alumni 56.3 6.3 18.8 18.8 100% Student 18.7 33.1 13.3 21.7 12.0 100% Existing Academic 18.2 18.2 18.2 45.5 100% gymnasium Alumni 18.8 25.0 18.8 31.3 100%

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 32

Response Categories Questions/ Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total Concerns agree disagree facilities Student 9.1 28.5 12.7 24.2 25.5 100% Adequate Office Academic 36.4 45.5 9.1 9.1 100% equipment’s Competent Academic 45.5 27.3 9.1 9.1 9.1 100% manpower of entity to run the academic affairs Availability of Academic 18.2 36.4 27.3 18.2 100% internet facilities Alumni 12.5 12.5 31.3 37.5 100% with sufficient Student 13.3 15.2 18.8 26.7 26.1 100% speed

5.1.1 Classroom Facilities Each year around 30-35 students get admitted in the department. So, the department has a total number of about 200 students of which about 35 students are in postgraduate programs (except 2-3 PhD students, mostly are in MURP program). The department has 3 classrooms equipped to accommodate 30-35 students and one new classroom without seating facilities and furniture that would accommodate about 70 students (refer to Table 5.2). Except the new one, these classrooms have white-boards. Teachers who want to take their theory classes using multimedia could use Design Lab or Computer Lab or Meeting Room or use mobile multimedia in the classrooms. Whatever, the classroom facilities of DURP need to be improved by installing some modern devices such as multimedia, interactive board, PA system etc. A brief description of these classrooms is given in Table 5.2.

Table 5.2: Classroom facilities in DURP Room No Floor Comments Room 341 3 Capacity 35 Room 342 3 Capacity 35 Room 405 4 Capacity 35 Room 407 4 Capacity 70. No bench, chair, table & furniture

5.1.2 Library Facilities The department has a Seminar Library, which has around 1,564 books and 516 journals at present and is being updated every academic year. The theses, projects and field reports from each academic year are also preserved and the students have open access to seminar library during weekdays from 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. Only the books and theses have online database, however, online archiving of the Seminar Library is not maintained. Wi-Fi network is

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 33 available in the library. Almost half of the respondents from the stakeholder groups do agree or strongly agree that the library in DURP has adequate up to date reading and reference materials (56 percent academic, 37 percent alumni and 47 percent student; as shown in Table 5.1). However, as around half of the respondents are either undecided or disagree or strongly disagree, this indicates that there are some rooms for improvement.

5.1.3 Laboratory Facilities The department has two labs: one Urban Design Lab and other Computer Lab (as shown in Table 5.3. All the labs are equipped with multimedia and internet facilities.

Table 5.3: Laboratory facilities in DURP Laboratory Description Class Urban Design 24 drawing tables & stools, equipped with multimedia All Year Lab projector Computer Lab 24 computers (but 17 not functioning due to monitor & other All Year hardware problems), equipped with multimedia projector

The Design Lab including different 3D plan, panel projects and Computer lab is equipped with necessary computer with various software according to the course curriculum. However, it does not appear to be sufficient as majority of the computers in the computer lab are either unusable or dysfunctional. Ironically, under window 1 of HEQEP project, the concerned committee procured 40 computers along with other optical and electronic equipment’s in 2013 that became largely dysfunctional by 2015. Hence almost 70 percent respondents in all stakeholders (62 percent academic, 75 percent alumni and 69 percent student - as seen in Table 5.1) are undecided and disagree or strongly disagree for laboratory facility, which indicate the lower graded lab facilities in the department. Therefore, the department is in a need to take appropriate steps in this connection.

5.1.4 Internet Facilities The students of DURP are provided with internet facility including Wi-Fi support in the department with university’s support. However, there is no special room dedicated only for students equipped with computers & Wi-Fi. Laboratories and seminar library are not equipped with computer with internet facilities though Wi-Fi is available there. More than half of academic (54 percent) agree or strongly agree about internet facility whilst for alumni and students it is very low - only 13 percent and 28 percent respectively (as shown in Table 5.1). Very poor response from alumni because there was no internet facilities in DURP

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 34 several years ago; therefore the alumni who graduated several years ago do disagree or strongly disagree. For the case of students, probably they do expect very high speed WiFi. However, the DURP thinks that the internet facility is not satisfactory.

5.1.5 Office Facilities The department office is well equipped with computers, internet and printing facility. The office is up to date in official documentation maintenance. The office has a staff room and a Chairman’s Office. An air-conditioned meeting room with multimedia and Wi-Fi internet facilities is also available at the department. All the academic members have their room with desktop computer and internet facilities. The survey shows the result for office facilities in Table 5.1 that 81 percent respondents from academic agree or strongly agree. However, teachers of DUR need intercom and telephone services.

5.1.6 Other Facilities The department has a very small store room. The department has limited facilities for indoor and outdoor games though with that students regularly participate in the inter-departmental games and sports activities. The university provides healthcare facilities centrally (through the University Medical Centre) and all the students and academic or non-academic staff can seek emergency and other medical care from there.

5.2 Conclusion From the overall survey result it is found that the department has office facilities with shortage of formally trained or skilled manpower and relevant office equipment’s to support the needs of students as well as the faculty members. However, the classroom facilities are not suitable for ensuring much effective learning. Moreover, the laboratory facilities are insufficient for practical teaching-learning and research. The library lacks behind in accumulating and offering up-to-date reading and reference materials to meet the academic and research needs to the full. The major improvement can be initiated in the infrastructure facilities. The internet and computer facilities would require regular update and maintenance.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 35

Chapter 6 Teaching Learning and Assessment

6.1 Quality Staff The need of planners for multidimensional development of any region is being felt in our country after the liberation war. The need has, rather been accentuated with the emergence of Bangladesh as a politically independent country. The Department of Urban and Regional Planning starts in 1998 for offering Bachelor Degree in URP. The academic program, however, began with three teachers and two guest teachers. At this time the department is enriched with nineteen qualified teacher which are dedicated for any didactic purpose of the department and highly longing to teach students. At this time there are thirteen teachers in country and servicing the department. Out of nineteen teachers six are outside the country for higher studies purposes.

6.2 Teaching Methods Achieving intended learning outcome from a specific course is primarily depends on the teaching methods applied to that course. Teaching methods again depends on the nature and contents of the course. In Jahangirnagar University, different teaching methods are followed by the course teachers with a view to achieving their intended learning outcome. Following teaching methods are generally followed by the faculty members of URP department based on the nature of the course:

6.2.1 Theory Courses Methods and procedures followed to conduct theory courses include, lecture method, class room discussion, presentation and assignments.

6.2.2 Sessional Courses Methods and procedures followed to conduct sessional courses include, group discussion, presentation, case study, assignments and class exercise.

6.2.3 Teaching Learning Methods As teaching method is one of the most important issues in achieving desired learning of students, therefore the department focuses teaching learning matters seriously. The DURP

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 36 has a team of qualified and professionally experienced teachers. Both teacher-centered and students-centered approaches are used for teaching the student. The primary role of the teachers is to pass information and knowledge onto their students. The medium of instruction in the department is English. It is mandatory that the questions and answers in the exam must be given in English. However during the lecturing, the teachers sometimes explain the topic in Bengali in order to understand and clarify the topic. Not only give traditional lecture but also demonstration is carried out through experiment or practical example. The students are inspired by the teaching learning strategy. This reflects the assessment of teaching learning strategy. The teaching learning assessment survey is carried out by the students, faculties and alumni members and their responses are shown in the Table 6.1. The score in each area of evaluation and assessment results are shown in Table 6.2 and discussed in details below.

Table 6.1: The overall responses of teaching learning assessment done by students, academics and alumni Response Categories Questions Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree Agree Disagree Interactive and Academic 72.7 27.3 100 % supportive Student 21.7 36.7 19.9 15.7 6 100 % Teaching- Alumni 31.3 12.5 50 6.3 100 % learning Class size is Academic 18.2 72.7 9.1 100 % optimum for Student 22.3 52.4 10.2 10.8 4.2 100 % interactive teaching, Alumni 31.3 62.5 6.3 100 % learning Entity provides Academic 54.5 45.5 100 % adequate Student 14.5 23.5 21.7 22.3 16.3 100 % opportunities for practical exercises to Alumni 18.8 50.0 6.3 25.0 100 % apply in real life situation Teaching- learning process encompasses co-curricular Academic 36.4 54.5 9.1 100 % activities to enrich students’ personal development Modern devices Academic 36.4 54.5 9.1 100 % are used to improve Student 12.7 42.2 14.5 18.1 12.7 100 % teaching- Alumni 6.3 31.3 18.8 43.8 100 % learning process

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 37

Response Categories Questions Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree Agree Disagree Diverse Academic 18.2 63.6 18.2 100 % methods are practiced to Student 9.1 27.7 27.1 27.1 8.4 100 % achieve learning Alumni 25.0 43.8 31.3 100 % objectives Lesson Academic 9.1 27.3 54.5 9.1 100 % plans/course outlines are Student 18.1 42.2 15.1 15.7 8.4 100 % provided to the students in Alumni 18.8 56.3 18.8 6.3 100 % advance

Table 6.2: The overall responses of learning assessment done by students, academics and alumni Response Categories Questions Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total Agree Disagree Entity duly Academic 63.6 27.3 9.1 100 % communicates Student 15.1 35.5 22.3 22.3 4.8 100 % assessment systems to students at the Alumni 12.5 31.3 12.5 25.0 18.8 100 % outset of the term/semester Assessment Academic 45.5 54.5 100 % procedures Student 10.2 41.6 27.7 13.3 4.2 100 % meets the objectives of Alumni 25.0 25.0 6.3 31.3 12.5 100 % the course Entity reviews the assessment system at Academic 27.3 63.6 9.1 100 % regular intervals Academic 54.5 36.4 9.1 100 % Assessment Student 24.1 43.4 19.9 8.4 3.6 100 % strategies Alumni 31.3 31.3 37.5 100 % Academic 9.1 72.7 18.2 100 % Use of diverse methods for Student 12.7 33.7 26.5 23.5 3 100 % assessment Alumni 25.0 37.5 31.3 6.3 100 % Entity provides Academic 36.4 45.5 18.2 100 % feedback to the students Student 15.1 29.5 21.7 21.7 10.8 100 % immediately after Alumni 12.5 6.3 37.5 43.8 100 % assessment

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 38

Response Categories Questions Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total Agree Disagree Entity maintains fairness and Academic 54.5 45.5 100 % transparency in the assessment system

6.2.3.1 Interactive Teaching Interactive teaching styles promote an atmosphere of attention and participation whereas students often lose interest in traditional lecture methods. We believe that telling is not teaching and listening is not learning. We encourage student’s participation in questioning and learning. Therefore, the teachers of the URP department use questions that stimulate response and discussion. The teachers provide practical examples and review questions. Assignment and class tests are also conducted. After evaluation of these, marks/grades are given and discussions are conducted in order to explain the problems and probable solutions. Most of the regular students are satisfied with this teaching style. Therefore, the teachers and students have opinionated that the teaching is interactive and supportive. The average of total agree regarding interactive teaching is 54.13 percent and average total disagree regarding interactive teaching is 26 percent. So the overall score in teaching aspects is moderately good and its one of the strength of the department. The others are shown in fig 6.1.

