Self Assessment Report Department of Chemistry Jahangirnagar University

University Grants Commission of Bangladesh Higher Education Quality Enhancement Project (HEQEP) QAU-IQAC

Submitted by Professor Dr. Md. Manzurul Karim Head, Self Assessment Committee

Professor Dr. Mahbub Kabir Member, Self Assessment Committee

Professor Dr. Koushik Saha Member, Self Assessment Committee

Submited to Professor Dr. Ajit Kumar Majumder Director IQAC Jahangirnagar Univeristy

Self Assessment Report

Department of Chemistry Jahangirnagar University Savar, Dhaka

Self Assessment Report Department of Chemistry Jahangirnagar University

University Grants Commission of Bangladesh

Higher Education Quality Enhancement Project (HEQEP)

QAU-IQAC

Submitted by

Professor Dr. Md. Manzurul Karim Head, Self Assessment Committee

Professor Dr. Mahbub Kabir Member, Self Assessment Committee

Professor Dr. Koushik Saha Member, Self Assessment Committee

Submited to Professor Dr. Ajit Kumar Majumder Director IQAC Jahangirnagar Univeristy

Acknowledgement

The implementation of Higher Education Quality Enhancement Project (HEQEP) in the Department of Chemistry, Jahangirnagar University has provided the department with an opportunity to assess its own ‘self-assessment system’ and to study its impact on teaching, learning, graduate employment and effective management.

It is a great pleasure and privilege for us to convey our heartiest greetings and gratitude to the authority of Jahangirnagar University and the University Grants Commission of Bangladesh (UGC) for granting funds to run the project named “Self Assessment Report, Department of Chemistry, JU” under Higher Education Quality Enhancement Project (HEQEP).

We wish to convey our sincere gratitude to all who participated in the surveys and interviews. The candid responses of diverse stakeholders added immence value to the present research and survey. It also ensured the reflection of real situation at the department as well as the university.

Appreciations are also extended to Prof. Dr Mahbub Kabir and Prof Dr. Koushik Saha of the department who did all the survey works sincerely related to this report and analyzed the data for preparing this report.

Our long standing thanks are due to Professor Dr. Ajit Kumar Majumder, Director IQAC for his continuous encouragement and suggestions for preparing this report. We also gratefully acknowledge the encouragement and help received from all the fellows, faculty members, teachers, students and alumni of the department.

Finally we would like to thank Mr. Mohmmad Abul Hossain and Mr. Md. Abu Sayed for their help regarding keeping the financial records and excellent publication of this typed written report.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents Page No. List of Table IV List of Figure VIII Abbreviations and Acronyms IX Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Significance of Program Self-Assessment 1 1.2 Process of Assessment 3 1.3 Overview of the University 4 1.4 Overview of the Program Offering Entity 6 1.5 Objectives and Learning Outcomes of the Program 7 1.6 Brief Summary of the Program(s) under Review 8 Chapter 2: Governance: Organization & Management 2.1 Program Management 10 2.2 Academic Documentation 18 2.3 Peer Observation and Feedback Process 19 2.4 Internal Quality Assurance Process 20 Chapter 3: Curriculum Design and Review 3.1 Need Assessment 22 3.2 Curriculum Design 22 3.3 Curriculum Alignment/Skill Mapping 32 3.4 Curriculum Review Process 33 3.5 Gaps in Curriculum : Adequacy to Meet the Needs 35 Chapter 4: Students Admission, Progress and Achievements 4.1 Entry Qualifications 36 4.2 Admission Procedure 37 4.3 Progress and Achievement 39 Chapter 5: Physical Facilities 5.1 Classroom Facilities 44 5.2 Library Facilities 45 5.3 Laboratory and Field Laboratories 46 5.4 Medical Facilities 48 5.5 Other Facilities 49

I

Chapter 6: Teaching, Learning and Learning Assessment 6.1 Quality Staff 51 6.2 Teaching Learning Methods 51 6.3 Use of Lesson Plan 54 6.4 Technology Integration 55 6.5 Assessment of Student Performance 58 Chapter 7: Student Support Services 7.1 Academic Guidance and Counseling 61 7.2 Co-curricular and Extra-curricular Activities 62 7.3 Career & Placement 64 7.4 Alumni Services 65 7.5 Community Services 67 Chapter 8: Staff and Facilities 8.1 Recruitment 73 8.2 Staff Development 74 8.3 Peer Observation 76 8.4 Career Development 76 8.5 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) 77 Chapter 9: Research & Extension 9.1 Policy and Program 79 9.2 Fund and Facilities 80 9.3 Fund Hunting/Collection 81 9.4 Dissemination of Research Findings 81 Chapter 10: Process Process Management and Continuous Improvement 10.1 Self-Assessment 83 10.2 Improvement Plan 84 10.3 Stakeholders Feedback 85 10.4 Use of Peer Observation Results 86 10.5 Regular updating of Program Objectives and ILOs 86 Chapter 11: Stakeholders/Employers 11.1 Nature of the Stakeholders 87 11.2 Different terms of Knowledge of Graduates 87 11.3 Different Guality of Graduates with Communication Skills for Stakeholders 89 11.4 Dimension of Quality of Graduates with Interpersonal Skills for Stakeholders 91

II

11.5 Dimensions of Quality Graduates with Work Skills for Employer 92 Chapter 12: SWOT Analysis 12.1 Strengths 94 12.2 Weaknesses 94 12.3 Opportunities 95 12.4 Threats 96 Chapter 13: Conclusion and Recommendation 13.1 Conclusion 97 13.2 Recommendation 102

III

List of Table

Table 1.1 Pattern of stakeholders 3 Table 1.2 Faculty members of Jahangirnagar University 5 Table 1.3 Data on academic staffs and students 9 Table 2.1 Weekly class loads of the teachers 11 Table 2.2 Statement of vision, mission and objectives of the entity 13 Table 2.3 Satisfaction of vision, mission and objectives by ILOs 13 Table 2.4 Adequacy of infrastructure for satisfying mission and objectives 14 Table 2.5 Disciplinary rules and regulations 15 Table 2.6 Timely publication of results according to ordinance 15 Table 2.7 Distribution of brochure/handbook to the students for comprehensive 16 Table 2.8 Review of policy and procedure for further improvement 17 Table 2.9 Communication of code of conduct for students and employees 17 Table 2.10 Maintenance of academic calendar 18 Table 2.11 Proper updatation of website 19 Table 2.12 Treatment of students’ opinion 20 Table 2.13 Fairness and transparency in academic decision making 21 Table 3.1 Consistent arrangement of courses in the curriculum from lower to 31 higher levels Table 3.2 Optimal curriculum load 31 Table 3.3 Statement of teaching strategies in the curriculum 32 Table 3.4 Statement of assessment strategies in the curriculum 33 Table 3.5 Curriculum addresses the program objectives and program learning 33 Table 3.6 Reviewed and updated of curriculum in compliance with the rules of 34 the universities Table 3.7 Consideration of stakeholders’ opinion during review of the 34 curriculum Table 3.8 Effectiveness of curriculum in achieving day-one skill at job place 35 Table 4.1 Entry of quality students 37 Table 4.2 Fairness of admission procedure 38 Table 4.3 Progress of students during last three years 40 Table 4.4 Commitment of the students to ensure desired progress and 40 achievement

IV

Table 4.5 Recording and monitoring of student progress 41 Table 4.6 Feedback of the teachers to the students about their progress 42 Table 4.7 Maintenance of individual student’s records 43 Table 5.1 Suitability of classroom facilities 44 Table 5.2 Availability of library facilities 46 Table 5.3 Availability of laboratory facilities 47 Table 5.4 Adequate facilities for conducting research 48 Table 5.5 Availability of medical facilities 48 Table 5.6 Adequate sports facilities 49 Table 5.7 Existing gymnasium facilities 50 Table 5.8 Availability of internet facilities with sufficient speed 50 Table 6.1 Interactive and supportive teaching-learning 52 Table 6.2 Optimal class size for interactive teaching-learning 53 Table 6.3 Assessment strategies 53 Table 6.4 Lesson plans are provided to the students in advance 54

Table 6.5 Use of modern devices to improve teaching-learning process 55

Table 6.6 Use of diverse methods for assessment 56

Table 6.7 Adequate opportunities for practical exercises 56

Table 6.8 Teaching-learning process encompasses co-curricular activities to 57 enrich students’ personal development

Table 6.9 Practice of diverse methods to achieve learning objectives 57

Table 6.10 Assessment procedures meet the objectives of the course 58

Table 6.11 Providing feedback to the students immediately after assessment 59

Table 6.12 Review of the assessment systems at regular intervals 59

Table 6.13 Maintenance of fairness and transparency in assessment system 60

Table 6.14 Duly communication of assessment systems to students at the outset 60 of the academic year

Table 7.1 Arrangement of academic guidance and counseling 62 Table 7.2 Distribution of co-curricular and extra-curricular exposures to the 64 students Table 7.3 Availability of financial grants to the students 65 V

Table 7.4 Organized and supportive alumni association 66 Table 7.5 Collection of alumni feedback to update the learning outcomes of the 66 program Table 7.6 Involvement of opportunities with community services 67 Table 8.1 Good recruitment policy and practices for recruitment of competent 74 academic and non-academic staff Table 8.2 Attractive salary and incentives to retain the Academic and Non- 74 academic staff

Table 8.3 Congenial atmosphere prevails to enhance professional knowledge 75 through research and higher studies Table 8.4 Opportunities of academics to take part in different seminar/ 75 workshop/training programs for skill development Table 8.5 Opportunities of non-academic staff to take part in different training 75 programs for skill development

Table 8.6 Policy of entity to provide mentoring/continuous guidance for new 76 academic staff

Table 8.7 Practice of seminars and workshops by the entity to share knowledge 77 and experience among the faculty members

Table 8.8 Performance of award policy of the entity to inspire academic staff 77

Table 8.9 Criteria for promotion/up-gradation 78

Table 9.1 A well-defined research and development policy of the entity 79 Table 9.2 Existence of mechanism for engaging the students in research and 80 development Table 9.3 Initiatives of teachers to hunt research fund for smooth running of the 81 research Table 9.4 Community service policy of entity 82 Table 10.1 Review of academic programs by the entity for the enhancement of 84 students’ learning Table 10.2 The action of entity in compliance with the decision of the university 85 regarding continuous quality improvement Table 10.3 Embracement of the spirit by the entity for continual quality 85 improvement

VI

Table 10.4 Ensuring a usual practice by the entity for students or alumni’s 86 feedback as a culture Table 11.1 Types of employers 87 Table 11.2 Required knowledge of quality of graduates and competence of 88 graduates Table 11.3 Importance of communication skills for recruitment and competence 89 of graduates based on their performance Table 11.4 Importance of interpersonal skills for recruitment and competence of 91 graduates based on their performance Table 11.5 Importance of work skills for recruitment and competence of 92 graduates based on their performance

List of Figure

Fig. 3.1 Pi-chart of consideration of stakeholder’s opinion during review of 34 the curriculum. Fig. 4.1 Bar chart about fairness of admission procedure (student opinion). 39 Fig. 4.2 Bar chart about recording and monitoring of students progress 42 (students opinion). Fig. 4.3 Pie-Chart about maintenance of individual student’s records (student 43 opinion). Fig. 11.1 Pie chart of nature of the organization. 87 Fig. 11.2 Bar chart of required knowledge of quality of graduates and 88 competence of graduates. Fig. 11.3 Bar chart of communication skills for recruitment and competence of 90 graduates based on their performance. Fig. 11.4 : Bar chart of interpersonal skills for recruitment and competence of 91 graduates based on their performance. Fig. 11.5 Bar chart of work skills for recruitment and competence of graduates 93 based on their performance.