Fig 6.1: The overall responses in interactive teaching of teaching learning assessment

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 39

6.2.3.2 Class Size Class size means the number of students in one class room. It is a very important factor for assessment, discussion and students learning. Our class room is for 35 students. Although it is small, but acceptable. Student do not complain regarding problems in listening, understanding or questioning. In laboratory class, groups consisting three or four students, conducts experiments or works on innovative planning solutions to planning problems. This is helpful for group discussion and doing experiments/exercises. The average of total agree regarding optimum class size for interactive teaching, learning is 86.47 percent and average total disagree regarding optimum class size for interactive teaching, learning is 5 percent. So the overall score in class size aspects is excellent and that is another strength of the department. The overall score in class size aspects are shown in fig 6.1. Therefore, the class size is good enough and score is excellent. The score indicates that the URP students are satisfied with the class size.

Fig 6.2: The overall responses in optimum class size for interactive teaching and learning

6.2.3.3 Modern Device Nowadays technological integration is essential in classroom. Previously blackboard, chalks were used in the classroom. Now it is replaced by white board, marker, multimedia projector etc. Some teachers use educational video or simulation during lectures, which has transformed the engagement levels of students and has created a greatly enhanced learning experience. Through the use of video and simulation during lectures, students are more alert, motivated and focused on the topic in hand. There are recognized connections between visual content, memory knowledge and students’ ability to retain new information. Watching video coverage transports the student into the world of the topic under discussion, with expert interviews or demonstrations to bring the topic to life. Students also gain insights relating to

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 40 skills needed for interviews and benefit from enhanced team working and communication skills. The growing use of videos during lectures is a key aspect of successful active learning. The department has Wi-Fi internet facilities as mentioned in other chapter which helps to connect.

The average of total agree regarding modern devices are used to improve teaching-learning process is 61.13 percent and average total disagree regarding modern devices are used to improve teaching-learning process is 24.87 percent. So the overall score in modern devices are used to improve teaching-learning process is quite good and another strong area of the department. The overall score in modern devices used to improve teaching-learning process aspects are shown in fig 6.3. More funding on modern instrument and model is required.

Fig. 6.3: The overall responses in modern devices used to improve teaching-learning process

6.2.3.4 Diverse Method There are diverse methods of learning in our department such as learning by model, viva voce, project/thesis writing, workshop practice, group discussion, field work and study tour etc. It is true that there is a variation in teaching styles between teachers. The students do not feel equal interest in all teachers. Each semester, every student faces viva-voce to the concerned exam committee. This enhances their communicative skill. In every semester, each student has to do some projects by himself and make presentations on those. In final year, each student has to produce thesis by himself and present it to the department. This develops their ability of creativity, writing skill. In addition, workshop is organized by DURP in which they can learn some important topics. In such a workshop, students ask questions freely without any hesitation and students can be benefitted from such a workshop. The other

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 41 activities of DURP is planning project contests/competitions, exhibitions of planning projects, scientific movie/short film show, seminars/talks on planning and on planning relevant fields by invited guest speakers, teachers of the department and departmental students, e-newsletter etc. Another feature of the department is class room discussion. Class discussion can enhance students understanding, add context to academic content, broaden student perspectives, highlight opposing viewpoints, reinforce knowledge, build confidence and support community in learning. Another important way of learning is study tour. Through that students get to experience how planning is applied. In this way, they learn more effectively.

The average of total agree regarding diverse methods are practiced to achieve learning objectives is 48.87 percent and average total disagree regarding diverse methods are practiced to achieve learning objectives is 22.27 percent. So the overall score in diverse methods are practiced to achieve learning objectives is not quite good. The overall score in diverse methods are practiced to achieve learning objectives are shown in fig 6.4. It is less than our expectation. We have to concentrate more in this area. One of the reasons of low score might be lack of regular activities of URP department due to the political unrest or busy schedule of the students.

Fig. 6.4: The overall responses in diverse methods are practiced to achieve learning objectives

6.2.3.5 Practical Exercise We have invested resources to offer a practical exercise to apply in real life situation. We encourage students to recognize the value of practical exercise as part of their development.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 42

The students of URP are actively engaged with the practical exercise. The score in this category is good and the average of total agree regarding the entity provides adequate opportunities for practical exercises to apply in real life situation is 68.93 percent and average total disagree is 21.2 percent. So the overall score in Entity provides adequate opportunities for practical exercises to apply in real life situation is quite good. The overall score in the entity provides adequate opportunities for practical exercises to apply in real life situation are shown in fig 6.5.

Fig. 6.5: Entity provides adequate opportunities for practical exercises to apply in real life situation

6.3 Use of Lesson Plan Each and every faculty members should use written/formal lesson plan for conducting their courses to achieve objectives of the course in an efficient and timely manner. Use of written/formal lesson plan is not yet mandatory for the faculty members of URP department. However, some of the faculty members of URP department use lesson plan for their courses. Most of the faculty members use the lesson plan in a very informal/unstructured way.

Lesson plan is a teacher's detailed description of the course of instruction, or 'learning trajectory' for a lesson. The syllabus or curriculum of DURP is very detailed in each chapter (Annexure B). Total number of lectures is also written. Therefore, students know the details of the curriculum which would be taught. In addition, most of the faculty members does provide lesson plan in a bit informal format addressing aims, objectives and outcomes of the course in their introductory lectures. In the recent past, the lesson plan format emerged as a topic of discussion in an academic committee meet and it was agreed that the teachers should

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 43 provide students with lesson plan for each of their assigned course. Some of the teachers also provide lecture notes. This might be beneficial for the students. The score in this category is good and the average of total agree regarding the use of lesson plan is 57.27 percent and average total disagree is 13.13 percent. So the overall score in the use of lesson plan is satisfactory. The overall score in the use of lesson plan is shown in fig 6.6.

Fig. 6.6: The overall score in the use of lesson plan

6.4 Technology Integration Now a days, quality of higher education is highly associated with technology integration. DURP has realized the importance of this technology integration and has arranged some technology oriented facilities for the students so that they can be well accustomed with modern technology. The Discipline has already established computer laboratory with internet facility, multimedia class rooms with internet access and a seminar library with journals and books. Moreover, students enjoy Wi-Fi internet facility 24 hours at the discipline premises.

6.5 Focus The Department of Urban and Regional Planning aspires to be a center of excellence in training, research and professional guidance in urban and regional planning in the region. The Department's mission is to produce high level professional skills for the nation and the region in the field of urban and regional planning and development through training, research and professional guidance/extension. Precisely, to produce professional town planning graduates who are creative, innovative and critical in the development and implementation of sustainable spatial planning and competitive in managerial and technological aspects within the national and global contexts.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 44

The department of urban and regional planning is concerned with the efficient planning and management of human settlements, resource use and the conservation of the built and natural environment. We are committed to:

 Academic freedom, creativity, innovativeness and visionary operational issues.  Academic and professional excellence, integrity and reliability.  As a team (faculty and students working together)  Creating opportunities for all (students and staff) to contribute towards nation building and social responsibility.  Individual and collective research and publication, teaching and extension services to the nation, urban and the region.  Creating and maintaining national and international partnerships for the advancement of the department of urban and Regional Planning  Common public interest.

6.6 Skill Development The teaching-learning methods are the main skill development mechanism of DURP. Frequently the department arranges thesis/research proposal defense seminars and research findings defense seminars for the students. Sometimes, the discipline also arranges workshops, seminars and training programs for the students. URP department also arranges some social and extracurricular activities with a view to achieving leadership skills and skills related to social and community service among the students of the discipline.

Developing student’s skill alongside studies is essential for securing better jobs. The broad and general skills essential for students are communication, adaptability, flexibility, problem solving, writing, research and the use of information technologies. We thought the followings are important for skill development of URP students.

 Participate more in national and international contest  Internship  Training or workshops in specific topic  Presentation of their learnings  Participation in debate competition  Study tour in the curriculum related fields

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 45

 Research idea exchange

6.7 Assessment of Student Performance For assessment, 100 marks shall be assigned to each three-credit hours course and 50 marks for each two-credit hours course. Assessment of a student in a course shall be based on marks obtained in the course-end examination (written) and class assessments/continuous assessment. Marks allotted for class assessment/continuous assessment shall be 40% of the total earmarked for each theoretical course and 60% for each practical course.

6.7.1 Class Assessment/Continuous Assessment and Submission of Assessment Class Assessment/Continuous Assessment will consist of written class test, quizzes, project work, case studies, assignment, and term paper and discussion sessions. For assessment of class test there shall be a minimum of three written tutorial tests for each three-credit hours course and two written tutorial tests for each two-credit hours course. The course teacher shall assess the students on 20% marks for each theoretical course and 30% marks for each practical course in the first phase within 6 weeks of the semester. At the end of first 6 weeks of the semester the course teacher shall submit two copies of such assessment to the Chairman of the relevant Examination Committee. During the next 6 weeks of the semester, the course teacher shall do the same as s/he did for the first six weeks. The course teacher shall submit the consolidated marks (tutorial marks) for class test/continuous assessment and class attendance to the Examination Office at the end of each semester before the commencement of the semester-end examination.

The distribution of marks for each theoretical course shall be as follows: i. Written Tutorial tests/Class tests, Assignments, Term paper and other forms of 30% assessment ii. Class attendance 10% iii. Semester-end examination 60% Total 100% The distribution of marks for each practical course will be as follows: i. Continuous evaluation through practical assignments in the form of project, survey, 50% report writing ii. Class attendance 10% iii. Semester-end examination 40% Total 100%

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 46

6.7.2 Semester-end Examination i) In each semester-end examination, to be held at the end of each semester, a candidate shall be examined in course(s) totaling 12-22 credit-hours. ii) The duration of the course-end examinations shall be 4 hours for each three-credit hours theoretical course and two and half hours for each two credit hours theoretical course. The duration of course-end practical examination shall be 6 hours.

6.7.3 Assessment of Semester-End Examination i) An internal examiner is a teacher (including part-time) of the department. An external examiner shall be a person within or outside the university. ii) In case of theoretical courses, the scripts will be examined by an internal and an external examiner. iii) In case of practical courses, the scripts will be examined by course teacher and members of the examination committee of the semester concerned. iv) The Internship will be coordinated by members of the examination committee of the semester.

[Note] Other aspects of conducting the examination, not specified in this ordinance, will be guided by the ‘Ordinance for Conduct of Examination for the Four-Year Bachelor Degree (in semester and credit system)’1.

6.7.4 Assessment of Thesis/Dissertation Thesis/Dissertation will be evaluated on 200 marks (6 credits) including 100 marks for continuous assessment throughout the semester by the thesis supervisor. The written document of the thesis will be evaluated on 100 marks by an internal examiner (preferably student’s supervisor) and an external examiner (from inside the department/university) appointed by the Examination Office. Thesis Defense will be conducted and evaluated on 25 marks (0.75 credits) by the internal members of the Examination Committee.