VII

Abbreviations and Acronyms

ACO Academic Committee AY Academic Year BSc Bachalor of Science CP Credit Point GPA Grade Point Average HEQEP Higher Education Quality Enhancement Project HSC Higher Secondary Certificate ILO Intended Learning Outcomes IP Improvement Plan IQAC Internal Quality Assurance Cell KPI Key Performance Indicators MCQ Multiple Choice Questions MS Master of Science OMR Optical Machine Readable PhD Doctor of Philosophy PSAC Program Self-Assessment Committee QA Quality Assurance QAA Quality Assurance and Accreditation QAU Quality Assurance Unit SA Self-Assessment SAC Self-Assessment Committee SAR Self-Assessment Report SSC Secondary School Certificate TEO Tertiary Education Organization TSC Teacher-Students Centre UGC University Grants Commission ICT Information and Communications Technology

VIII

1

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction

1.1 Significance of Program Self-Assessment

Self-assessment is arguably the most powerful means of a tertiary education organization (TEO) to understand and improve its educational performance. Self-assessment is a systematic process of evaluating the various aspects of academic programs including the major QA areas in respect of national qualifications framework and criteria. For the purpose of further improvement, SA collects information and evidences from the stakeholders, reviews those and identifies the weaknesses and the areas which need further improvement to enhance quality of teaching, learning and education. Self-assessment does not mean that the evidences of quality education are not available. It is directed towards coherent and clearly articulated goals to inform decision- making and operational practices. It also provides direction to continuous improvement through gradual internalization of the standards and good practices.

TEOs generate and gather a large amount of data. Analyzing and making sense of this data enables better decision-making. Good self-assessment is only possible when a range of people in the organization are involved, e.g. teachers, non-teaching staffs, students and other stakeholders such as employers. Self-assessment enables a tertiary education organization to find out:  what outcomes learners are achieving and how well  the value of the outcomes to stakeholders including learners  the effectiveness of processes in contributing to these outcomes

By identifying strengths and weaknesses, a TEO can develop and implement an improvement strategy resulting in actual and worthwhile improvements.

The situation of higher education in Bangladesh is very despondent. Bangladesh is not producing good human resources for its society. Now-a-days self-assessment becomes a very important exercise to the academic institutions for continuous improvement and quality assurance in education. It refers to a comprehensive and systematic process of collecting and analyzing information from major stakeholders on the QA areas and related aspects of the 2

educational institution. The SA process allows the organization 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. Self-assessment provides a direction and guidelines to prepare comprehensive improvement plan, addressing the issues critical to quality assurance. The understanding and practice of self- assessment promotes developmental processes. 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.

The general objective of the self-assessment is to improve the quality of education addressing the needs of the major stakeholders and national relevance. The specific objectives of self- assessment exercise are to:

Identify learning needs: Employability of the graduates and ability to contribute to organizations and national development are very critical to ensure quality in education. Education is all about gaining a set of skills to match with the requirements for employment, career development, lifelong learning and socioeconomic development as well. As such, it is very important to understand what the students need to learn to develop the required skills.

Assess the teaching learning capacity of the institution: Teaching-learning is the core of all academic institutions. It is very important to assess the capacity of teaching-learning to attain the learning objectives.

Review the existing procedures: To provide quality education in respect of changing needs of the society, it is important to measure the effectiveness of existing procedures and provisions in practice in the university.

Identify the improvement areas: Quality in education is the outcome of a comprehensive process composed of several distinctive but interrelated elements. All the elements or component of the process must be up to the mark to meet the quality standard. Self-assessment is to identify the areas of the process or individual practitioners, which need reinforcement and further improvement to enhance the capacity of the institutions or individuals to make the total system effective to provide and maintain quality in education.  Create a basis for external assessment and validation  Provide guidelines or direction to the program offering entity or to the university for strategic planning.

3

1.2 Process of Assessment Receiving the written directives from the director of IQAC, the chairman of the department of chemistry arranged a meeting inviting the faculty members of the entity to constitute a program self-assessment committee. In the meeting, the entity constituted the program self-assessment committee (PSAC) by interested, experienced and qualified faculty as per the provisions stated in IQAC operations manual. The Chairman of the entity sent the PSAC to the director, IQAC in writing for further necessary actions.

The director of the IQAC placed the PSACs received from the entity for approval of the vice chancellor and informs the head of the SAC. According to the activity plan, the head of the PSAC, in consultation with the chairman of the entity, organized an awareness building workshop on “Team Building Workshop on Self-Assessment”. This workshop is for clear understanding about the SA process and team building.

The faculty members along with the SA committee carefully reviewed the survey tools (questionnaire) for major stakeholders i.e., students, alumni, employers, academic staffs, non- academic staffs following the self-assessment criteria and standard.

The PSAC selected 57 students from the 1st year, 88 students from 2nd year, 67 students from 3rd year, 62 students from 4th year BSc degree and 37 students from MS degree. No statistical methods were used for selecting sample size for the purpose of data collection. The following table represents the number of respondents from five categories of stakeholders:

Table 1.1 Pattern of stakeholders Stakeholders No. of Respondents Academic staff 20 Non-academic staff 07 Alumni 31 Student 311 Employer 15

The self-assessment committee managed the overall survey administration, data entry, analysis and report writing. Data analysis has been conducted by using statistical software such as IBM SPSS Statistics 22. 4

1.3 Overview of the University

Jahangirnagar University is a residential public university of Bangladesh. In the 1960s the Government of Pakistan had a decision to establish a residential university in East Pakistan in the same nature to that of the one built in Islamabad. To ease the student pressure of the University of Dhaka, the Education Department of the government of East Pakistan framed a plan in June 1964 to establish a residential university near Dhaka. In June 1965 the Executive Board of the National Economic Council approved the plan. On the basis of this plan, a place called Salna in Gazipur district was first earmarked and the foundation stone was laid by Field Marshall Ayub Khan, the then President of Pakistan. Due to some administrative difficulties, this site was abandoned and the present site of Savar was chosen, and accordingly 750 acres of land had been allotted for the university and the land was taken away from the Government Dairy Farm, east of the present campus in 1967. Later on about 50 acres of the University land was taken away by the Government for Public Administration Training Center. The university project started its implementation in April 1968 as Jahangirnagar Muslim University and Professor Surat Ali Khan was made the first Project Director.

Jahangirnagar University was formally launched on 12 January 1970 under the Jahangirnagar Muslim University Ordinance, 1970 and this day is observed as University Day. 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. It operated as a project until 1973, when the ‘Jahangirnagar Muslim University Act’ was amended as the ‘Jahangirnagar University Act’. But after the independence of Bangladesh, its name changed as Jahangirnagar University under the act of Jahangirnagar University Act 1973. On 20 August 1970, an ordinance was promulgated to start the academic programs of the university. Professor Mofizuddin Ahmed, the then member of the Central Public Service Commission of Pakistan and former Professor of Chemistry, University of Dhaka, was appointed as the first Vice-Chancellor. He joined as Vice-Chancellor on 24 September 1970. The earlier aim was to establish this university as a science oriented university. For the purpose five faculties, namely, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Faculty of Social Sciences, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Basic Sciences, Faculty of Applied Sciences were earmarked. However, the university was started later with 4 honours departments called viz Economics, Geography, Statistics and Mathematics. The university started with 21 teachers in these departments. The first group of students, a total of 150, was enrolled in four Honors departments. The initial class was held on 4 January 1971. Its formal inauguration was delayed until 12 January 1971, when the university was formally launched by Rear Admiral S M 5

Ahsan, the then Governor of East Pakistan and the Chancellor of the University. The university started in full swing when Professor Syed Ali Ahsan joined as the second Vice-Chancellor in 2 February 1972. The main purpose of the University is promoting research in different fields as well as preparing the students to meet the challenges of future day.

The university has 16,781 students, 699 teachers, and 1,430 other employees. At present there are 34 departments under six faculties: Mathematical and Physical Science, Biological Science, Social Science, Arts and Humanities, Business Studies and Law & Justice and three institutes: Institute of Business Administration, Institute of Information Technology & Institute of Bangabondhu Comparative Literature and Cultural Study. Faculty members of Jahangirnagar University includes.

Table 1.2 Faculty members of Jahangirnagar University Faculty No. of Faculty members Mathematical and Physical Science 184 Biological Science 137 Social Science 135 Arts and Humanities 164 Business Studies 36 Law & Justice 8 Institute of Business Administration (IBA) 22 Institute of information Technology (IIT) 12 Institute of Bangabondhu Comparative 1 Literature and Cultural Study Total 699

An institute for advanced research and training of the university, namely Wazed Miah Science Research Center also situated in the campus.

Presently the enrollment range of Jahangirnagar University is 2,500-3,000 students per year based on entrance examinations and students past academic record and grades. The University (JU) offers courses and programs leading to officially recognized higher education degrees such as pre-bachelor degrees (i.e. certificates, diplomas, associate or foundation degrees), bachelor degrees, master degrees as well as master of philosophy and doctorate degrees in several areas of study. The university also trains up a large number of researchers in different disciplines. 6

With sixteen residential halls, Jahangirnagar University is mandated to provide residential accommodation to every student with separate halls for the female students. JU also provides several academic and non-academic facilities and services to students including a library, sport facilities and/or activities, financial aids and/or scholarships, study abroad and exchange programs as well as administrative services.

The central library of the university has a collection of over 100,000 titles. Online journal browsing and photo copying facilities are also available in the central library of the university. The university has a beautiful central mosque, a temple, a large gymnasium, a swimming pool, and a central cafeteria. The university also has its own medical centre. Adequate bus services between the campus and dhaka city are also provided by the university’s own transports. A 71 feet tall central shaheed minar, by far the tallest in the country, in front of the new arts building is one of the main attractions of the university.

There is an open-air amphitheater; the very first one in the country, inside the campus is the main venue for the socio-cultural programs. A teacher-students centre (TSC) is also established for various club activities for teachers and students. There are two famous statues, known as Samsaptak, in front of the central library and Amar Ekushe in front of the social sciences building. The natural beauty of jahangirnagar university is always attractive for everyone who enters the campus.

1.3.1 Mission and Objectives of the University The university runs according to 1973 act and ordinances along with administrative order of necessary but has no structured operational policy. The mission and objectives of the university are not set properly. Well-structured and deeply thought mission and objectives are needed to run the programs efficiently. However, the entity (Department) has well-structured mission and objectives.

1.4 Overview of the Program Offering Entity

The department of chemistry was established in 1971 with Prof. M. Mahbubul Huqe as head of the department; its academic session started functioning in 1972 just after the war of liberation. Over the last 43 years, this department has gradually emerged as a major seat of teaching, learning and research in the country. The department of chemistry now offers courses in 7

inorganic, organic, physical, environmental and analytical chemistry for BSc (Hons), MS, MPhil and PhD degrees to students. At present there are 35 teachers in the department of which 26 have their PhDs. Around 350 students are pursuing their under graduate and post-graduate studies in the department. The research activities in the department are being carried out in all the sections namely inorganic, organic, physical and environmental chemistry.