6.7.5 Viva-Voce There shall be a compulsory viva-voce Examination for each student at the end of each semester and the candidate shall have to pass this examination for obtaining the Bachelor Degree. Full marks for each shall be 25. Qualifying marks for viva-voce shall be 40%.

1 Approved by the 230th syndicate meeting held on April 18, 2001

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 47

6.7.6 Grading System The total numerical marks obtaining by a student in each theoretical and practical course and Viva-voce examination will be converted into letter grades. There shall be 11 letter grades that may be assigned to evaluate course-performances and other works. The letter conversion points and grade points will be as follows:

Range of Marks (%) Letter Grade Grade Point 80% and above A+ 4.00 75% to less than 80% A 3.75 70% to less than 75% A- 3.50 65% to less than 70% B+ 3.25 60% to less than 65% B 3.00 55% to less than 60% B- 2.75 50% to less than 55% C+ 2.50 45% to less than 50% C 2.25 40% to less than 45% D 2.00 Less than 40% F (Fail) 0 Incomplete I 0

6.7.8 Class Attendance A student with class attendance of less than 70% in any course will be debarred from appearing at the course-end examination of that particular course. Credits in the form of marks will be given to students attending classes over the minimum 70% mandatory requirement. Basis for awarding marks for class attendance will be as follows:

Class attendance Marks allocated for Marks allocated for full-unit courses half-unit courses 90% or above 10 5 85% to less than 90% 9 4.5 80% to less than 85% 8 4 75% to less than 80% 7 3.5 70% to less than 75% 6 3 less than 70% 0 0

6.7.9 Survey Results of Assessment Process The process of evaluation on the overall responses of learning assessment conducted a purposive survey among the three stakeholders, such as students, academics and alumni out of five to explore the current state of the teaching learning and assessment in the URP department. Under this, seven areas of evaluation have been selected. These include, duly communication of assessment systems to students at the outset of the term/semester;

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 48 assessment procedures of the objectives of the course; review of the assessment system at regular intervals; assessment strategies; use of diverse methods for assessment; provide feedback to the students immediately after assessment and maintenance of fairness and transparency in the assessment system. The percentage scores on individual concerns of the teaching learning and assessment obtained from the three stakeholders are presented in the following tables below -

Table 6.3: Assessment systems are duly communicated to students at the outset of the term/semester Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 63.6 27.3 9.1 0 0 100 % Student 15.1 35.5 22.3 22.3 4.8 100 % Alumni 12.5 31.3 12.5 25.0 18.8 100 %

Table 6.3 reveals that overwhelming majority responses of academic, students and alumni on the opinions/question “Assessment systems are duly communicated to students at the outset of the term/semester”, have ranged between “strongly agree” and “agree” categories e.g. more than 90 percent collective response of the academics, more than 50 percent collective response of the student and 43.8 percent collective response of the alumni. Whereas for the alumni’s response, these have been majorly on “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories e.g. collectively 43.8 percent. Such an outcome might have steamed from the fact that academics and students are enlightened and have new good experience in comparison to alumni members regarding ‘assessment systems are duly communicated to students at the outset of the term/semester’ issues and over the years have witnessed the improvements under considerable amount of constraints.

Regarding “Assessment procedures meet the objectives of the course” (table 6.4), the response patterns of the academics have ranged between “strongly agree” and “agree” categories.

Table 6.4: Assessment procedures meet the objectives of the course Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 45.5 54.5 0 0 0 100 % Student 10.2 41.6 27.7 13.3 4.2 100 % Alumni 25.0 25.0 6.3 31.3 12.5 100 %

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 49

E.g. exactly 100 percent collective response and students are similar to that of the previous question/concern e.g. more that 51 percent from respondents have chosen either “agree” or “strongly agree” responses. Whereas for the alumni’s response, these have been differently on “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories e.g. collectively 43.8 percent.

Regarding “Review of the assessment system at regular intervals” (table 6.5), the response patterns of the academics have ranged between “strongly agree” and “agree” categories e.g. 90.6 percent collective response.

Table 6.5: Review of the assessment system at regular intervals Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 27.3 63.6 9.1 0 0 100 %

Table 6.6 reveals an interesting as well as a different scenario from the previous three tabulated facts. Concerning “Both formative (quizzes, assignment, term papers, continuous assessments, presentations etc.) and summative assessment (final examination) strategies are followed” concern, the academics have their opinions noticeably distributed between “strongly agree” to “disagree” - with 9.1 percent emerging as undecided. As with students, collectively 67.5 percent have responded between “agree” to “strongly agree” categories though 12 percent tended to “disagree” to “strongly disagree” and 19.9 percent in “undecided”.

Table 6.6: Both formative (quizzes, assignment, term papers, continuous assessments, presentations etc.) and summative assessment (final examination) strategies are followed Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 54.5 36.4 9.1 0 0 100 % Student 24.1 43.4 19.9 8.4 3.6 100 % Alumni 31.3 31.3 37.5 0 0 100 %

In table 6.6 the response patterns of the alumni have ranged between “strongly agree” and “agree” categories e.g. 62.6 percent collective response and 31.3 percent in “undecided”.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 50

Regarding “use of diverse methods for assessment” (table 6.7), the response patterns of the academics have ranged between “strongly agree” and “agree” categories e.g. more than 81 percent collective response. Students have confined their responses between “agree” and “undecided” categories whereas alumni majorly tended to be “agree” e.g. 37.5 percent; with 31.3 percent of them responded with “undecided” category.

Table 6.7: Use of diverse methods for assessment Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 9.1 72.7 18.2 0 0 100 % Student 12.7 33.7 26.5 23.5 3 100 % Alumni 25.0 37.5 31.3 6.3 0 100 %

The response patterns on “providing feedback to the students immediately after assessment” bythe academics have ranged between “strongly agree” and “agree” categories e.g. more than 81 percent collective response. Students have confined their responses all categories (table 6.8) whereas alumni majorly tended to be “disagree” e.g. 43.8 percent; with 37.5 percent of them responded with “undecided” category.

Table 6.8: Provide feedback to the students immediately after assessment Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 36.4 45.5 18.2 0 0 100 % Student 15.1 29.5 21.7 21.7 10.8 100 % Alumni 12.5 6.3 37.5 43.8 0 100 %

6.8 Conclusion It can be concluded that the overall teaching-learning environment in the department is moderate. From the survey result it has been found that the overall rating on various aspects of Learning Assessment among the different class of stakeholders is also moderate. The department does have many initiatives to improve this area, however in survey process few areas may not be able to cover.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 51

Chapter 7 Student Support Services

7.1 Co-curricular and Extra-curricular Activities Activities recognized by a department that are not part of the academic curriculum but are acknowledged as essential part of the overall life of an educational institution. These may also be classed as ‘Extra-curricular’ i.e. activities carried on outside the regular course of study. Extra-curricular activities are optional.

To develop the various facets of personality development of students; classroom teaching should be supplemented with co-curricular activities. These out of class activities affect all domains of life such as intellectual, emotional, social, moral, cultural and aesthetic.

Student Welfare Advisory service at Jahangirnagar University (JU) is meant for all students and it includes advising, supporting as well as organizing co-curricular and extra-curricular services. Improving students' relationships with teachers has important, positive and long- lasting implications for both students' academic and social development. Therefore, the department of Urban and Regional Planning (URP) of JU also extends hand to improve moral, professional skills, as well as co-curricular and extra-curricular activities through departmental students’ welfare advisor’s active initiatives. These include:

 Fresher reception and farewell programs in every year

 Annual picnic and World Planning Day celebration program for the department etc.

The department has several committees for co- and extra-curricular activities. All these committees are formed by the academic committee.

7.2 Academic Guidance and Counseling Academic Guidance and Cancelling is an opportunity to exchange information designed to help students to achieve their educational and career goals. Guidance and counseling is a shared responsibility between an adviser and the student. The departmental chairman as well as the examination committee for each batch acts as the academic guiding and counseling points for the students of URP and provides a range of academic guidance and counseling

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 52 resources to help the students to achieve their academic goals. The examination committee is formed through the departmental academic committee meeting for one academic year. The academic council and the Vice-Chancellor approve the examination committee. The academic and counseling activities include the followings services:

 Admission procedure  Class progress and problems associated with theory and sessional

 Readmission procedures

 Advising tips on course improvements process

 Contacts parents of underperforming students

 Selection of class representatives for each semester

7.3 Carrier and Placement The department of URP does not have any stated charter to arrange or fixate jobs for the passing graduates formally. However, the faculty members enthusiastically supports and recommends students to organizations, overseas universities for job positions and/or higher degree program admissions and scholarships. Alongside, the BURP program does have a component of internship/organizational attachment for six weeks between 7th and 8th semester. Over the years, it has been observed that such endeavor serves as the launch pad for the passed out students to secure job positions in relevant organizations or admission in overseas higher studies program.

7.4 Alumni Services The department initiated and formed the alumni back in 2006. Presently, the alumni association of DURP provides the following services:

 alumni give lecture in the department of URP on specialized topics,

 graduates from URP are encouraged to contact Alumni for job hunting, and

 students of URP are helped from the Alumni during the study tour

7.5 Survey results Questionnaire survey results from the academics, students and alumni is presented on table 7.1 below.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 53

Table 7.1: Scores obtained from the survey for various student services Response Categories Questions Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree Arrangement Academic 27.3 36.4 27.3 9.1 100% exists in the Student 18.1 28.3 20.5 18.7 12.7 100% entity to provide Alumni 6.3 18.8 6.3 43.8 25.0 100% an academic guidance and counseling Availability of Academic 9.1 27.3 27.3 36.4 100% financial grants Student 9.6 31.3 23.5 21.7 13.3 100% to the students Alumni 18.8 18.8 12.5 31.3 18.8 100% in case of hardship The entity Academic 18.2 54.5 9.1 9.1 9.1 100% provides co- Student 14.5 32.5 19.3 19.9 13.3 100% curricular and Alumni 12.5 50.0 25.0 12.5 100% extra-curricular exposures to the students There is an Academic 27.3 18.2 9.1 45.5 100% organized and Student 9.6 30.1 23.5 19.3 15.7 100% supportive alumni Alumni 12.5 37.5 18.8 31.3 100% association Collection of Academic 9.1 27.3 27.3 36.4 100% alumni feedback Student 12.0 21.7 24.1 21.7 19.9 100% by the entity to update the Alumni 6.3 12.5 12.5 68.8 100% learning outcomes of the program There are Academic 54.5 36.4 9.1 100% opportunities to Student 13.9 36.7 21.7 20.5 6.6 100% be involved with community Alumni 6.3 6.3 6.3 18.8 62.5 100% services

The interpretations of the outcomes are present below:

7.5.1 Guidance and Counseling The department of URP has a strategy for rendering active students’ guidance, counseling and engagement to community activities. As a routine (though unofficial) norm, the faculties of the department identify relatively weak, inattentive students in theory and sessional classes and help them by providing guidance and counseling. Hence, the percentage responses of the academics and students, collectively, have been found to be largely tilting towards either “strongly agree” or “agree” (63.7 percent for the academics and 46.4 percent for the students)

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 54

(table 7.1). However, more than two-third of the participant alumni tended to either “strongly disagree” or “disagree” e.g. 68.8 percent collectively; in this regard. Perhaps their disagreement steams from relevant experience at the department while it was at infancy - in a time when the number of faculties were few e.g. 4 to 7; with the number of academic batches were more than four. Hence, it was not possible for the department to devote its attention completely on the needs and causes of each student. Mentionably, a significant percent of the respondents have surfaced to be “undecided”. Nonetheless, the department perceives that are rooms for further improvements on this affair in future with the active cooperation from teachers and students.

7.5.2 Financial grants to the students in case of hardship Students of the DURP that can meet certain CGPA score as set out by the university as well as UGC are regularly being awarded with scholarships from JU, University Grants Commission, different charity organizations as well as personal contributions from within the core faculties. However, due to inherent competitiveness, only a handful of the students emerge as recipients – not all the students with hardship receives financial support. Moreover, the budgetary allocation of the department is dependent on the university’s annual approved resources – which is by far – insufficient to meet the departmental necessities. Hence, it is quite impossible for the department to support students with financial hardship by its own. Thus, close to only 40 percent collective response on this concern - for all the respondent groups - have settled between “strongly agree” to “agree” category. As for the alumni, nearly 50 percent (collectively) tended to either “disagree” or “strongly disagree”. Again, they are probably not well-informed about the above mentioned financial awards, award deciding mechanisms and hence tended to be negative with their responses. Again, with greater financial support and relevant fund hunting, more needy students can be helped.

7.5.3 The entity provides co-curricular and extra-curricular exposures to the students The department of URP has methodic approach to encourage, ensure students onto co- curricular and extracurricular activities. Every year a faculty is appointed by the academic committee to act as departmental students’ welfare and development advisor, one as sports advisor. They support students to organize sports, recreational events as well as participate in non-academic competitive activities. Thus, the well-informed groups e.g. academics and students; have their major (collective) percentage response on this tilting towards “strongly agree” to “agree” categories e.g. more than 70 percent and exactly 47 percent respectively.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 55

On the contrary, 50 percent of the alumni have been found to be undecided. Moreover, collectively, 37.5 percent of them had their opinions either on “strongly disagree” or “disagree” categories. Perhaps they are not well-informed about the increasing departmental activities in recent times compared to their studentship period.

7.5.4 Alumni Though there is an alumni association of the passed out graduates however it is still at infant state and the member size is quite low. Moreover, job nature of the graduates does not always permit them to actively participate in alumni activities. As a result, noticeable activity of the alumni is not visible on any front. Thus, regarding its activeness, the percentage scores of the academics and alumni appeared to be largely falling between “disagree” to “strongly disagree” categories. Though the current students seems to be harbouring the notion that the alumni is proactive e.g. collectively close to 40 percent opinionated either in the “agree” or “strongly agree” categories. In all the categories of respondents, a noticeable percentage seems to be “undecided”.

7.5.5 Collection of alumni feedback by the entity to update the learning outcomes of the program As per Jahangirnagar University Act 1973 and relevant statute as well as decisions taken by syndicate and senate, the department of URP decides departmental affairs though the prescribed means. The students as well as alumni are, in this connection, not involved or not members of a decisive forum. And because of this reality, the percentage scores - from all the respondent groups - on this issue have been found to be heavily ranging between “disagree” to “strongly disagree” categories e.g. collectively 63.7 percent of the academics, 41.6 percent of the students and 81.3 percent of the alumni quays such opinions. Again, a significant percentage of the respondents on each group remained “undecided”.

7.5.6 Community service opportunity The department of URP encourages students to be involved in community services. Hence the academics are majorly tending to “agree” with issue e.g. 54.5 percent. The second highest percentage for the group appeared to be “undecided” e.g. 36.4. Probably, the term “community activity” needed further elaboration in the questionnaire. Close to 40 percent of the students have their collective opinions aligned between “agree” and “strongly agree” - implying that they believe DURP provides opportunity to do community services. However,

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 56

80 percent or more of the alumni are of the opinion that the department does not provide opportunities for doing community service. Perhaps, their opinions have been shaped by the experience of the department at its infancy - on every account. It is worth of citing here that the professional practice of the discipline is solely community oriented.

7.6 Conclusion The status of student support services has rooms for improvement. The overall score obtained for this issue could have been better had a noticeable percentage of the respondents from all the groups not remained “undecided”. Of course it could have been other way round with these “undecided” respondents favoring “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories of responses. Nonetheless, the department should take necessary steps to improve the student support services.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 57

Chapter 8 Staff and Facilities

Survey has been conducted over the staff of Department of Urban and Regional Planning. Before showing opinions from different stakeholders, staff recruitment and development policies of the university have been presented in this chapter. Existing staff structure is as follows: (a) Academic (b) Non-academic: (i) Administrative, and (ii) Technical

8.1 Entry Qualifications 8.1.1 Academic Entry qualifications of academic staffs are vital in ensuring quality education provided by the discipline. The URP department of Jahangirnagar University has four categories of academic staffs; Lecturer, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor. Generally lecturer is the entry level academic position in Jahangirnagar University though in other level the qualified candidate can also enter into university as academic staff. Generally having first class/division/equivalent results in secondary school level to post graduate level is the main entry qualification at lecturer level. No third division/class is allowed for this position.

Entry qualifications of academic staffs are defined by the Syndicate of the JU. The following qualifications are considered for the academic staff recruitment (Annexure - A)

(i) Lecturer a) First division in SSC and HSC examination or having CGPA 4.00 in a scale of 5.00. b) BURP and MURP degree with minimum 3.50 GPA in 4.00 scale c) Applicant having M. Phil or Ph. D. would get priority

(ii) Assistant Professor a) BURP and MURP degree with minimum 3.50 GPA in 4.00 scale b) Applicant must have minimum 3 (Three) years experiences in teaching or relevant profession c) 2 (Two) years teaching experience as a Lecturer d) Minimum 2 publications as a first author

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 58

(iii) Associate professor a) Entry qualification of Assistant Professor; plus b) Total seven years of experience at university level among which at least 4 years as Assistant Professor. c) Total five publications in any refereed reputed journal among which at least three as Assistant Professor.

(iv) Professor a) Entry qualification of Associate Professor; plus b) Total eleven years of experience at university level among which at least 4 years as Associate Professor. c) Total ten publications in any refereed reputed journal among which at least four as Associate Professor.

8.1.2 Entry Qualifications of Non-academic Staffs URP department of Jahangirnagar University has three categories of non-academic staffs; Administrative Officer cum Computer Operator, Office Assistant cum Computer Operator and Peon. Table No. 8.1 describes the entry qualifications of non-academic staffs of URP department. Table 8.1: Entry Qualification of Non-Academic Staff Designation Entry Qualifications Administrative Having a Bachelor/Equivalent degree from any reputed university. Officer cum And having typing speed of 40 and 50 words in Bangla and English Computer respectively. Or, Operator Having five years of experience as Administrative Officer cum Computer Operator Office Having passed HSC/Equivalent. And having typing speed of 40 and Assistant cum 50 words in Bangla and English respectively. Or, Computer Having five years of experience as Office Assistant cum Computer Operator Operator. Peon i. Class eight passed with relevant working experience. ii. It can be relaxed for more experienced person.

8.2 Recruitment All the academic and non-academic staffs are recruited by the Jahangirnagar University authority. The university forms the recruitment committee for each position. For academic positions, the concerned committee arranges viva voce examination for the applicant and after the viva voce examination they recommend selected candidates for recruitment and send it to Syndicate for final approval. After the approval of the Syndicate the selected

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 59 candidate(s) can join their respective position(s). For the non-academic positions the same process is also followed but the concerned committee may take examination in this regards.

8.2.1 Academic There shall be selection boards for recommending the appointments of Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant Professors, Lecturers and other teachers of the University in various subjects.

(a) The Syndicate shall subject to the condition as laid down in section 44(2) of J. U. Act, 1973, section 18, 19, 22, 24 and 25 of the first Statutes and such other Statutes as may apply, have power to appoint all University employees (other than the Vice- Chancellor, the Pro- Vice-Chancellor and the Treasurer) to determine their remuneration and terms of their services, to define their duties and conditions of services; and to dismiss or remove them from services or terminate their services or to impose any other lesser penalties on them for misconduct, inefficiency or breach of discipline in accordance with the J. U. Act 1973, Statutes and Ordinance relating to Efficiency and Discipline of J. U. Employees.

(b) The Authority for the appointment and confirmation of appointment of M.L.S.S. shall rest with Heads of Departments and Heads of Offices concerned; foe cases not covered by above with the Registrar. However all appointment of M.L.S.S. shall be made with prior approval of the Vice-Chancellor.

The constitution and functions of the selection boards shall be such as may be prescribed the Statues (Annexure - A). (1) The selection board for appointment of Professors, Associate Professors shall consist of: (a) the Vice chancellor of JU - Chairman, (b) two nominees of the syndicate; (c) two members nominated by the Chancellor; and (d) three expert of whom one shall be an external expert to be nominated by the Chancellor. (2) The selection board for appointment of Assistant Professors and Lecturers shall consist of: (a) the Vice chancellor of JU - Chairman, (b) the Chairman of the Department concerned if he is not below the rank of Assistant Professor; (c) two members of the syndicate to be elected by syndicate; and (d) one expert to be nominated by the syndicate.

8.2.2 Non-academic Administrative The minimum qualification of administrative staffs is graduation.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 60

8.2.3 Non-academic Technical Selection committee is form by the syndicate. The selection committee selects applicants and forwards a list to the syndicate for approval.

8.3 Staff Development 8.3.1 Development of Academic Staff Professional development activities of academic staff include: attending seminars, participation in training, workshops, attending professional conferences, professional writing activities, and review activities, conducting new and original research, training programs inside and outside Bangladesh. Jahangirnagar University allows and encourages its faculty members to take part in such professional development activities with little logistic and financial support.

8.3.1.1 Institutional Quality Assurance Cell (IQAC) IQAC of Jahangirnagar University also conducts different training programs and workshops on different issues related to quality of education at university level viz; pedagogy, teaching- learning, evaluation, assessment, research methods etc. for the faculty members of the university.

8.3.1.2 Study Leave Jahangirnagar University grants study leave to its faculty members with full average pay/half average pay/without pays according to the university rule to pursue Masters/PhD/Post- Doctoral degrees for their professional development.

An academic staff enjoys the following facilities from the JU: a) 5 years study leave (pre and post-doctoral) with full average pay for doing Ph. D. and more 2 years with half average pay b) 1 year postdoctoral leave with full pay for every ten years of active service as per section 32 (iii) c) 4 years leave for gaining experience through teaching or research to other academic or research institutions without pay d) 1 year sabbatical leave for writing books, doing research, etc. with full pay

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 61

8.3.1.3 Sabbatical Leave: The University supports a faculty professional leave (sabbatical) activity after five years of service for their further professional development. Some members of the faculty take advantage of this opportunity for their development.