The inorganic section is devoted to research in the broad field of organometallic, cluster, coordination and liquid crystal chemistry. The country’s first transition metal organometallic research group was organized by late Prof. Dr. Syed Safiullah. The group has done commendable research on synthesis and structural determination of organometallic compounds, reactions of the coordinated ligands, trapping of transient organic species by metal coordination and first row transition metal cluster with recognition behaviour. His group was also engaged in synthesis of some titanium compounds having anticancer activities and environmental research.

The organic section of the department is now carrying out research on natural products (the group was initiated by retired Prof. Dr. Mesbah Uddin Ahmad), photochemistry, polymer chemistry, organic synthesis, sonochemistry, synthesis of heterocyclic compounds with emphasis on anticancer activity and synthesis of biologically active organic compounds.

The Physical Chemistry group is carrying out research on chemical kinetics, physio-chemical studies of metal drug interactions, solid phase extraction of metal, metal speciation, photochemistry, ion-solvent interaction and metal drug absorption on biopolymer.

In addition the department is carrying out significant research over the last 30 years on environmental issues.

1.5 Objectives and Learning Outcomes of the Program Vision of the Department of Chemistry

The department of chemistry prepares students for employment, higher study and research as well as highly capable individuals in the society to ultimately shoulder the challenges of science for a diverse and changing world. We strive to contribute to a chemically literate society through quality teaching (with classrooms, labs and research), scholarship and service.

8

Mission of the Department of Chemistry The department of chemistry provides rigorous preparation to students whose career paths require expertise in chemistry. We provide exceptional opportunities for students to learn chemistry through classroom, laboratory and research experiences. Students participating in our program will master content and develop critical thinking and communication skills that will prepare them for professional careers as scientists, educators and scientifically literate human resources. The faculties in the department of chemistry see themselves as resources for our program, university, region, nation and world.

The Program Objectives of the Department of Chemistry

The degrees [BSc (Hons), MS, M Phil & PhD] conferred on students who will be able to:

1. Exhibit knowledge and grasp basic in the field of study accrued from program materials. 2. Apply knowledge and understanding for professional purposes. 3. Identify, analyze and solve practical problems in chemistry. 4. Develop and demonstrate values and attitudes leading to professionalism. 5. Demonstrate relevant techniques and abilities to address and solve social and ethical issues. 6. Demonstrate in-depth knowledge from traditional and emerging areas of chemistry. 7. Demonstrate effective critical thinking skills in chemistry. 8. Show sense of responsibility to make contribution to society. 9. Communicate scientific ideas and information properly in written and oral forms. 10. Apply teamwork and leadership skills for efficient performance. 11. Be enthusiastic to lifelong and independent learning. 12. Pose decision making, creative and innovative skills.

1.6 Brief Summary of the Program(s) Under Review

The momentum of research activity of this department can very well be judged from the number of research publications till date. A total of about 1000 papers have been published during this time by the researchers of this department in national and international journals. The teachers of the department received several grants from the ministry of science and technology. A good number of members of the academic staff of the department have been recognized nationally and internationally for their diligence and creativity in research work.

The department has defined mission and vision and graduate profile. Our graduates are contributing significantly in their field both at home and abroad. 9

Table 1.3 Data on academic staffs and students Sl.No. Items Unit/Quantity 1 First year enrollment (2016-17) 84 2 HSC GPA score of enrolled students (2016-17) 4.5-5.0 3 First year retention rate (2016-17) 90% 4 Average first year retention rate (recent 5 years) 90% 5 Average transfer rate (recent 5 years) 10% 6 Total number of students at present 350 7 Average pass rate in first year courses (recent 5 years) 90% 8 Total enrollment in MS 100% 9 Total enrollment in PhD (2016-17) 11 10 Total number of full time academic staff 35 11 Total number of full time academic staff with PhD 26 12 Academic staffs on study leave for PhD in home and abroad 4 13 Number of graduates passed (average of recent 5 years) 60 14 MS degree awarded (average of recent 5 years) 60 15 PhD degree awarded (average of recent 5 years) 3 16 Total number & amount of external (other than GoB) funded research - projects 17 Total number & amount of (GoB) funded research projects 70 lac 18 Number of theses/research monographs (recent) 33 19 Teacher-student ratio 1:10

10

CHAPTER TWO

Governance: Organization & Management

Governance at university encompasses the organizational structures, legislative framework and processes through which policies and programs are developed, managed and delivered. Governance facilitates the achievement of the stated mission and objectives of the university. The central administration and statutory bodies like the Vice Chancellor, Senate, Syndicate and Academic Council are the powerful actors in university’s governance system. This criterion describes the use of mission, goals and objectives of the university, first. Second, it explains the overall objectives used for different areas such as teaching & learning, research and development, academic administration and so on. Finally, the criterion describes the role of stakeholders in curriculum management, means of achieving objectives and the role of university, faculty and department in the degree program management.

2.1 Program Management

A program is a group of related projects managed in a coordinated manner to obtain benefits not available from managing them individually. Program management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools and techniques to meet program requirements.

Good governance and quality assurance depend on the integrated approach of management by the statutory bodies and individual units of the university. The department is made of few academic staffs to perform activities of teaching, learning and research. The most important activities of quality indicators generally refer to the quality of teaching, learning and research. Generally all these academic activities take place at the program management level. The chairman of the department executes departmental academic and essential needs of the department. Governance is the key activity that connects among the management, staff, students and the community. We believe it should be effective, efficient and economical in execution of its duties. We support modern governance and proper administration and believe these should be carried out in a way that actively acknowledges the diversity and identity. Normally academic year starts in July of every year before which department circulates the academic calendar which includes details such as reopening date, last day of working, block dates for practical/theory examinations etc. On receipt of the academic calendar, a separate examination committee is formed to prepare different schedule like tutorial, assignment, field work, excursion, last date for 11

completion of the lectures and practical, and year final examination. There are 35 and 60 class hours (50 minutes each) in an academic year for each theory subjects of 0.50 and 1.00 unit, respectively and at least 54 and 105 laboratory periods in an academic year for each practical subjects of 0.5 and 1.0 unit, respectively.

The Table 2.1 is prepared for the weekly class loads of the teachers along with their designations and qualifications for the department of chemistry.

Table 2.1 Weekly Class Loads of the Teachers SN Name and qualification Designation Class taken* Total Theory Practical 1 Dr. Shariff Enamul Kabir Professor 2 2 4 MSc (JU) PhD (London), C Chem FRSC 2 Dr. Md. Elias Molla Professor 3 2 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar), DPhil (Sussex) 3 Dr. Md. Manzurul Karim Professor 3 2 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (London) 4 Dr. Md. Nurul Abser Professor 3 3 6 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (UK) 5 Dr. Mahbub Kabir Professor 3 2 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Cambridge) 6 Dr. Md. Enamullah Professor - - - MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Austria) [On leave] 7 Dr. Md. Arzu Miah Professor 3 2 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Vienna) 8 Dr. Nurunnahar Professor 3 2 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) 9 Dr. D. M. Shafiqul Islam Professor 3 2 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) 10 Dr. Tapan Kumar Saha Professor 3 2 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) 11 Dr. Khurshida Khayer, MSc (JU), Professor 2 2 4 MPhil (St. Andrews, UK), PhD (Germany) 12 Dr. Koushik Saha Professor 4 2 6 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Malaysia) 13 Dr. Md. Abdullah Khan Professor 4 2 6 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan)

12

14 Dr. Mohammad Mamun Hossain Professor 4 2 6 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) 15 Dr. Md. Ataur Rahman Professor 5 2 7 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) 16 Dr. Subarna Karmaker Professor 3 2 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) 17 Dr. Md. Anamul Hoque Professor 3 3 6 MSc & PhD (Jahangirnagar) 18 Dr. Md. Minarul Islam Professor 3 2 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Taiwan) 19 Dr. Tahmina Haque Associate 3 2 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar) PhD (Japan) Professor 20 Dr. Shishir Ghosh Associate 3 3 6 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (England) Professor 21 Dr. S M Tareque Abedin Associate 3 3 6 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Canada) Professor 22 Dr. Nasrin Jewena Associate 2 3 5 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) Professor 23 Dr. Shahed Rana Associate 4 3 7 MS (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) Professor 24 Dr. Md. Awlad Hossain Associate 3 3 6 MS (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) Professor 25 Mr. Md. Abdus Sabur Assistant - - - MS (Jahangirnagar) [On leave] Professor 26 Dr. Md. Kamal Hossain Assistant 3 3 6 MSc (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) Professor 27 Dr. Mir Tamzid Rahman Assistant 5 3 8 MS (Jahangirnagar), PhD (Japan) Professor 28 Mr. Subus Rajbongshi Assistant - - - MS (Jahangirnagar), [On leave] Professor 29 Mr. Md. Aminur Rahman Lecturer - - - MS (Jahangirnagar) [On leave] 30 Mr. Ananda Kumar Ghosh, Lecturer - - - MS (Dhaka) [On leave] 31 Mr. Shafikul Islam, MS (Jahangirnagar) Lecturer 4 3 7 32 Mr. Rokonuzzaman, MS (Jahangirnagar) Lecturer 4 3 7 33 Mr. Md. Mahbub Alam, MS (Jahangirnagar) Lecturer 4 3 7 34 Mrs. Sumaiya Khan, MS (Jahangirnagar) Lecturer 2 3 5 35 Mrs. Tamanna-Binte-Mahmud Chowdhury, Lecturer 2 3 5 MS (Jahangirnagar) *Each Theoretical class is of 50 minutes and each practical class of 02 hours 30 minutes. 13

From the survey results, the opinion of different stakeholders are given below:

Table 2.2 Statement of Vision, Mission and Objectives of the entity Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%)

Academic 0.0 0.0 0 11.1 55.6 33.3 88.9 Alumni 0.0 12.9 12.9 19.4 38.7 29.0 67.7 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 14.3 85.7 100 st 1 Year 0.0 3.5 3.5 10.5 71.9 14.0 85.9 nd 2 Year 1.2 3.6 4.8 10.8 45.8 38.6 84.4

rd 3 Year 0.0 1.5 1.5 4.5 35.8 58.2 94 th 4 Year 0.0 11.3 4.8 71.0 12.9 Student 11.3 83.9 Masters 11.1 5.6 16.7 11.1 27.8 44.4 72.2 Total 1.6 4.9 6.5 8.2 51.5 33.8 85.3

Table 2.2 indicates that about 88% academic staff and 67% alumni at least agree that vision, mission and objectives of the entity are clearly stated which is a significant proportion. On the other hand, none of the academic and 12% alumni at least disagree with this statement. But all non-academic staff (100%) are agreed on this statement. Also, we observe that about 85%, 84%, 94%, 83%, 72%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least agree that vision, mission and objectives of the entity are clearly stated. Also 3%, 4%, 1%, 11%, 16%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least disagree on this issue. This result indicates most of the academic, alumni, non-academic and students are agreed that the vision, mission and objectives of the entity are clearly stated.

Table 2.3 Satisfaction of Vision, Mission and Objectives by ILOs Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 66.7 Alumni 9.7 3.2 12.9 25.8 45.2 16.1 61.3 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 28.6 57.1 85.7 1st Year 0.0 7.0 7.0 59.6 29.8 3.5 33.3

2nd Year 0.0 15.7 15.7 27.7 44.6 12.0 56.6

3rd Year 0.0 3.0 3 6.0 62.7 28.4 91.1

4th Year 12.9 17.7 30.6 24.2 38.7 6.5 45.2 Student Masters 8.3 13.9 22.2 11.1 50.0 16.7 66.7 Total 3.6 11.5 15.1 26.2 45.2 13.4 58.6 14

Table 2.3 indicates that about 66% academic staff, 61% alumni and 85% non-academic staff at least agree that the intended learning outcomes (ILOs) satisfy the stated mission and objectives. On the other hand, about 2% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 33%, 56%, 90%, 45%, 66%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least agree that the intended learning outcomes (ILOs) satisfy the stated mission and objectives. But about 7%, 15%, 3%, 17%, 13%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least disagree on this issue. Thus we may conclude that the intended learning outcomes (ILOs) satisfy the stated mission and objectives.

Table 2.4 Adequacy of infrastructure for satisfying Mission and Objectives Strongly Total Disagree Undecided Strongly Total Respondent disagree Disagree Agree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) (%) (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 88.8 Alumni 6.5 12.9 19.4 16.1 32.3 32.3 64.6 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 100 1st Year 1.8 15.8 17.6 14.0 47.4 21.1 68.5 2nd Year 6.0 14.5 20.5 1.2 34.9 43.4 78.3 3rd Year 1.5 22.4 23.9 7.5 26.9 41.8 68.7

4th Year 4.8 21.0 25.8 4.8 41.9 27.4 69.3 Student Masters 2.8 13.9 16.7 6.5 36.1 41.7 77.8 Total 3.6 17.7 21.3 6.2 37.0 35.4 72.4

Table 2.4 indicates that about 88% academic staff, 64% alumni and 100% non-academic staff at least agree that the entity has adequate infrastructures to satisfy its mission and objectives. On the other hand, none of the academic staff and 19% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 68%, 78%, 68%, 69%, 77%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least agree that the entity has adequate infrastructures to satisfy its mission and objectives. Also about 17%, 20%, 23%, 25%, 16%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least disagree on this issue. Since a significant number of respondents disagree and undecided on this issue hence we may conclude that the entity has some facilities however need additional infrastructure to satisfy its mission and objectives.

15

Table 2.5 Disciplinary rules and regulations Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) Disagree(%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 11.1 55.6 22.2 77.8 Alumni 3.2 6.5 9.7 29.0 41.9 19.4 61.3 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 100 1st Year 0.0 5.3 5.3 24.6 45.6 24.6 70.2 2nd Year 1.2 6.0 7.2 7.2 56.6 28.9 85.5 3rd Year 6.0 19.4 25.4 10.4 31.3 32.8 64.1

4th Year 9.7 29.0 38.7 22.6 33.9 4.8 38.7 Student Masters 13.9 13.9 27.8 25.0 30.6 16.7 47.3 Total 5.2 14.4 19.6 16.4 41.3 22.6 63.9

Table 2.5 indicates that about 77% academic staff, 61% alumni and 100% non-academic staff at least agree that the disciplinary rules and regulations are explicitly defined and well circulated. But 11% academic staff, 9% alumni and none of the non-academic staff at least disagree with this statement. We observe that about 70%, 85%, 64%, 38%, 47%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least agree that the disciplinary rules and regulations are explicitly defined and well circulated. But about 5%, 7%, 25%, 35%, 27%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least disagree on this issue. Despite some students disagree with this statement hence we may conclude that the disciplinary rules and regulations are explicitly defined and circulated. All academic and administrative affairs are fairly maintained in compliance with rules and regulations to ensure good governance in the entity.

Table 2.6 Timely publication of results according to ordinance Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 11.1 22.2 33.3 44.4 22.2 0.0 22.2 Alumni 22.6 12.9 35.5 22.6 29.0 12.9 41.9 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 100 1st Year 3.5 8.8 12.3 77.2 10.5 0.0 10.5

2nd Year 69.9 21.7 91.6 3.6 2.4 2.4 4.8

3rd Year 46.3 37.3 83.6 10.4 4.5 1.5 6

4th Year 72.6 24.2 96.8 0.0 1.6 1.6 3.2 Student Masters 38.9 41.7 80.6 2.8 11.1 5.6 16.7 Total 49.2 25.6 74.8 18.0 5.2 2.0 7.2

16

Table 2.6 indicates that about 22% academic staff, 41% alumni and 100% non-academic staff at least agree that results are published timely in compliance with the ordinance. On the other hand, about 33% academic staff and 33% alumni at least disagree with this statement. None of the non-academic staff disagree with the above statement. Also, we observe that about 10%, 4%, 6%, 3%, 16%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that the results are published timely in compliance with the ordinance. Also about 12%, 91%, 83%, 96%, 80%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least disagree that results are published timely in compliance with the ordinance. Students generally disagree with the statement that results are published timely in compliance with the ordinance. So this process should be improved.

Table 2.7 Distribution of brochure/handbook to the students for comprehensive guidelines. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 33.3 55.6 0.0 55.6 Alumni 0.0 19.4 19.4 16.1 48.4 16.1 64.5 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 100 1st Year 17.5 31.6 49.1 29.8 21.1 0.0 21.1 2nd Year 7.2 19.3 26.5 21.7 45.8 6.0 51.8 3rd Year 9.0 31.3 40.3 4.5 29.9 25.4 55.3

4th Year 3.2 4.8 8 1.6 79.0 11.3 90.3 Student Masters 11.1 2.8 13.9 2.8 47.2 36.1 83.3 Total 9.2 19.3 28.5 13.1 44.6 13.8 58.4

Table 2.7 indicates that about 55% academic staff, 64% alumni and 100% non-academic staff at least agree that the entity provides comprehensive guidelines to the students in advance by means of a brochure/handbook. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff, 19% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 21%, 51%, 55%, 90%, 83%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least agree that the entity provides comprehensive guidelines to the students in advance by means of a brochure/handbook. Also about 49%, 26%, 40%, 8%, 13%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least disagree on this issue. It is evident from the above table that student opinions vary from year to year. Since some respondents disagree with this issue it indicates that status of providing comprehensive guidelines to the students in advance by means of a brochure/handbook is sufficient. Actually department provide syllabus/curriculum and laboratory manuals to the students in advance. 17

Table 2.8 Review of policy and procedure for further improvement. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 66.7 Alumni 3.2 9.7 12.9 16.1 41.9 29.0 70.9 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 100 1st Year 0.0 1.8 1.8 19.3 49.1 29.8 78.9 2nd Year 10.8 24.1 34.9 20.5 34.9 9.6 44.5 3rd Year 9.0 37.3 46.3 19.4 26.9 7.5 34.4

4th Year 4.8 9.7 14.5 33.9 50.0 1.6 51.6 Student Masters 11.1 16.7 27.8 13.9 41.7 16.7 58.4 Total 7.2 19.0 26.2 22.0 39.7 12.1 51.8

Table 2.8 indicates that about 66% academic staff, 70% alumni and 100% non-academic staff at least agree that the entity reviews its policy and procedures periodically for further improvement. On the other hand, none of the academic staff and 12% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 78%, 44%, 34%, 51%, 58%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least agree on this issue. Also about 2%, 35%, 46%, 14%, 28%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least disagree on this issue. Thus we may conclude that the entity usually review its policy and procedures periodically for further improvement.

Table 2.9 Communication of code of conduct for students and employees. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 11.1 77.8 0.0 77.8 Alumni 3.2 9.7 12.9 12.9 61.3 12.9 74.2 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 100 1st Year 0.0 3.5 3.5 5.3 63.2 28.1 91.3 2nd Year 1.2 19.3 20.5 14.5 48.2 16.9 65.1 3rd Year 3.0 17.9 20.9 19.4 20.9 38.8 59.7

4th Year 3.2 11.3 14.5 12.9 54.8 17.7 72.5 Student Masters 8.3 8.3 16.6 8.3 52.8 22.2 75 Total 2.6 13.1 15.7 12.8 46.9 24.6 71.5

Table 2.9 indicates that about 77% academic staff, 73% alumni and 99% non-academic staff at least agree that codes of conduct for the students and employees are well communicated. On the 18

other hand, 11% academic staff and 13% alumni disagree with this statement. At least 91%, 64%, 58%, 71% and 74% of 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students, respectively are agreed with this statement. But about 4%, 20%, 20%, 14%, 17%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students are disagreed on this issue. It is evident from the above table that student opinions vary from year to year and senior students opinion is more realistic than junior students opinion. For well communicated codes of conducts for students and employees, we expect almost 100% respondents’ opinion is likely to be in favour of the statement. Thus we may conclude that codes of conduct for the students and employees are hardly communicated.

2.2 Academic Documentation Resolutions of the meeting, regarding exam committee, academic decisions should be recorded properly. All other academic records e.g., lesson plain, marks, attendance registrar, etc. should also be documented and maintained properly. From the survey result, the opinion of academic staff, non-academic staff, alumni and student are given below:

Table 2.10 Maintenance of academic calendar. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 22.2 22.2 33.3 22.2 22.2 44.4 Alumni 6.5 9.7 16.2 16.1 51.6 16.1 67.7 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 100 1st Year 7.0 29.8 36.8 22.8 29.8 10.5 40.3 2nd Year 53.0 27.7 80.7 8.4 7.2 3.6 10.8 3rd Year 26.9 40.3 67.2 6.0 16.4 10.4 26.8

4th Year 61.3 22.6 83.9 3.2 8.1 4.8 12.9 Student Masters 33.3 16.7 50 8.3 36.1 5.6 41.7 Total 38.0 28.5 66.5 9.5 17.0 6.9 23.9

Table 2.10 indicates that about 44% academic staff, 67% alumni and 100% non-academic staff at least agree that the academic calendars are maintained strictly by the entity. On the other hand, about 22% academic staff and 10% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 40%, 11%, 27%, 13%, 42%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agreed that the academic calendars are maintained strictly by the entity. But a numbers of respondents about 37%, 81%, 67%, 84%, 50%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th 19

year and MS students are disagreed on this issue. For a good academic practice, we expect almost 100% respondents opinions are likely to be in favour of the statement. Thus we may conclude that department has inadequately maintained the academic calendar.

Table 2.11 Proper updatation of website. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 55.6 44.4 100 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alumni 16.1 9.7 25.8 16.1 41.9 16.1 58 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 100 1st Year 5.3 19.3 24.6 38.6 24.6 12.3 36.9 2nd Year 56.6 22.9 79.5 7.2 9.6 3.6 13.2 3rd Year 38.8 25.4 64.2 9.0 10.4 16.4 26.8

4th Year 54.8 27.4 82.2 6.5 4.8 6.5 11.3 Student Masters 30.6 19.4 50 19.4 22.2 8.3 30.5 Total 39.7 23.3 63 14.8 13.1 9.2 22.3

Table 2.11 indicates that 57% alumni and 100% non-academic staff at least agree that the website is updated properly. On the other hand, 100% academic staff and 25% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 26%, 12%, 26%, 10%, 30%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least agree that the website is updated properly. But a numbers of respondents about 24%, 78%, 63%, 81%, 40%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students are disagreed on this issue. We may conclude that this innovative technique of communication should be improved for further use. The university should have a well-designed website which will contain all sorts of information of the university and programs with easy access to the stakeholders.