8.3.2 Development of Non-academic Staff Professional development of non-academic staffs is generally possible in Jahangirnagar University through allowing its non-academic staffs to participate in different training programs and workshops and also arranging the same for them. Jahangirnagar University allows its non-academic staffs to pursue higher studies and attending in different training programs. IQAC of Jahangirnagar University also arranges training programs for professional development of non-academic staffs.

8.4 Key Responsibilities 8.4.1 Key Responsibilities of Academic Staffs Each academic position has some key responsibilities. Table No. 8.2 portrays some key responsibilities of academic staffs of URP department of Jahangirnagar University. From the table it is observed that conducting courses, supervising/mentoring research activities and performing the role of a member of academic committee are the key common responsibilities of all the academic staffs of URP department.

Table 8.2: Key Responsibilities of Faculty by Designation Designation Key Responsibilities Professor i. Conducting courses at both undergraduate and post graduate level. ii. Supervising/Mentoring both undergraduate and post graduate research. iii. Coordinating both undergraduate and post graduate courses. iv. Acting as a chairman/member of examination committee. v. Playing role as a member of academic committee. vi. Counseling students Associate i. Conducting courses at both undergraduate and post graduate level. Professor ii. Supervising/Mentoring both undergraduate and post graduate research. iii. Coordinating both undergraduate and post graduate courses. iv. Acting as a chairman/member of examination committee. v. Playing role as a member of academic committee. Assistant i. Conducting courses at both undergraduate and post graduate level. Professor ii. Supervising/Mentoring both undergraduate and post graduate research. iii. Coordinating both undergraduate and post graduate courses. iv. Acting as a chairman/member of examination committee. v. Playing role as a member of academic committee. Lecturer i. Conducting courses at undergraduate level. ii. Supervising/Mentoring only undergraduate research. iii. Coordinating undergraduate courses. iv. Playing role as a member of academic committee.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 62

8.4.2 Key Responsibilities of Non-academic Staffs Non-academic staffs of URP department also have some key responsibilities according to their position. Mainly filing and documentation and providing all sorts of logistic supports to academic staffs are the main key responsibilities of the non-academic staffs. Table No. 8.3 exposes the key responsibilities of non-academic staffs by position.

Table 8.3: Key Responsibilities of Non-Academic Staffs by Designation Designation Key Responsibilities Administrative i. In filing and documentation. Officer cum ii. Providing logistic support in arranging meetings of the Discipline. Computer iii. Drafting meeting minutes. Operator iv. Drafting any document assigned by the Discipline. v. Any duties assigned by the Chairman of the department.

Office i. In filing and documentation. Assistant cum ii. Providing logistic support in arranging meetings of the Computer department. Operator iii. Drafting meeting minutes. iv. Drafting any document assigned by the Discipline. v. Any duties assigned by the Chairman of the department. Peon i. Receiving and distributing official letters/memo/documents. ii. Providing hospitality services. iii. Any duties assigned by the Chairman of the department.

8.5 Key Performance Indicators There are no official/formal key performance indicators for any academic and non-academic positions in Jahangirnagar University. So, for the academic and non-academic staffs of URP department has no formal key performance indicator. However, the following indicators are treated as key performance indicators informally in URP department:

8.5.1 Key Performance Indicators of Academic Staffs i. Number of courses conducted in a semester ii. Average number of class conducted in a semester i. Number of thesis/research supervised ii. Number of days in declaring continuous assessment iii. Average number of hours stay in campus per week

8.5.2 Key Performance Indicators of Non-academic Staffs i. Number of hours stay in office per day ii. Number of file proceed per day

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 63

iv. Number of tasks done per day

8.6 Survey Results The process of evaluation conducted a purposive survey among the two stakeholders, such as academic staff and non-academic staff out of five to explore the current state of the staff and facilities in the URP department. The percentage scores on individual concerns of staff and facilities obtained from the two stakeholders are presented in the following tables below -

Table 8.4: Good recruitment policy and practices for recruitment of competent academic and non- academic staff Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 54.5 18.2 18.2 0 9.1 100% Non-academic 0 0 71.4 14.3 14.3 100%

Table 8.4 reveals that majority responses of academic and non-academic staffs on the opinions/questions “Recruitment policy and practices are good enough for recruitment of competent academic and non-academic staff”, have ranged between “strongly agree”; “agree” and “undecided” categories e.g. more than 54 percent collective response of the academics whereas for the non- academic response, these have been majorly on “undecided” categories e.g. collectively 71.4 percent. Such an outcome might have steamed from the fact that academics have higher experience in comparison to non – academic members regarding recruitment policy and practices and non – academic staffs have neutral opinion under considerable amount of constraints.

Regarding “The attractive salary and incentives to retain the academic and non-academic staff” (table 8.5), the response patterns of the academics and non-academic staffs are similar to that of the “agree” to “disagree” options. More that 18 percent and 42 percent from respondents of academic and non- academic respectively have chosen “agree”

Table 8.5: The attractive salary and incentives to retain the academic and non-academic staff Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 0 18.2 27.3 36.4 18.2 100% Non-academic 0 42.9 28.6 28.6 0 100%

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 64

With the academics, collectively close to 18.2 percent had their responses in “strongly disagree” options. Close to 27 percent of them responded with “undecided” categories. As for the non - academic a response trend is similar to that of academic and hence it is 28.6 percent. The rationale can be perceived to be similar as well.

Table 8.6 reveals an interesting as well as a different scenario from the previous two tabulated facts comparatively concerning “Good team spirit exists among different academic staff” concern. The academics have their opinions noticeably distributed between “agree” to “disagree” - with 18.2 percent emerging as undecided. As with 28.6 percent non – academic staff responded with “agree” and “disagree” with 42.9 percent emerging as undecided.

Table 8.6: Good team spirit exists among different academic staff Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 0 27.3 54.5 18.2 0 100% Non-academic 0 28.6 42.9 28.6 0 100%

Non-academic staffs have confined their responses in “undecided” categories (100 percent) whereas academic majorly tended to be “agree” e.g. 54.5 percent; with 36.4 percent of them responded with “undecided” category. The varied responses in ‘congenial atmosphere prevails to enhance professional knowledge through research and higher studies’ might have steamed for relevant satisfaction deriving out of these as well as their experience while pursuing purpose/s (table 8.7).

Table 8.7: A congenial atmosphere prevails to enhance professional knowledge through research and higher studies Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 0 54.5 36.4 9.1 0 100% Non-academic 0 0 100 0 0 100%

As per table 8.8, more than 63 percent of the academic have their responses distributed either on “strongly agree” or “agree” categories. Collectively 100 percent of non - academic responded between “strongly agree” and “agree” categories.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 65

Table 8.8: Academics have enough opportunities to take part in different seminar/workshop/training programs for skill development Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 18.2 45.5 36.4 0 0 100% Non-academic 28.6 71.4 0 0 0 100%

It also reveals that more than 36 percent of the academics expressed their opinion in “undecided” category. Since they are well aware of the fact that is why they have responded like that.

On the issue of “Non-academics have enough opportunity to take part in different training programs for skill development”, there is a controversy between the academics and the non – academics. In the above issues about 82 percent of the academics have their responses distributed either on “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories whereas more than 71 percent non - academic have collectively responded with “agree” or “strongly agree” categories (Table 8.9).

Table 8.9: Non-academics have enough opportunity to take part in different training programs for skill development Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 0 18.2 0 45.5 36.4 100% Non-academic 14.3 57.1 14.3 14.3 0 100%

Table 8.10 depicts percentage responses on the “Policy of entity to provide mentoring/continuous guidance for new academic staff” by academic and non – academic groups. Collectively more than 60 percent of the academics have responded either with “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories, more than 85 percent of the non-academics have responded “undecided” categories (Table 8.10).

Table 8.10: Policy of entity to provide mentoring/continuous guidance for new academic staff Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 0 27.3 9.1 27.3 36.4 100% Non-academic 0 14.3 85.7 0 0 100%

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 66

The reason is strait forward - for the new academic staff, there is no good policy of the entity to provide mentoring/continuous guidance. There should be a good policy of entity to provide mentoring/continuous guidance for new academic staff and to develop their future carrier.

As per table 8.11, collectively more than 63 percent of the academic either “strongly agree” or “agree” with the question/concern “Practice of seminars and workshops by the entity to share knowledge and experience among the faculty members”. Non-academic staffs have confined their responses in “undecided” categories and it is 100 percent (table: 8.11). So both stakeholders are in agreement in this regard.

Table 8.11: Practice of seminars and workshops by the entity to share knowledge and experience among the faculty members Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 9.1 54.5 18.2 18.2 0 100% Non-academic 0 100 0 0 0 100%

Table 8.12 is about performance award policy of the entity to inspire academic staff. Collectively more than 81 percent of the academic either “disagree” or “strongly disagree” in response to this question/concern.. On the other hand about 57 percent non-academics responses were found to be falling “disagree” category. More than 42 percent have chosen to remain “undecided”. It may be due to the fact that out of 7 staffs, only 2 has Masters’ degree, 2 has bachelor degree and the rest are either below S.S.C. holder or have passed it without any further academic degrees. Hence, a good performance award policy of the entity are obviously beyond their understanding.

Table 8.12: Performance award policy of the entity to inspire academic staff Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 0 9.1 9.1 18.2 63.6 100% Non-academic 0 0 42.9 57.1 0 100%

With regards to the concern “Performance indicators are the criteria for promotion/up- gradation” to the academic and non – academic staffs, table 8.13 bellow reveals that more than 72 (collectively) percent of academics, more than 28 percent of non – academic staffs responded either on “strongly agree” or “agree” categories.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 67

Table 8.13: Performance indicators are the criteria for promotion/up-gradation Response Categories Respondents Strongly Strongly Total Agree Undecided Disagree agree disagree Academic 27.3 45.5 18.2 0 9.1 100% Non-academic 0 28.6 71.4 0 0 100%

Table 8.13 above reveals that about 18.2 percent of the academics and majority (71.4 percent) of non – academic staffs expressed their opinion in “undecided”. Since they are well aware of the fact that is why they have responded like that. Emergence of such opposite opinions might have steamed from the fact that academics are better informed about such policy compared to the non-academics.

8.7 Conclusion Neither the department nor the university does have appropriate initiative to train the staff. The overall score in this area indicates the actual status of the department as well as the university. One of main reasons behind it is that there is no budget allocation for staff development.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 68

Chapter 9 Research and Extension

Research leads to creativity and innovation. It also directly contributes to effective teaching learning practice. Commonly, universities have mandates, resources (to a certain extent) and opportunities for research. To explore the present status of research and extension of DURP, a survey has been conducted on three stakeholders - academic member, alumni and student. Policy and funding mechanism in this regard are as follows.

9.1 Policy and Program Mission: The mission of research and extension at the DURP has always been to generate, preserve and disseminate knowledge by integrating research, extension and linkages into quality programs covering a wide variety of disciplines while engaging in innovative research and teaching.

Values: To undertake its mission and to realize its vision, DURP upholds the following values:

 Excellence: Ensuring excellence in teaching, research and service to the community;  Innovativeness: To create and utilize new ideas in teaching, research and innovation;

 Integrity: Staffs are committed to honest, open, accountable and transparent relationships;

 Equality: Ensuring that there is equal opportunity for all without any form of discrimination be it gender, race, disability, religion or ethnicity; and

 Social Responsibility: Promoting awareness of and providing leadership in responding to issues and problems affecting the society.

9.2 Fund and Facilities The overwhelming sources of funding for pursuing research by the faculties at the department have been two – UGC grants and Jahangirnagar University Grants. The amount devoted or

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 69 awarded varied between years. However, it has been highly insufficient for pursuing bigger research projects. Following table provide year wise research project titles of DURP faculty members that received funding from the above two mentioned source :

UGC funded research projects (2014-15) Sl. Name of the faculty Research project title 1 Dr. Shammi Akter Shatu “The Impact of Local Parks on the Livability of the Neighborhoods: The Case of Dhaka” 2 Mohammad Mizanur “Geographic Information System (GIS) to Assess and Collect the Rahman Holding Tax: An Application Approach of Singair Municipality” 3 Farhana Akter “Commercial Use beside National Highway and Its Impacts: A Case Study In Savar Pourashava a Small Town of Bangladesh.”

(2015-16) Sl. Name of the faculty Research project title 1 Dr. Shammi Akter Shatu “An Investigation of the impact of Dhaka Metropolitan Building Construction Rules 2008 on the residential environment of Dhaka” 2 Afsana Haque “Developing Practical guideline for using place making as an Urban Design tool: A Case study of Dhaka ” 3 Mohammad Mizanur “Drainage Network Management Using Geographic Information Rahman System (GIS) Tools: A Case Study of Savar Municipality” 4 Farhana Akter “Identifying Deprived Area of Open space/Park Facilities Using GIS in Dhaka City”

(2016-17) Sl. Name of the faculty Research project title 1. Dr. Mohammad Shafiq- Existing Bus Services in Dhaka City: Satisfaction Level and ur Rahman Expectations of Passengers. 2. Dr. Shammi Akter Shatu Investigation of the socio spatial equity to public facilities in selected neighborhoods of Dhaka. 3. Mohammad Mizanur Model Choice and Pedestrian Facilities in Municipal Transportation Rahman Demand and Accessibility: A Case Study of Savar Municipality

4. Farhana Akter Institutional Capacity and People’s Perception Regarding Fire Hazard in Secondary Cities Of Bangladesh: Case Study on Savar Municipality.

(2017-18) Sl. Name of the faculty Research project title 1 Dr. Mohammad Shafiq- Travel Pattern of Disabled People: A Case Study on Savar ur Rahman Municipality. 2 Dr. Kasphia Nahrin Urban community understandings and reactions about climate change in Bangladesh. 3 Dr. Adil Muhammad A Study on Low Income Housing in Dhaka City. Khan 4 Mohammad Mizanur Urbanization and Land –use/Land – cover dynamics on Urban Rahman Heat Island: A Remote Sensing and GIS Approach.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 70

Sl. Name of the faculty Research project title 5 Farhana Akter Kitchen market waste management by DNCC and DSCC: Prospects and Problems.

Jahangirnagar University funded research projects (2015-16) Sl. Name of the faculty Research project title 1. Dr. Mohammad Shafiq- “Road User Charging (RUC) as a tool of Traffic Management for ur-Rahman Dhaka City” 2. Dr. Shammi Akter Shatu “Recent Decline in the Housing Price of Dhaka: How far it can go?” 3. Adil Muhammad Khan “Comparative Assessment of Community Facility Provisions at Metro Cities in Bangladesh” 4. S.M. Naushad Hossain “A Study on the Existing Provision and Condition of Community Facilities at Faridpur Pourashava: A Planning Perspective” 5. Farhadur Reza “Evaluation of Bus Terminal Facilities: A Case Study of Faridpur Poura Bus Terminal” 6. Afsana Haque “An Evaluation of Planning and Management Development Projects of Bangladesh” 7. Mohammad Mizanur “Geographic Information System (GIS) to Identity the Maximum Rahman Utility of Roads: A Priority Based Approach of Singair Municipality” 8. Farhana Akter “Making Smart City an Opportunity of Eliminate Urban Problems: A Case Study in Ward no. A of Dhaka City Corporation”

(2016-17) Sl. Name of the faculty Research project title 1. Dr. Mohammad Shafiq- Chanda (Bribe) in Transport Sector of Bangladesh. ur-Rahman 2. Dr. Shammi Akter Shatu Investigation of the Political economy of urban planning process of Dhaka and the socio-spatial consequences. 3. Adil Muhammad Khan Innovations in Housing and Community Planning: Analysis of Some Selected International Exemplary Practices. 4. S.M. Naushad Hossain A Study on Water Logging Problem of Savar Pourashava: Causes, Consequences and Solutions. 5. Farhadur Reza Ecosystem Service Assessment of Savar Pourashava. 6. Mohammad Mizanur Optimization of Solid Waste Management using Geographic Rahman Information System (GIS) and Consequence of Water Pollution: A Case Study of Savar Pourasava.

(2017-18) Sl. Name of the faculty Research project title 1. Dr. Mohammad Shafiq- Travel characteristics of school children: A case study on Dhaka ur Rahman city. 2. Dr. Kasphia Nahrin Integrating environmental conservation policy with urban planning for environmental improvements in developing cities: a case study. 3. Dr. Adil Muhammad Density control for urban areas: A study on various techniques and Khan applications in city planning. 4. S.M. Naushad Hossain Applying Climate Disaster Resilience Index to Improve City Resilience Condition: A Case Study on Ward no. 29 of Dhaka South City Corporation.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 71

Sl. Name of the faculty Research project title 5. Farhadur Reza Effects of Street Features/Pattern on Outdoor Thermal Comfort: A Study in Dhaka City. 6. Mohammad Mizanur Walkability and Pedestrian Flow Characteristics: LoS and Mindset Rahman Approach Study. 7. Farhana Akter Rain Water harvesting: An Approach to Reduce Water Problem of City Dwellers.

Apart from University and UGC funding, some faculties have received funding from other national and international organizations for a number of their research endeavors. The recipients, research title and reporting/financing organizations in this connection area as following:

Sl. Name of Research project title Funding Medium of Status the faculty organization fund hunting 1. Professor Public Toilet Demand Scan SNV, Open call Submitted Golam in Kushtia and Jhenaidah Netherlands in 2017 Moinuddin, Municipality Development PhD Organization Innovation in Public Health BRAC- Open call Submitted Education : Introducing JPGSPH in 2015 Public Health in Urban Planning Studies 2. Professor Integrated multi-modal DFID-UK Open call Complete Dr. public transport: planning & d in 2017 Mohammad designing urban transport Shafiq-Ur- interchanges in Dhaka city Rahman Donor and Development DFID-UK Evidence Complete Agency Approaches to on Demand d in 2014 Measuring Infrastructure Results

For students, as per the degree requirement chartered in the approved syllabuses of both BURP and MURP, each of them are required to produce a thesis that ought to be supervised by a DURP faculty. Each and every MURP dissertation requires to be evaluated by an external expert outside Jahangirnagar University.

DURP has a seminar library, presentation rooms that acts - to a considerable extent - as support services for conducting research.

9.3 Fund Hunting In Bangladesh, the higher education institutions have a very limited scope to collect fund

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 72 from private sectors, such as, industries or other organizations. This is due to the fact that most of the industries are business enterprises and these do not perceive research as priority area. Faculties at the DURP, at their personal capacities, sometimes receives fund or becomes part of a non-campus based research initiatives. However such endeavors are quite rare.

9.4 Dissemination of Research Findings DURP faculties normally disseminate their research finding through two mediums – as research papers in indexed journals and seminar/workshop/symposium papers. DURP regularly publishes a peer-reviewed journal titled “Jahangirnagar Planning Review” where research papers of the DURP faculties - alongside relevant professionals and experts - regularly gets published. Apart from that, the department organizes seminar where the faculties can and normally disseminates their research findings.

9.5 Survey findings Table 9.1 below reveals the comprehensive picture of survey findings from academics, students and alumni. It shows that collectively more than 50 percent of academics’ opinion, close to 50 percent of students’ opinion ranges between “agree” to “strongly agree” categories regarding “The entity has a well-defined research and development policy“. However, it has been ranked poorly by the alumni as more than 70 percent is of this opinion.

Table 9.1: Overall response on various aspects of research and extension. Response Categories Questions/Concerns Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Total agree disagree The entity has a Academic 27.3 27.3 27.3 9.1 9.1 100% well-defined Student 27.7 21.2 19.9 20.5 10.8 100% research and development policy Alumni 18.8 12.5 15.5 56.3 100% Mechanism exists Academic 9.1 45.5 36.4 9.1 100% for engaging the Student 9.6 39.5 20.5 20.5 9.6 100% students in research Alumni 6.3 18.8 18.8 18.8 37.5 100% and development Teachers always take initiative to hunt research fund for Academic 27.3 18.2 36.4 18.2 100% smooth running of the research The entity has a Academic 27.3 27.3 27.3 18.2 100% community service Student 14.5 24.7 30.1 19.3 11.4 100% policy Alumni 6.3 25.0 12.5 56.3 100%

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 73

Perhaps alumni is not well-informed about the recent trends in the department since their involvement is extremely low or nil. However a significant portion of the respondents have been found to be collectively undecided e.g. 59.7 percent.

On the opinion of “Mechanism exists for engaging the students in research and development”, a similar trend of response is observed though the percentage of undecided respondents is higher than the previous question e.g. 75 percent.

“Teachers always take initiative to hunt research fund for smooth running of the research” - this particular concern/issue has majorly received negative responses or opinions between “strongly disagree” to “disagree”. Precisely, close to 55 percent of the DURP faculties have been of these opinions. 18.2 percent have been found to be undecided. The discussions assembled on the previous sections imply that such responses are obvious. Apart from the university’s own funding and UGC grants, only a handful of DURP faculties were successful in research fund hunting from other sources in the recent past as there are very few organizations that regularly calls for research proposals and awards grant.

With regards to the concern/question “The entity has a community service policy”, 84.5 percent of the collective responses have been found to be falling in “undecided” category. Close to 50 percent of the faculties, 69 percent of the alumni and 31 percent of the existing students have expressed their opinions ranging between “strongly disagree” to “disagree” categories. The rationale behind such response might well be couched on the fact that department doesn't have any community service policy explicitly apart from responding to national calls (if there is/are any).

9.6 Conclusion The overall response pattern implies that there are substantial rooms for improvement in the research and extension services. A very fruitful improvement might be obtained in this regard if the authority allocates realistic and sufficient budget along with a favorable policy instrument. It is indeed worth of citing here that in spite of shortage of budget and other facilities the faculties of DURP possesses a good number of publications - that are largely the outcomes of their research work.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 74

Chapter 10 Process Management and Continuous Improvement

This chapter presents an overview and performances of some functional processes and management systems in the Department of URP. Accordingly some of the major processes involved in academics are listed. Some survey results are discussed with an insight into the interpretation of the survey. At the end the chapter presents some improvement plans for enhancement of the quality of education and research that can lead the department into a reputation with competitive academic and research environment.