2.3 Peer Observation and Feedback Process

The peer observation of teaching process provides both the observe and the observer with the opportunity to mutually enhance the quality of their teaching practice. It also provides an opportunity to disseminate good practice amongst colleagues by sharing thoughts on teaching practice and supporting each other’s development of teaching skills. The opinion of academic staff, alumni and student regarding some statement is given below:

20

Table 2.12 Treatment of student’s opinion. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 44.4 44.4 0.0 44.4 Alumni 3.2 25.8 29 25.8 32.3 12.9 45.2 1st Year 10.5 10.5 21 52.6 21.1 5.3 26.4 2nd Year 37.3 26.5 63.8 12.0 21.7 2.4 24.1 3rd Year 38.8 32.8 71.6 6.0 11.9 10.4 22.3

4th Year 24.2 24.2 48.4 9.7 32.3 9.7 42 Student Masters 30.6 16.7 47.3 13.9 25.0 13.9 38.9 Total 29.2 23.3 52.5 18.0 22.0 7.5 29.5

Table 2.12 indicates that 44% academic staff and 44% alumni at least agree that the students’ opinion regarding academic and extra-academic matters is addressed properly. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 28% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 26%, 23%, 21%, 41%, 38%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least agree that the students’ opinion regarding academic and extra-academic matters is addressed properly. But a suitable numbers of respondents about 20%, 63%, 70%, 48%, 46%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students are disagreed on this issue. It indicates that a proper way of addressing students’ opinion is required. Well defined policy for mentoring and peer observation not exists and not followed properly. Feedback process from both teachers’ and students’ are occasionally taken and not often honored.

2.4 Internal Quality Assurances Process

Self-assessment process is an ongoing process. Evaluation of teachers by the students is not at regular phenomenon. Course evaluation by the teacher, students and head of the department is not usual practice after completion of each course. The opinion regarding decision making of academic, non-academic staff, alumni and student is given below:

21

Table 2.13 Fairness and Transparency in Academic decision making. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 100 Alumni 3.2 12.9 16.1 6.5 44.8 22.6 67.4 Non-Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 100 1st Year 0.0 7.0 7 26.3 52.6 14.0 66.6 2nd Year 6.0 16.9 22.9 8.4 51.8 16.9 68.7 3rd Year 4.5 14.9 19.4 16.4 37.3 26.9 64.2

4th Year 6.5 9.7 16.2 8.1 43.5 32.3 75.8 Student Masters 8.3 13.9 22.2 8.3 38.9 30.6 69.5 Total 4.9 12.8 17.7 13.4 45.6 23.3 68.9

Table 2.13 indicates that all academic staff and non-academic staff (100%), are agreed that academic decisions are taken by the entity with fairness and transparency but 66% of the alumni are agreed on this issue. On the other hand, about 15% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 66%, 67%, 63%, 75%, 68%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least agree that academic decisions are taken by the entity with fairness and transparency. But a numbers of respondents about 33%, 24%, 30%, 17%, 21%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students are disagreed on this issue. For the fairness and transparency in academic decision making we expect almost 100% respondents’ opinion is likely to be in favour of the statement. Students are not involved in academic decision making. Thus we may conclude that academic decisions taken by the entity are fair in most of the time.

22

CHAPTER THREE

Curriculum Design and Review

3.1 Need Assessment

Need assessment is a systematic process for determining and addressing needs or “gaps” between current conditions and desired conditions or “wants”. The discrepancy between the current condition and wanted condition must be measured to appropriately identify the need. The need can be a desire to improve current performance or to correct a deficiency. A need assessment is a part of planning processes, often used for improvement in individual’s education/training, organizations or communities. It can be an effective tool to clarify problems and identify appropriate inventions or solutions. Need assessments can help to improve the quality or policy or program decisions thus leading to improvements in performance and the accomplishment of desired results.

3.2 Curriculum Design

Curriculum refers to a well-designed and prescribed subject of studies, lesson and activities which students must complete to fulfill the requirements for acquiring the degree. Self assessment facilities is the integration of the procedure in redesigning, modernizing and updating the curricula to accommodate the job market requirement. The curriculum plays a crucial role in achieving the mission and objectives of the university including the students learning outcomes and overall effectiveness of the program. As our university is an autonomous educational institute, we have every scope to the extent of framing our curriculum design and development within the construct of the academic plan framed by the university.

The department of chemistry offers BSc (honours), MS, MPhil and PhD courses in chemistry.

 The students also are offered courses in Mathematics and Physics as allied subjects.  The students also get compulsory computer training as part of their study.  The curricula are designed to equip the students with necessary skills to enhance their employment opportunities nationally and internationally.

The department of chemistry offers four years course of bachelor degree, one year course of MS, two year course of master of philosophy and three years (minimum time period) course of PhD degree in chemistry. The ongoing syllabus/curriculum of the above mentioned different degree courses has been redesigned, reviewed and the necessary corrections in the 23

content are made at every three years. The curriculum adopted by department of chemistry is approved by the departmental academic committee, the committee of courses and the faculty of mathematical and physical sciences. The curriculum is expected eventually to be passed by academic council and the syndicate of the university. The breakdowns of the curriculum are as follows:

Syllabus for BSc (Honours) in Chemistry SESSION: 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017

Courses of study for a Bachelor of Science (Honours) degree in Chemistry shall extend over a period of four academic years and shall be divided into four parts: Part-I, Part-II, Part-III and Part- IV. Part-I, Part-II, Part-III and Part-IV examinations shall be held at the end of first year, second year, third year and fourth year, respectively.

A candidate for an Honours degree in Chemistry shall have to take all courses listed totaling fifty two courses covering 136 credits. Of the 52 courses there will be 36 theoretical courses (94 credits), 11 practical courses (28 credits), one industrial training/laboratory project (4 credits) and 4 viva- voce courses (10 credits). The Chem. 370 Course (Computing and Information Technology for Chemistry) will spread over two years (from second to third year).

The Chem. 470 (Industrial Training/Laboratory Project) course will primarily be meant for giving practical training to the students in an appropriate chemical/pharmaceutical industry/research institute. In case a placement of a student in an industry cannot be assured, only then a student will have the option to complete a laboratory project to be offered by the teachers of the department or in an appropriate research institution.

Assignment of credits:

Theoretical Courses: A 1 unit (4-credits) course will involve one tutorial and three lecture hours per week (a total of 55 to 60 lecture hours) and a 0.5 unit (2-credits) course will involve two lecture hours per week (a total of 35 to 40 lecture hours).

Practical Courses: Minimum 9 hours per week for six weeks for a 0.5 unit (2-credits) course and 15 hours per week for 7 weeks for a 1 unit (4-credits) course.

Marks Distribution: Of the total marks in a theoretical or a practical course 70% will be from the written/ practical examination to be held at the end of the course and 20% from tutorials and class tests conducted throughout the course and 10% from class attendance. For assessment of class works (tutorial) a minimum of three tests for a 1 unit course and two tests for a ½ unit course will be taken. 24

The courses to be taken in the different parts are detailed below: Part-I Course No. Title of the course Credits Marks Unit

Chem. 110F Physical Chemistry I

(Elements of Physical Chemistry) 4.0 100 1 Chem. 120F Inorganic Chemistry I (Introductory Concepts) 4.0 100 1 Chem. 130F Organic Chemistry I (Fundamentals of Organic Chemistry I) 4.0 100 1 Math. C151H Calculus and Analytical Geometry 2.0 50 0.5

Phys. C161H Mechanics and Properties of

Matter and Waves 2.0 50 0.5 Phys. C162H Electricity and Magnetism 2.0 50 0.5

Eng. C170H English for Special Purposes 2.0 50 0.5

Biol. C171H Introductory Biology 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 115LH Physical Chemistry Practical I 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 125LH Qualitative Inorganic Analysis 2.0 50 0.5 Phys. C163LH Physics Practical 2.0 50 0.5

Chem. 180VH Viva voce 2.0 50 0.5

Total 30.0 750 7.5

Part-II Course No. Title of the course Credits Marks Unit 25

Chem. 210F Physical Chemistry II (Concepts of Physical Chemistry) 4.0 100 1 Chem. 220F Inorganic Chemistry II (Chemistry of Main Group Elements) 4.0 100 1 Chem. 230F Organic Chemistry II (Fundamentals of Organic Chemistry II) 4.0 100 1 Chem. 240F Analytical Chemistry 4.0 100 1 Chem. 245H Nuclear and Radiochemistry 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 250H Industrial Chemistry 2.0 50 0.5 Math. C251H Linear Algebra and Numerical Methods 2.0 50 0.5 Math. C252H Mathematical Methods 2.0 50 0.5 Phys. C261H Electronics and Optics 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 215LH Physical Chemistry Practical II 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 225LH Inorganic Preparation and Volumetric Analysis 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 235LH Preparative Organic Chemistry 2.0 50 0.5

Chem. 280VH Viva voce 2.0 50 0.5

Total 34.0 850 8.5

Part-III Course No. Title of the course Credits Marks Unit Chem. 310F Physical Chemistry III (Selected Topics in Physical Chemistry) 4.0 100 1 Chem. 312H Quantum Chemistry and Statistical Thermodynamics 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 320F Inorganic Chemistry III (Advanced Concepts) 4.0 100 1 Chem. 322H Inorganic Chemistry IV (Selected Topics) 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 330F Organic Chemistry III (Advanced Organic Chemistry) 4.0 100 1 Chem. 332H Organic Chemistry IV 26

(Chemistry of Natural Products) 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 340F Chemical Spectroscopy 4.0 100 1 Chem. 350H Fundamentals of Pharmaceutical Chemistry 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 315LF Physical Chemistry Practical III 4.0 100 1 Chem. 335LF Identification of Organic Compounds 4.0 100 1 Chem. 370LH Computing and Information Technology for Chemistry 2.0 50 0.5

Chem. 380VH Viva voce 2.0 50 0.5

Total 36.0 900 9

Part-IV Course No. Title of the course Credits Marks Unit Chem. 400H Application of Spectroscopic Methods in 2.0 50 0.5 Chemical Analysis Chem. 410H Physical Chemistry IV (Molecular Motion & Reaction Kinetics) 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 412H Solid State Chemistry 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 414H Polymer Chemistry 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 420H Supramolecular Chemistry 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 422H Organometallic Chemistry 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 424H Environmental Chemistry 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 430H Theoretical Organic Chemistry 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 432H Advanced Stereochemistry 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 433H Topics in Biochemistry 2.0 50 0.5

Chem. 434H Organic Reagents and Syntheses 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 425LF Inorganic Synthesis and Quantitative Analysis 4.0 100 1 Chem. 435LH Organo-Applied Chemistry Practical 2.0 50 0.5 Chem. 470TF Industrial Training/ Laboratory Project 4.0 100 1 Chem. 480VF Viva-Voce 4.0 100 1

Total 36.0 900 9

27

Total Credits: 30 + 34 + 36 + 36 = 136, Total Unit: 7.5 + 8.5 + 9 + 9 = 34, Total Marks: 3400 Session indicates first year admission session. F = Full Unit, H = Half Unit, LF = Laboratory Full Unit, LH = Laboratory Half Unit, VH = Viva- Voce Half Unit, VF = Viva-Voce Full Unit.