10.1 List of some major academic processes A number of academic processes are involved in the department. Some of the academic processes are regularly maintained with immediate execution of decision taken by the academic committee of the department in compliance with Jahangirnagar University Act 1973 and ordinance of the university. For example, preparing syllabus, conducting examination, result preparation etc. However, the major functional processes those are involved in conducting the academic activities in undergraduate and postgraduate levels can be listed below:

 Admission process;  Designing the academic curriculum through meeting of the committee of courses;  Preparation of academic calendar;  Preparation of lecture schedule;  Teaching and learning process;  Examination process;  Result preparation process; and  Result publication process.

Students after completing BURP are eligible for admission into MURP program. MPhil and Doctoral degree are also awarded from the university. Moreover, some other non-academic but extracurricular activities (e.g. cultural, sports, indoor game, farewell program) are involved in the department.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 75

10.2 Self-assessment While talking about the performance of the processes and management system in the department, it is concerned with firstly, the academic achievement in terms of education and research; secondly, some measures on sincerity, integrity, transparency, and robustness of the processes involved in academics and non-academic activities at the department. For example, in the student admission process of the university the department takes fresh students according to the decision made by the university. This is worth to mention here that the academic committee of the department and relevant faculty suggests the criteria of admission process. The admission process is free and fair which is taken in a competitive environment by maintaining unbiased and quality examination system. Similarly, the department maintains the listed process according to the regulations of the relevant faculty in compliance with the ordinance of the university. A survey was conducted to evaluate process management of the department: Table 10.1 shows the percentage scores on process management (quality assurance and continuous quality improvement) on the four relevant questions of the questionnaire.

Table 10.1: Survey result for the individual areas of process management and continuous improvement. Response Categories Total Questions/ Respondents Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Concerns agree disagree The entity always acts in compliance with the decision of the university Academic 54.5 45.5 - - - 100% regarding continuous quality improvement Entity embraces the spirit for continual Academic 54.5 36.4 - 9.1 - 100% quality improvement Entity reviews academic programs for the Academic 54.5 27.3 9.1 9.1 - 100% enhancement of students learning Entity ensures a usual practice for students or alumni Academic 9.1 27.3 18.2 36.4 9.1 100% feedback as a culture

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 76

The survey results for the individual areas of process management and continuous improvement are derived from academics. For the question whether or not “the entity always acts in compliance with the decision of the university regarding continuous quality improvement”, DURP faculties have responded collectively either with “strongly agree” or “agree” categories e.g. 100 percent. The reason being that the departmental affairs, from time to time, is guided/directed by the university as per the syndicate, senate, and academic council approved rules of business.

In response to the concern “entity embraces the spirit for continual quality improvement”, collectively again more than 90 percent of academics have chosen either “strongly agree” or “agree” categories. The rationale is quite simple - the quest for improvement. Besides, university’s practiced custom requires the department to seek improvement in its academic process management continually.

“Entity reviews academic programs for the enhancement of students learning” - for this particular concern, collectively close to 82 percent academics registered the opinions either on “strongly agree” or “agree” categories. Continuous improvements of the academic process management are aimed at the students - producing comparatively better graduates.

Regarding “Entity ensures a usual practice for students or alumni feedback as a culture” concern, the percentage response majorly falls in either “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories. It is because of the fact that the university’s approved system does not allow the department to take into account the feedback of students in a formal way even for evaluating the quality of teaching and learning process. Perhaps it is differently in practice, which may not be recognized here such as there are always scopes for the students to discuss their academic problems with relevant course teacher at any time although formally students’ feedback is not allowed in the syllabus reviewing process. However, the department always takes some measures from past experiences for designing/reviewing academic ordinances and syllabuses. For example, department always invites and takes ideas from experienced academicians who worked for long time in the department or similar organization somewhere else. Perhaps, the participants who responded either with “disagree” or “strongly disagree” categories, might possess the notion that the future and present conditions are not taken into account for embracing or holding the departmental spirit tightly or it may be a bit far from the present conditions of social needs and benefits.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 77

In conclusion, the average results from this survey are quite acceptable and can be considered a strength point of the department. However, this also indicates that the department needs to improve its culture by ensuring incorporation of student's and alumni’s feedback in the academic process management and continuous improvement.

10.3 Use of all feedback In modern education system the feedback from each stakeholder is considered one of the key points for the improvement and ensuring the quality education. For example, students are one such stakeholder in this environment and their feedback is essential for the judgment of effective and quality improvement. However in the process management system it is not clearly stated how such a stakeholder be accommodated in the decision-making and hence the university does not take feedbacks from students. However, having such as part of the process could render with indicators for improving academic’s teaching and relevant professional capacity. It is also true that there might be a trouble on the quality of the feedback of a student; mainly because the students and the culture are not well established and hence they might be embarrassed/hesitated/ biased/ threatened for their feedback. Thus, teacher and student both stakeholders need some motivational workshop(s) for ethics that might be helpful for unbiased feedback (or quality feedback) to improve the quality of education.

In the modern education system there might have some tools like pedagogy and andragogy methods for teaching and learning enhancement. Despite a lot of improvements in education system, still there may not have a definite and rigorous method that everybody could use for teaching and learning improvement. Rather, it is a combination of trial and error methods, and mostly depends instructors - how successful (s)he is in delivering to the students and make them understand or effective in class. Actually, it is a philosophical belief of an instructor on him/herself that how a teacher will steer his/her teaching that will be understandable, interactive.

It is not unlikely that sometimes the feedback from alumni and students are shallower than what the department may think about its spirit and future target. The reason might very well be that the students and alumni are not familiar about the process how the department designs and reviews academic curriculum, therefore they tend to award a lower score in process management and continuous improvement issue.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 78

The survey derived scores for Teaching-Learning assembled in chapter six indicate that the department needs closer attention for the improvement of the teaching and learning mechanism by introducing modern facilities and techniques of teaching and learning system.

10.4 Improvement plans Despite some of limitations, flaws, political unrest in the country the department continues its job for delivering quality education and comparatively not so much contribution to the research and development for societal and international benefits. The department struggles to be a reputed organization in national and international standard but sometimes it seems that the department suffers with lacking of some good plans for the improvement of the quality in education as well as in research. Accordingly the department might have some very specific plans for immediate next year/years that must be tried to follow up. Based on the findings, DURP perceives following areas of improvement will enhance its standard.

 Infrastructure development: As evident throughout the report, DURP is suffering from acute shortage of infrastructures and logistics. To be precise, lack of classrooms and modern classroom facilities, lack of studios and studio facilities, lack of computers and optical devices, lack of faculty members’ office rooms, inadequacy of up-to-date library resource of both online and offline character are constantly effecting its effective teaching and learning endeavors and environments, research pursuits and result dissemination. The university, UGC - on immediate basis - must have to act to meet these requirements so that DURP can overcome these difficulties at earliest. If such a shortage is allowed to be continued, it will adversely affect the quality of DURP faculties and graduates in comparison to it counterparts across Bangladesh.

 Professionalism: This particular feat is indeed necessary for every professional across professions. Moreover, components of professionalism keep changing from time to time. To adhere such principles, the faculties of DURP needs to receive “Training for Teachers” or ToT on regular basis. Currently, the key areas where there are rooms for improvement amongst faculties of DURP include knowledge on service regulations and necessity of compliance to it, setting-up of yardstick on minimum number of classes for both 3 credit hour and 2 credit hour courses, preparing course lecture outline and providing the same to the students at the beginning of a semester,

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 79

fund hunting for research projects beyond the university and UGC etc. DURP can consider deputing its faculties to GTI at Bangladesh Agricultural University (BAU) on regular basis for enhancing professional capabilities. Again, university’s active support in the form of implementer, financier and supervisor is the key in this regard.

 Curriculum development: As discussed in chapter 3, DURP actually - so far - has not embarked on evaluating the program syllabuses basing on that. In fact, the starting point of the present syllabuses rest with those developed by BUET and Khulna University’s URP department/discipline in 1998-1999. Generally, curriculum development is couched on reflecting the broader national vision, mission of educational development. Precisely, before embarking on regular syllabus evaluation, there is a need to do groundwork as well as concept paper by DURP on what vision and mission it would be following, what goals it ought to achieve through its offered programs, whether the necessity of the job markets/employers be reflected on the curriculum development or the other way round etc.

 Research: Worldwide tertiary education has long been re-oriented towards “research and teaching” from “teaching and research”. To be precise, doing research and disseminating the results helps to create new knowledge. Findings of the SA reveals that a number of faculties carry out research activities regularly based on university’s own funding as well as from UGC’s. However, when it comes to fund hunting and carrying out nationally significant research, the DURP faculties substantially lacks behind. Looking on the other side of the reality, in Bangladesh, research funding as well as research organizations devoted to urban and regional/rural planning is highly scarce. Moreover, for the market, it is still in a dilemma to differentiate between consultancy assignment and research endeavors. This has directly and indirectly affected the endeavors of research amongst faculties of URP across Bangladesh. DURP has been no exception to that. Nonetheless, the DURP should emphasize on doing research as part of professional development - specially, it should consider fund hunting from organizations of national and international flavor on regular basis for research purpose. Also, it should seek to develop opportunities for more and more dissemination of research findings alongside the existing ones.

 Synchronization: There is a need to synchronize the starting and ending points of semesters. In other words, the department needs to fixate a time frame for commencing first and second semesters for all the academic years of BURP and

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 80

MURP programs. This will relieve the faculties from the painful task of conducting across the year and devote more time on research and relevant academic activities. For instance, Khulna University has been successful in doing so - starting from 2016, all the academic years/batches from every department is commencing 1st semester on January 1st and 2nd semester on July 1st. However, to achieve such a university-wide common time frame, there is indeed a necessity of consensus on a broader scale beyond the DURP. The university needs to decide that the 1st year students’ enrollment will be complete by December and the classes for 1st semesters in all the batches across the university (similar to Khulna University) will commence on January 1st. This is quite a challenging task indeed however achievement of such will definitely result with the eradication of session jam and timely passing out of graduates.

 Student evaluation: Evaluation from students regarding the course/s taught and course tutor/s at the end of semester has been in practice worldwide for quite a long time. The DURP faculties who have had their advanced degrees from overseas or are on the process of pursuing are familiar with such practice. Ideologically and ideally such a practice is aimed at improving the courses content and teaching capacity of the faculties. DURP needs to actively consider introducing such practice. Again, university dynamics is pivotal in this connection. However, DURP needs to be vigilant with such a move as the experience from some Bangladeshi tertiary entities - where such is practiced - reveals that there is a tendency of manipulating the exercise by irregular, influential (!!), inattentive, poorly performing students. In public universities, there remains a strong possibility of flaring-up unwanted situations if such practice is introduced and - for any reason - being manipulated by any quarter. Hence, before introducing such a practice, the DURP needs to work-out the vigilance/supervisory mechanism/s in consort with university so that the optimum benefits can be fetched out it.

 Industry/organizational linkage: There is a need to develop fruitful linkage with organizations/industries that are relevant to urban and regional planning. Precisely, DURP should be actively in touch with such in order to create a platform for better and more placements of its graduates, research and development collaboration, knowledge development and dissemination. Moreover, having such networking will

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 81

definitely provide the department with superior edge in wider publicity, involvement in community activities and national exposure.