Grading System [Effective from Session 2002-2003] 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

Syllabus for MS in Chemistry SESSION: 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017

Course of study for a Master of Science (MS) degree in Chemistry shall have a duration of one academic year. The examination can be taken either in the General or in the Thesis group. A candidate for MS degree in Chemistry will have to take up courses in Physical, Inorganic and Organic branch. Students of both the groups, General as well as the Thesis will have to take four 100 marks (1 unit) theoretical courses. A 1 unit (4 credits) theoretical course will involve three lecture hours per week and a total of 55 to 60 lecture hours. A student willing to specialize in a particular branch (Physical/Inorganic/Organic) will have to take two courses from that branch and two other courses from other 28 two branches taking one course from each branch. The courses offered by a particular branch will be decided by that branch. The total marks for the practical courses/research project of General group students will be 150 (1.5 unit) taking 50 marks (½ unit) from each branch. A 0.5 unit (2 credits) practical course will spread over for six weeks with minimum of 9 hours per week. A Thesis group student will carry out a research work and submit his thesis of a total marks of 200 (2 unit). Students of General group will have a viva voce examination of 100 marks (1 unit) at the end of examination and students of Thesis group will have a viva voce examination of 50 marks (½ unit) at the end of thesis submission, respectively. Assessment of a student in each theoretical and practical course shall be based on marks obtained in the examinations (written, practical) and class works and class attendance. Projects will be evaluated by the examination committee. Marks allotted for class work, termed as tutorial marks, shall be 20% of the total marks and marks for attendance shall be 10% of the total marks earmarked for each of the theoretical and practical courses. For assessment of class works (tutorial) a minimum of three tests for a 1 unit course and two tests for a ½ unit course will be taken. Thus the MS examination in Chemistry shall consist of the following: General Group Units Marks Credits 1. Theoretical courses 4 400 16 2. Practical courses/project 1.5 (0.5+0.5+0.5) 150 6 3. Viva voce 1 100 4 Grand total : 6.5 650 26

29

Thesis Group Units Marks Credits 1. Theoretical courses 4 400 16 2. Thesis 2 200 8 3. Viva voce 0.5 50 2 Grand total: 6.5 650 26 The following courses will be offered for the degree of MS in Chemistry:

A. Physical Chemistry branch

Theoretical Course No. Title of the course Units Marks Credits Chem. 510F Biophysical Chemistry 1 100 4 Chem. 511F Photochemistry and Atmospheric Chemistry 1 100 4 Chem. 512F Electrochemistry and Aquatic Chemistry 1 100 4 Chem. 513F Advanced Chemical Thermodynamics & Kinetics 1 100 4 Chem. 514F Advanced Polymer Chemistry 1 100 4

Practical Chem.515LH Advanced Experiment in Physical Chemistry/ Laboratory Project 0.5 50 2 30

B. Inorganic Chemistry branch

Theoretical Course No. Title of the course Units Marks Credits Chem. 520F Material Science 1 100 4 Chem. 521F Advanced Co-ordination Chemistry and 1 100 4 Reaction Mechanisms Chem. 522F Advanced Organometallic Chemistry 1 100 4 Chem. 523F Bio-inorganic Chemistry 1 100 4 Chem. 524F Advanced Analytical Chemistry 1 100 4 Chem. 525F Advanced Environmental Chemistry. 1 100 4

Practical Chem.527LH Advanced Inorganic Lab: Synthesis, Structure and Chemical Analysis of Inorganic Compounds 0.5 50 2

31

C. Organic Chemistry branch

Theoretical Course No. Title of the course Units Marks Credits Chem. 530F Advanced Spectroscopy 1 100 4 Chem. 531F Medicinal Chemistry 1 100 4 Chem. 532F Chemistry of Natural Products 1 100 4 Chem. 533F Organic Synthesis 1 100 4 Chem. 534F Food Chemistry 1 100 4 Chem. 535F Fragrance Chemistry 1 100 4

Practical Chem. 540LH Chromatographic Techniques and 0.5 50 2 Multistep Synthesis

D. Viva voce Chem. 580VF Viva voce for general group 1 100 4 Chem. 585VH Viva voce for thesis group 0.5 50 2

Syllabus for MPhil/PhD in Chemistry SESSION: 2013-2014, 2014-2015, 2015-2016, 2016-2017

32

The admission to MPhil/PhD course in chemistry will be in accordance with the ordinance for the degree of master of philosophy of this university. A student admitted to MPhil/PhD course will have to undertake two years full time supervised study in the department under the guidance of a supervisor/supervisors. The department will offer courses of specialization in selected branches of chemistry e.g., Physical, Inorganic, Organic etc. and the degree of MPhil/PhD shall consist of (a) written examination on approved courses, (b) submission of a thesis on an approved topic and (c) an oral examination. The department will offer a number of courses in the first year from which a student will have to take courses covering 200 marks, which will be determined by the respective supervisor/supervisors. There will be an examination on the approved courses at the end of the first year, the pass marks for the courses will be 50%. The MPhil students will be required to carry out research on approved topics both in the first and second year and give a minimum of two seminars on topics in his field of research and approved by the supervisor and the full time PhD students will be required to carryout research on specific approved topic for at least 3 years while the minimum research period for part time PhD student will be 5 years. The student will submit a thesis on the approved topic with necessary approval of the supervisor/supervisors and will have to appear at an oral examination provided his thesis is recommended for acceptance by the examiners.

The following courses will be offered for the degree of Master of Philosophy in Chemistry during these sessions.

Course No. Title of the course Marks Chem. 610 Surface Chemistry 100 Chem. 612 Advanced Electrochemistry 100 Chem. 614 Polymer Chemistry 100 Chem. 616 Biophysical Chemistry 100 Chem. 620 Organometallic Chemistry 100 Chem. 622 Coordination Chemistry 100 Chem. 624 Advanced Inorganic Chemistry & Spectroscopic 100 Methods in Inorganic Chemistry Chem. 626 Environmental Chemistry 100 Chem. 630 Physical Organic Chemistry and Spectroscopic Methods in Organic Chemistry 100 Chem. 632 Chemistry of Natural Products and Biosynthesis 100 Chem. 634 Biochemistry 100 33

Chem. 638 Organic Synthesis 100 Chem. 650 Nuclear and Radiochemistry 100 Chem. 660 Analytical Chemistry 100

34

Table 3.1 Consistent arrangement of courses in the curriculum from lower to higher levels

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.1 44.4 44.4 88.8 Alumni 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 58.0 35.5 93.5 1st Year 0.0 1.8 1.8 86.0 8.8 3.5 12.3

2nd Year 0.0 2.4 2.4 84.3 4.8 8.4 13.2

3rd Year 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 34.3 64.2 98.5

4th Year 4.8 9.7 14.5 8.1 46.8 30.6 77.4 Student Masters 8.3 8.3 16.6 5.6 33.3 44.4 77.7 Total 2.0 3.9 5.9 41.6 23.9 28.5 52.4

Table 3.1 indicates that about 88% academic staff and 93% alumni agree that courses in the curriculum is structured and arranged properly. On the other hand, none of the academic staff and alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 12%, 13%, 98%, 77%, 78%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that courses in the curriculum is structured and arranged properly. But a numbers of respondents about 2%, 2%, 0%, 10%, 8%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. However 86% and 84% of 1st year and 2nd year students were undecided on this statement because the new students have limited idea about the consistency of the curriculum.

Table 3.2 Optimal Curriculum load

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Agree Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 0.0 88.9 0.0 88.9 Alumni 6.5 25.8 32.3 12.9 45.2 9.7 54.9 1st Year 7.0 22.8 29.8 43.9 21.1 5.3 26.4

2nd Year 50.6 27.7 78.3 9.6 8.4 3.6 12

3rd Year 61.2 20.9 82.1 9.0 4.5 4.5 9

4th Year 58.1 25.8 83.9 9.7 3.2 3.2 6.4 Student Masters 33.3 25.0 58.3 8.3 25.0 8.3 33.3 Total 44.3 24.6 68.9 15.7 10.8 4.6 15.4

Table 3.2 indicates that about 88% academic staff and 54% alumni agree that curriculum load is optimum and exerts no pressure. Also, about 26%, 11%, 9%, 6%, 33%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on this issue. But a numbers of respondents about 29%, 77%, 80%, 83%, 58%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students are disagreed with this statement. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 32% alumni 35

are disagreed that curriculum load is optimum and exerts no pressure. It is evident from the above result that students opinions vary from year to year. It indicates that curriculum load is not optimum and exerts pressure which is evident from the disagreement of 2nd year, 3rd year and 4th year student. There should be a program specific body or committee with representation from the major stakeholders to take care of design and redesign of curriculum. Designed curriculum with valid basis and all changes in the curriculum with specific reasons must be properly documented.

3.3 Curriculum Alignment/Skill Mapping The respondents were asked whether teaching strategies and assessment strategies are clearly stated in the curriculum. Teaching strategies need to be appropriate for achieving learning outcomes.

Table 3.3 Statement of teaching strategies in the curriculum.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 0.0 66.7 22.2 88.9 Alumni 0.0 12.9 12.9 12.9 51.6 22.6 74.2 1st Year 3.5 24.6 28.1 12.3 54.4 5.3 59.7 2nd Year 20.5 36.1 56.6 2.4 30.1 10.8 40.9 3rd Year 6.0 20.9 26.9 9.0 32.8 31.3 64.1

4th Year 11.3 17.7 29 3.2 53.2 14.5 67.7 Student Masters 16.7 0.0 16.7 2.8 33.3 47.2 80.5 Total 11.8 22.6 34.4 5.9 40.3 19.3 59.6

From the above table it is observed that about 88% academic staff and 72% alumni agree that the teaching strategies are clearly stated in the curriculum. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 12% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, about 59%, 40%, 63%, 67%, 80%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on this issue. But a number of respondents about 27%, 56%, 26%, 29%, 16%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree that the teaching strategies are clearly stated in the curriculum. Thus we may conclude that the teaching strategies in details are not clearly stated in the curriculum.

Table 3.4 Statement of assessment strategies in the curriculum 36

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.2 77.8 0.0 77.8 Alumni 3.2 3.2 6.4 29.0 45.2 19.4 64.6 1st Year 1.8 3.5 5.3 15.8 56.1 22.8 78.9 2nd Year 0.0 8.4 8.4 12.0 72.3 7.2 79.5 3rd Year 0.0 9.0 9 9.0 10.3 41.8 52.1

4th Year 6.5 14.5 21 11.3 50.0 17.7 67.7 Student Masters 13.9 36.1 50 19.4 25.0 5.6 30.6 Total 3.3 12.1 15.4 12.8 52.1 19.7 71.8

Table 3.4 indicates that about 77% academic staff and 64% alumni agree that assessment strategies are explicit in the curriculum. On the other hand, none of the academic staff and 6% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 78%, 79%, 51%, 67%, 25%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that assessment strategies are explicit in the curriculum. But about 4%, 8%, 9%, 20%, 49%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students are disagreed on this issue. Even though few respondents disagree on this issue so we may conclude that assessment strategies are explicit in the curriculum.

Table 3.5 Curriculum addresses the program objectives and program learning

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 100

The academic staff of the department as a respondent group mentioned that curriculum addresses the program objectives and program learning outcomes. Table 3.5 indicates that 100% academic staff agree that curriculum addresses the program objectives and program learning outcomes.

3.4 Curriculum Review Process

University should have a well-defined procedure to design and review the curriculum of academic programs periodically. There must be a program specific body or committee with representation from the major stakeholders to take care of design and redesign of curriculum. To 37

cope with the globalization, ongoing developments and changes across the environmental setting there is a strong need to integrate the concerns of major stakeholders in the curriculum.

The curriculum can be improved if it is updated periodically by thoroughly reviewing it. Opinions of the stakeholders and experts can be incorporated during review of the curriculum. From the survey the opinion of respondent are given below.

Table 3.6 Reviewed and updated of curriculum in compliance with the rules of the universities

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 100

Table 3.6 indicates that 100% academic staff agrees that curriculum is reviewed and updated at regular intervals in compliance with the rules of the university. None of the academic staff disagree on this issue.

Table 3.7 Consideration of stakeholder’s opinion during review of the curriculum

Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Strongly Disagree Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 11.1 22.2 33.3 11.1 55.6 0.0 55.6

Figure 3.1: Pi-chart of consideration of stakeholder’s opinion during review of the curriculum Consideration of stakeholder’s opinion during review of the curriculum

0%

11.10% Strongly disagree Disagree 22.20% Undecided 55.60% Agree Strongly agree 11.10%

38

From the above table 3.7 and Figure 3.1 it is observed that about 56% academic staff agree that opinions from the relevant stakeholders (students, teachers, employers and alumni) are duly considered during review of the curriculum. About 33% academic staff disagree with this statement. But about 11% academic staff is neutral with this statement. Although curriculum review process is regularly practiced, students, alumni and employers are not involved in the review process.

3.5 Gaps in Curriculum: Adequacy to Meet the Needs Review process and involvement of major stakeholders with special attention to achievement of course learning outcomes (CLDs), employability of the graduates, course evaluation by the students and respective course teachers, identifying gaps and lapses in existing curriculum through curriculum alignment should be maintained. The opinion of academic staff and alumni regarding the curriculum is effective in achieving day-one skill is given below:

Table 3.8 Effectiveness of curriculum in achieving day-one skill at job place

Total Total Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly Respondent Disagree Agree (%) disagree (%) (%) (%) (%) agree (%) (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 22.2 33.3 33.3 66.6 Alumni 6.5 12.9 19.4 25.8 35.5 19.4 54.9

Table 3.8 indicates that about 66% academic staff and 54% alumni agree that the curriculum is effective in achieving day-one skill. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 18% alumni disagree with this statement. It indicates that the curriculum is fairly effective in achieving day-one skill. There may be gaps and lapses in existing curriculum which are not identified through curriculum alignment. Accordingly initiatives should be taken to close the gaps.

39

CHAPTER FOUR

Students Admission, Progress and Achievements

After the publication of the result of Higher Secondary Certificate (HSC) examination, every year lots of students become interested to admit themselves into different universities of Bangladesh. There is no set criteria as a whole for applying into universities. Every university has its own criteria for admission.

4.1 Entry Qualifications

Entry requirements are the minimum qualifications, knowledge, skills and/or experience that an applicant must have in favor of his candidature for a particular academic program. Entry requirements must be well defined, measurable and communicable to the potential candidates for admission.

(a) According to the conditions set by the central admission committee, students who completed their Higher Secondary Certificate (HSC) examination or an equivalent examination may be admitted to the program of study leading to the degree of BSc (Honours). The preliminary requirement for admission is set by the academic committee of the department concerned.

(b) To be eligible for admission to BSc (Honours) program, a student must have to obtain at least 3.5 GPA including 4th subject in both the SSC and HSC examinations individually and 8.0 GPA in total in the two examinations including chemistry with grade ‘A’ and mathematics with grade ‘A-’. Students should pass five (5) subjects in "O" level and at least two (2) subjects in "A" level examinations and shall have to obtain at least "B" grade in three (3) subjects and "C" grade in two in both the examinations to be considered for admission.

(c) Only one year of break of study after passing HSC/equivalent examination is allowed for admission.

The opinion of the academic staff, alumni and student about the entry qualification is given below:

40

Table 4.1 Entry of quality students.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 0.0 44.4 44.4 88.8 Alumni 0.0 17.1 17.1 0.0 41.9 41.9 83.8 1st Year 1.8 10.5 12.3 3.5 26.3 57.9 84.2 2nd Year 7.2 7.2 14.4 10.8 33.7 41.0 74.7 3rd Year 4.5 10.4 14.9 1.5 19.4 64.2 83.6

4th Year 4.8 4.8 9.6 11.3 37.1 41.9 79 Student Masters 0.0 11.1 11.1 11.1 36.1 41.7 77.8 Total 4.3 8.5 12.8 7.5 30.2 49.5 79.7

Table 4.1 indicates that about 89% academic staff and 84% alumni agree that admission policy ensures entry of quality students in the department which is a significant proportion. On the other hand 11% academic staff and 17% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 84%, 75%, 84%, 79%, 78%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that admission policy ensures entry of quality students in the department. Also 12%, 14%, 15%, 10%, 11%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students are disagreed on this issue. It indicates that eligibility of learners is well defined.

4.2 Admission Procedure

Universities are required to select the candidates from a pool of diverse applicants who collectively will form the best possible group of students. Selection of the eligible candidates for the particular academic program is important to maintain quality in education. The admission process ensures fair treatment to all applicants with transparent and good practices and do not discriminate applicants in any way.

Admission of students to the university for degrees of bachelor and higher degrees are to be made by a central admission committee appointed for that purpose by the university authority. All principles and rules are made by this committee each year before admission. The faculty admission committee headed by dean deals with all matters relating to admission of students in the departments under that faculty. The central admission committee gives the necessary guidance and advice as required for the faculty admission committee.

41

 The university authorities (Academic Council and Central Admission Committee) review the admission process annually for modifying/rectifying the admission eligibility criteria and also reservation policy.  The university advertises its notifications for admission to various subjects through national newspapers as well as by uploading the information on the website of the university.  Only online submission of applications is allowed. In the advertisement and subsequent notices in university website, eligibility criteria for each subjects, category wise seat distribution of each subjects, date of admission test, date of publications of merit list, date of counseling-cum- admission, admission fees etc. are given. Wherever necessary, further counseling-cum- admission is done, this is also notified through website mentioning the vacancy and dates of admission.  Marks obtained in the admission test (MCQ questions and OMR answer sheet, 100 Marks) and the percentage of total marks obtained in the SSC (40%) and HSC (60%) examinations (100 Marks) are considered in finalizing the merit list (Total: 100 + 100 = 200 Marks).

The opinion of the academic staff, alumni and student about the admission process is given below:

Table 4.2 Fairness of admission procedure.

Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Strongly Disagree Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 100 Alumni 9.7 3.2 12.9 9.7 35.5 41.9 77.4 1st Year 3.5 7.0 10.5 12.3 36.8 40.4 77.2 2nd Year 0.0 10.8 10.8 2.4 31.3 55.4 86.7 3rd Year 4.5 6.0 10.5 7.5 31.3 50.7 82

4th Year 0.0 4.8 4.8 3.2 40.3 51.6 91.9 Student Masters 5.6 5.6 11.2 8.3 44.4 36.1 80.5 Total 2.3 7.2 9.5 6.2 35.7 48.5 84.2

Table 4.2 indicates that 100% academic staff and 77% alumni at least agree that admission procedure is quite fair. Also, about 72%, 87%, 82%, 92%, 81%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree with this statement. But 10%, 0%, 10%, 0%, 11%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least disagree on this issue. We observe that none of the academic staff and a few of the other respondent disagree that admission procedure is quite fair. Thus we may conclude that admission procedure is quite fair. 42

Figure 4.1: Bar chart about fairness of admission procedure (student opinion).

60

50

40

30 Frequency

20

10

0 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly agree disagree

4.3 Progress and Achievement

Progress and achievement present a complete picture of student learning. The quality assurance system of universities should be in place to assure that levels of students’ achievements and progress are monitored and recorded duly for the use of reference points, evaluation of achievement and meaningful academic guidance and counseling.

The overall environment of support available to the students in the department has a direct impact on the motivation of the students in the right directions of learning. This is also reflected on the progression of the students to higher levels of academic pursuits and employment. The performance of the students in the university examinations is highly satisfactory. There are negligible dropouts at the undergraduate level. Progression to higher studies and employment is also satisfactory. Progress of students during last three years are given in Table 4.1.

43

Table 4.3 Progress of students during last three years. No of Fail/ Teacher: Examination Year examinee Pass % Pass Dropped Students male+female 2014 45+27 50 22 69.44 1:10 B.Sc (Hons) 2015 65+35 85 15 85.00 1:10 Part-1 2016 57+34 53 38 58.24 1:10 2014 46+26 56 16 77.78 1:10 B.Sc (Hons) 2015 50+25 52 23 69.33 1:10 Part-2 2016 55+36 ------1:10 2014 39+21 52 8 86.67 1:10 B.Sc (Hons) 2015 43+25 51 17 75.00 1:10 Part-3 2016 50+25 ------1:10 2014 43+19 61 1 98.39 1:10 B.Sc (Hons) 2015 37+20 54 3 94.74 1:10 Part-4 2016 42+24 ------1:10

The opinion of the academic, alumni and student about progress and achievement of students are given below:

Table 4.4 Commitment of the students to ensure desired progress and achievement.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 0.0 88.9 0.0 88.9 Alumni 0.0 9.7 9.7 25.8 48.0 16.1 64.1 1st Year 0.0 10.5 10.5 31.6 56.1 1.8 57.9 2nd Year 1.2 18.1 19.3 33.7 26.5 20.5 47 3rd Year 3.0 1.5 4.5 6.0 52.2 37.3 89.5

4th Year 1.6 6.5 8.1 71.0 17.7 3.2 20.9 Student Masters 11.1 8.3 19.4 36.1 33.3 11.1 44.4 Total 2.6 9.5 12.1 35.1 36.7 16.1 52.8

Table 4.4 indicates that 88% academic staff and 64% alumni at least agree that commitment among students is observed to ensure desired progress and achievement. On the other hand, 11% academic and 9% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 58%, 44

47%, 90%, 21%, 44%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that commitment among students is observed to ensure desired progress and achievement. About 11%, 19%, 6%, 8%, 19%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. It is evident from the above table that student opinions vary from year to year. Thus we may conclude that commitment among students is not observed to ensure desired progress and achievement.