 Alumni involvement: DURP needs close and active alumni involvement for its strategic developments. Precisely, alumni can a reliable source for delving on market needs while evaluating the syllabuses. It can also be a platform for job placements for newly graduates, contributor for various infrastructural or logistical needs of the department, co-organizer of various events.

 Training for non-academic staffs: In consort with the university, DURP needs to introduce relevant training courses for its non-academic staffs. This will enhance the professional capabilities of the non-academic staffs that - per the report - needs heavy upheaval.

10.5 Conclusion Process management and continuous improvement seems to be good as the overall percentage scores obtained from the survey are on “strongly agree” or “agree” categories. From this survey process it was found that the department should ensure a standard practice of considering or channeling students and alumni’s feedback on its process management and continuous improvement.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 82

Chapter 11 SWOT Analysis

SWOT Analysis

Basing on the findings of the previous chapters, the current chapter has identified strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of DURP. Table 11.1 shows the key findings of SWOT analysis for the Department of URP, Jahangirnagar University.

Table 11.1: SWOT Analysis of DURP Strengths Opportunities

 Journal published regularly  With sufficient logistics & spaces, the  Departmental seminars every year program would excel more  More than half of the teachers are trained  Alumni and industry involvement in the in overseas and have PhD department’s development would lead to a  Fairness in admission policy, fairness & more practical improvement transparency of academic decision  Teaching and research capacities will  Optimum class size for interactive teaching improve with regular pedagogical training and learning of the department  Curriculum address the program objectives  Greater exposure to national and and learning outcomes, curriculum international level would enhance reviewed and updated regularly department’s research and  Proper documentation, maintenance and professional/consultancy capacity for participatory decision-making national interest

Weakness Threats

 Logistics limitation, space scarcity  Inconsistency between university’s overall  Non-involvement of alumni, employers in policies with department’s policy/interest the curricula and syllabus development  Budgetary allocation process of the  No pedagogical training university is not conducive for department’s  Nearly non-existing linkage with the regular development industry  Lack of compliance to the requirement  No departmental supervision over interns academic calendar from BURP 4th year

Strengths: The DURP regularly publishes a peer-reviewed journal and organizes departmental seminars. These are the major strengths of it. Moreover, more than half of the teachers are trained in overseas and have PhD from abroad. This provides knowledge and skills of the faculty members of international standards.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 83

The DURP ensures fairness in admission policy as well as fairness and transparency of academic decision. As mentioned in Section 4.4, the majority of all the stakeholders either agree of strongly agree that admission policy ensures fairness where individual student’s record are maintained and students’ progress are recorded and monitored. In section 2.5 it has also been discussed that except students, the majority of all other stakeholders mostly agree or strongly agree that there is fairness and transparency of academic decisions. Moreover, proper documentations are maintained and participatory decision-making is practiced in DURP; as highlighted in Section 2.2, majority of academics either agree or strongly agree in this regard. There is optimum class size in DURP to facilitate interactive teaching and learning, as mentioned in Fig 6.3 (refer to Section 6.2.3). Academics mentioned, as shown and discussed in Section 3.6 and Section 10.2 (Table 10.1), that curriculum of DURP addresses the program objectives and learning outcomes, and the curriculum is reviewed and updated regularly.

Weakness: The major weakness of DURP is limited logistics, particularly academic, administrative and logistical space scarcity and almost non-involvement of alumni, employers in the curricula and syllabus development. In section 5.1 it was discussed that there are poor physical facilities at DURP. For instance, almost 70 percent respondents of all stakeholders are undecided or disagree about laboratory facilities. Section 2.3 also showed that except for non-academic staffs, all the other stakeholders consider that there is inadequate infrastructure for achieving mission, vision and objectives of DURP. Moreover, alumni’s opinions reveal that governance issues is another weakness of DURP.

Other notable weaknesses of DURP are: no pedagogical training for teachers, nearly non- existing linkage with the relevant industries/organizations and no departmental supervision over student interns from BURP 4th year. For instance, in Table 9.2 in Section 9.5 it was shown that the majority of academics disagree or strongly disagree or remained undecided about the criteria “initiative of teachers to hunt research fund for smooth running of the research”.

Opportunities: The DURP possesses several opportunities. The major portion of academic and non-academic respondents agrees or strongly agrees (see Table 2.3 in Section 2.5) that the vision, mission and objectives are clearly stated and DURP satisfies the stated vision, mission and objectives. Academics mostly agree that the curricula is effective in achieving

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 84 program skills from day one whilst alumni disagree (as discussed in Section 3.6) - implying that there is a scope for improvement. As discussed in Section 4.3, progress reports (exam results) of students show a steady or continuous improvement over the year – better results in middle or final semesters than in the beginning. This crafts the scope to believe that there are opportunities for further improvement in the beginning of the program.

With sufficient logistics and enough spaces, the program would excel further. Though there is limited physical infrastructure or logistics, modern devices are used in DURP to improve teaching learning (refer to table 6.1 and table 6.2 in Section 6.2.3). Though a major portion of students and alumni disagree or strongly disagree or are undecided about ‘conducive learning environment’ (Table 2.3 in Section 2.5), there is a scope to improve by using modern devices and participatory techniques. Effective involvement of alumni and industry would lead the department’s development to a more practical improvement. Therefore, ensuring usual practice by DURP for students or alumni feedback as a culture would be needed; as Table 10.1 (in Section 10.2) showed the majority are not satisfied with current practice.

Regular pedagogical training at the department may help to improve teaching and research capacities of the faculties. Greater exposure to national and international level would enhance department’s research and professional capacity for national interest.

Threats: The existing major threats of DURP are mainly non-synchronization between university’s and department’s overall policies or interest. Moreover, budgetary allocation process of the university is not conducive for meeting department’s regular development needs. Even the students and alumni mentioned ‘curriculum load is high’ (refer to Section 3.6) might be a threat to achieve conducive learning and teaching environment of DURP.

Besides the above mentioned threats, not having an academic calendar. This is indeed a threat to accomplish semesters on time. In section 2.5 it was revealed (refer to Table 2.3) that the majority of the students and alumni have either disagreed or strongly disagreed on the question that whether DURP maintains an academic calendar.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 85

Chapter 12 Conclusion, Recommendation and Strategic Improvement Plan

12.1 Conclusion Quality assurance is becoming a global practice in higher education. Global universities or institutes are now working and setting up various standards for a realistic measurement to achieve quality education. In the line of quality education measurement, self-assessment process is such an initiative made by the Government of Bangladesh and World Bank through University Grants Commission under Institutional Quality Assurance Cell in each university funded by Higher Education Quality Enhancement Project that has provided the current status by giving scores in different aspects of the department of Urban and Regional Planning Program. The categories and assessed scores are explained below.

The assessments in nine categories were to provide score based interpretations for the concerns relevant to academics, students, non-academics staffs, alumni and employers along with regular activities and existing facilities of the department. Of those nine categories or areas of intervention infrastructure and physical facilities, research and extension and student support services are not solely dependent on the department. Higher authorities of the university act as the major players in this regard. Departments are rather dependent on the university for financial and policy supports. Perhaps such a dependency scenario is not well known to students, alumni and thus their overall opinions on these emerged to be low in rating categories.

It is probably not possible to derive at a grand percentage score or a single line result that would best interpret the findings. However, at this point it would not erroneous to state that DURP does have fairly noticeable or satisfactory status on governance; curriculum design and review (to be read syllabus and ordinance review); teaching and learning; learning assessment; student admission; progress and achievement; process management and continuous improvement. However, such does not necessarily imply that DURP is at its best or has been successful to establish itself as a center of excellence. Rather, there are substantial rooms for further improvement - either in the short run or long run. Nonetheless, DURP must strive for achieving fineness in the country as well as in the international arena.

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 86

12.2 Recommendation The DURP SAC perceives that basing on the improvement plan placed on chapter 10 and the SWOT analysis on chapter 11, there is a need to develop and implement a strategic development plan to have the intended improvements in place or in reality. In light of this understanding, the following strategic plan with action strategies are prescribed.

12.3 Strategic plan for further improvement of the institution Under this section, the improvement areas and action strategies are presented below:

12.3.1 Excellence in Teaching/Education Action Strategies:  Training on Pedagogy  Development of a regular communication plan with concerned stakeholders  Yearly action plan  Development of detailed curricula in light of national development vision, mission and goals  Curricula development, skill mapping and feedback through seminar on continuous basis  Developing collaborative linkage with globally acclaimed institution for curriculum development, reasoning and justification  Developing academic exchange programs through national and international collaborations

12.3.2 Research and Scholarly Activities Action Strategies:  Providing support to faculty for research grant hunting and securing  Encouraging research group formation amongst the faculties and supporting such in the dissemination of research work by organizing seminars, symposiums and workshops.  Introducing award for research achievements, publications in the top ranked journal(s)  Creating provision for awarding students with the best dissertations both at BURP and MURP program  Continuing need based and merit based scholarships/awards

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 87

12.3.3 Service for Students and Faculty Action Strategies:  Improvement of Internet facilities and access to journal and electronic resources  Providing laptops/desktop computers, printers to individual faculty  Enhancing student counseling for the academically and socially challenged  Provisioning realistic funds for faculties to attend national and international seminar/conference  Facilitation for extra and co-curricular activities

12.3.4 Physical Facilities Improvement Action Strategies:  Establishment of three more design studios  Making provisions for at least two furnished class-rooms  Expanding the number of teachers’ room to 25.  Expanding the existing seminar library with up-to-date resources e.g. books, journals, web based resources  Establishment of remote sensing Lab with new computers, modeling and simulation software, plotters, printers etc.  Upgrading the GIS facilities with new computers, software, plotters, printers etc.  Making space provisions for support services i.e. storerooms, survey equipment rooms etc.

12.3.5 Community Engagement Action Strategies:  Developing and implementing a strategic plan for job placements of the BURP and MURP graduates  Developing policy for encouraging the faculties and students to conduct community- based projects  Establishment of long-term partnership and collaboration with relevant organizations

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 88

References

Deubel, P. (2003) An investigation of behavior and cognitive approaches to instructional multimedia design. Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(1), 63-90.

Sweller, J., van Merrier, J. and Pass, F. (1998) Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-196.

MoE, UGC, HEQEP and QAU, (2014) Self-Assessment Manual, Natundhara Printing Press, Dhaka, 63p.

UN Online Network in Public Administration and Finance, 2003. p. 11.http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN018224. pdf, Retrieved on 2016-05-24.

Saleheen, M. (2012) Jahangirnagar University in Islam, S., Jamal, A. A., Banglapedia: National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh (Second ed.). Asiatic Society of Bangladesh. http://www.juniv.edu/administration?roleType=VICE_CHANCELLOR&roleName=Vice%2 0Chancellor – retrieved on 12/10/2017.

Loacker, G. (2004a) Taking Self-Assessment Seriously. Essays on Teaching ExcellenceToward the Best in the Academy. 15 (2).

SA Report, Department of URP, JU 89