Table 4.5 Recording and monitoring of student progress.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 0.0 77.8 11.1 88.9 Alumni 9.7 19.4 29.1 25.8 38.7 6.5 45.2 1st Year 7.0 17.5 24.5 40.4 26.3 8.8 35.1 2nd Year 30.1 25.3 55.4 16.9 16.9 10.8 27.7 3rd Year 22.4 49.3 71.7 3.0 19.4 6.0 25.4

4th Year 21.0 41.9 62.9 11.3 22.6 3.2 25.8 Student Masters 16.7 38.9 55.6 5.6 25.0 13.9 38.9 Total 20.7 34.1 54.8 15.7 21.3 8.2 29.5

It is observed from the above table that 88% academic staff and 45% alumni at least agree that students’ progress is regularly recorded and monitored. On the other hand, 11% academic staff and 29% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observed that about 35%, 28%, 25%, 26%, 39%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that students’ progress is regularly recorded and monitored. But about 25%, 55%, 72%, 63%, 56%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. For a regular recording and monitoring students’ progress, we expect 100% respondents opinion is likely to be in favour of the statement. But a significant number of students disagree on this issue. So it may be evident that recording of periodic progress and final achievements of the students are not done consistently. We should arrange a discussion meeting with the academics to formulate a policy for recording and updating progress and achievements of each student.

45

Figure 4.2: Bar chart about recording and monitoring of students progress (students opinion).

40 35 30 25 20

15 Frequency 10 5 0 Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly disagree agree

Table 4.6 Feedback of the teachers to the students about their progress.

Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Strongly Disagree Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.4 55.6 0.0 55.6 Alumni 12.9 35.5 48.4 12.9 25.8 12.9 38.7 1st Year 3.5 25.6 29.1 12.3 50.9 8.8 59.7 2nd Year 26.5 36.1 62.6 9.6 24.1 3.6 27.7 3rd Year 10.4 20.9 31.3 3.0 43.3 22.4 65.7

4th Year 17.7 35.5 53.2 16.1 27.4 3.2 30.6 Student Masters 27.8 52.8 80.6 8.3 8.3 2.8 11.1 Total 17.0 32.5 49.5 9.8 32.1 8.5 40.6

Table 4.6 indicates that 56% academic staff and 38% alumni at least agree that teachers provide regular feedback to the students about their progress. On the other hand, 48% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 58%, 28%, 66%, 31%, 11%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that teachers provide regular feedback to the students about their progress. But, about 29%, 63%, 31%, 53%, 81%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. It is evident from the above table that student opinions vary from year to year. The overall data on the above issue indicates that teachers do not provide regular feedback to the students about their progress.

46

Table 4.7 Maintenance of individual student’s records.

Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Strongly Disagree Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 22.2 44.4 22.2 66.6 Alumni 9.7 12.9 22.6 12.9 44.8 9.7 54.5 1st Year 1.8 1.8 3.6 63.2 24.6 8.8 33.4

2nd Year 13.3 6.0 19.3 9.6 36.1 34.9 71

3rd Year 4.5 4.5 9 10.4 35.8 44.8 80.6

4th Year 8.1 9.7 17.8 19.4 45.2 17.7 62.9 Student Masters 8.3 8.3 16.6 2.8 58.3 22.2 80.5 Total 7.5 5.9 13.4 21.0 38.4 27.2 65.6

Table 4.7 indicates that 66% academic staff and 64% alumni at least agree that the entity maintains individual student’s records properly. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 23% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that 33%, 71%, 71%, 62%, 80%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on the above issue. But, about 4%, 19%, 9%, 18%, 17%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. Since majority of respondents are agreed on this issue we may conclude that the entity maintains individual student’s records properly but there is a scope to improve this record keeping.

Also we can see graphically all student opinion about the entity maintaining individual student’s records.

Figure 4.3: Pie-Chart about maintenance of individual student’s records (student opinion).

Maintenance of Students Record

7.50% 5.90% 27.20% Strongly disagree Disagree 21% Undecided Agree Strongly agree

38.40%

47

CHAPTER FIVE

Physical Facilities

Quality physical facilities are integral part of the quality learning opportunities of the university. Physical facilities create favorable learning condition and facilitate the attainment of earning objectives. Physical facilities are very important for strengthening effective teaching-learning that provide quality education. Physical facility includes class room facilities, library facilities, laboratory facilities, medical facilities and other facilities. The opinion of the alumni, current students, academic and non-academic staffs about whether all these physical facilities are provided or not in the department are given below.

5.1 Classroom Facilities

Classroom facilities should be adequate and well equipped with modern teaching aids. There are 6 classrooms now available in the department of chemistry. The rooms 203, 205 have students capacity of 90, 60 respectively whereas room 207 & gallery have students capacity of 88 and 120 respectively. Two new classrooms with student capacity of 108 each and three more research laboratories for each of inorganic, organic and physical have been recently constructed. In addition to that a modern instrument laboratory has also been constructed for the department. At the moment all classrooms are equipped with white board, teacher’s table and chair, computer and multimedia projector. The opinion of the alumni, students, academic and non- academic staffs about whether classroom are good in number, well-spaced, well equipped and well maintained to ensure effective delivery is given below:

Table 5.1 Suitability of classroom facilities. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 77.8 Alumni 3.2 6.5 9.7 3.2 58.1 29.0 87.1 1st Year 8.8 19.3 28.1 1.8 43.9 26.3 70.2 2nd Year 22.9 30.1 53 10.8 20.5 15.7 36.2 3rd Year 10.4 22.4 32.8 3.0 43.3 20.9 64.2

4th Year 14.5 27.4 41.9 4.8 38.7 14.5 53.2 Student Masters 5.6 2.8 8.4 5.6 22.2 63.9 86.1 Total 13.8 22.6 36.4 5.6 33.8 24.3 58.1 48

Table 5.1 indicates that about 78% academic staff and 87% alumni agree that classroom facilities are suitable for ensuring effective learning. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 10% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 70%, 36%, 64%, 53%, 86%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that classroom facilities are suitable for ensuring effective learning. But, about 28%, 53%, 33%, 32%, 8%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. From the above table we observed that a significant number of respondents agree that classroom facilities are suitable for ensuring effective learning. So we can say that classroom facilities in terms of number, space, modern equipment’s are hardly adequate and need to be improved.

5.2 Library Facilities

Library facilities with quality text books, reference books, journals, documents, literature and access to digital library facilities and e-learning materials are required for academic and research purposes. Departmental seminar library has a stock of about 2,500 books and research journals on various field of chemistry. Effort is made to acquire latest books. Subscription to international level chemical journals is required. The department of chemistry has internet facility in seminar library. The availability of the latest editions, new books and research journals need to be ensured. University has wireless internet facility available for the students and faculty member but regarding this facility many improvements are needed. No. adequate e- learning facility is available in the department yet.

Faculty members and students of the department are allowed to use the main library which has extended working hours. The main library provides the following services;

i. Reference books ii. Research Journals iii. Newspapers etc.

New books are regularly purchased. Every research student (including MS, MPhil and PhD) submits one copy of his/her thesis paper to the seminar library. The department of chemistry generally publishes a chemical magazine named ‘Rashayan Somikka’ every year. The seminar librarian is responsible for proper management of the seminar library. The librarian maintains a catalogue book and issue card for issuing books to students and staffs. The opinion of the alumni, students, academic and non-academic staffs about library facilities is given below: 49

Table 5.2 Availability of library facilities. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 11.1 55.6 22.2 77.8 Alumni 16.1 22.6 38.7 16.1 32.3 12.9 45.2 1st Year 8.8 21.1 29.9 24.6 38.6 7.0 45.6 2nd Year 22.9 44.6 67.5 9.6 20.5 2.4 22.9 3rd Year 11.9 31.3 43.2 10.4 31.3 14.9 46.2

4th Year 16.1 19.4 35.5 16.1 45.2 3.2 48.4 Student Masters 5.6 11.1 16.7 8.3 47.2 27.8 75 Total 14.4 28.2 42.6 13.8 34.4 9.2 43.6

From the above table it is observed that about 78% academic staff and 45% alumni agree and about 11% academic staff and 39% alumni disagree that library has an adequate up-to-date reading and reference materials to meet the academic & research needs. On the other hand, about 46%, 23%, 46%, 48%, 75%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on this issue. But, about 30%, 68%, 43%, 36%, 17%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree that library has an adequate up-to-date reading and reference materials to meet the academic & research needs. It is evident from the above table that a significant number of respondents disagree on this issue. Considering the above data it can be said library has some lack of facilities such as limited sitting facilities for the students, referred books, technological support, place for group discussion, availability of drinks and snacks. These facilities should be developed.

5.3 Laboratory and Field Laboratories

Laboratory and field laboratories should be adequate, well equipped, accessible and useful. The department of chemistry has one modern instrument laboratory and 5 laboratories for three branches of chemistry namely inorganic chemistry, organic chemistry and physical chemistry. These laboratories are yet to be equipped with many modern instruments. The department of chemistry has a well equipped computer laboratory with 40 PCs. All laboratories have laboratory manuals/instructions required for performing experiments. Laboratory staff is available in laboratories. The technical staff for teaching laboratories appears to be adequate but they need to be trained. An electronic engineer has been appointed to take care of troubleshooting, repairing, and maintenance of minor departmental electronic equipments. The department has 10 research laboratories but there is no technical staff in these research laboratories. 50

The courses conducted in the teaching laboratories are follows:

Teaching Laboratories Course Conducted Laboratory 1 Chem. 425; Chem. 527 Laboratory 2 Chem. 115; Chem. 125 Laboratory 3 Chem. 335; Chem. 435; Chem. 540 Laboratory 4 Chem. 315; Chem. 515 Laboratory 5 Chem. 215; Chem. 225; Chem. 235

For field experience we have introduced an industrial training course in the syllabus. For this course the students visit chemical/pharmaceutical/research laboratories for four weeks period. They submit a report on their training and present the report in front of the examination committee for evaluation. The opinion of respondents about laboratory facilities are given below:

Table 5.3 Availability of laboratory facilities. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 11.1 77.8 0.0 77.8 Alumni 6.5 6.5 13 0.0 61.3 25.8 87.1 1st Year 10.5 5.3 15.8 7.0 52.6 24.6 77.2 2nd Year 13.3 20.5 33.8 4.8 42.2 19.3 61.5 3rd Year 0.0 9.0 9 6.0 53.7 31.3 85

4th Year 4.8 22.6 27.4 6.5 53.2 12.9 66.1 Student Masters 5.6 5.6 11.2 0.0 36.1 52.8 88.9 Total 7.2 13.8 21 5.2 48.2 25.6 73.8

Above table shows that about 78% academic staff and 87% alumni agree that laboratory facilities are congenial for practical teaching-learning. But 11% academic staff and 13% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 77%, 62%, 85%, 66%, 89%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on this issue. But, about 16%, 34%, 9%, 27%, 11%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree that laboratory facilities are congenial for practical teaching-learning. We observe that a number of respondents agreed on this issue. However, latest scientific equipments are inadequate in the teaching and research laboratories.

51

The opinion of respondents about adequate facilities for conducting research are given below:

Table 5.4 Adequate facilities for conducting research. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 33.3 33.3 11.1 55.6 0.0 55.6 Alumni 0.0 22.6 22.6 22.6 38.7 16.1 54.8 1st Year 3.5 5.3 8.8 82.5 7.0 1.8 8.8

2nd Year 3.6 6.0 9.6 74.7 12.0 3.6 15.6

3rd Year 10.4 13.4 23.8 17.9 38.8 19.4 58.2

4th Year 0.0 8.1 8.1 72.6 14.5 4.8 19.3 Student Masters 11.1 13.9 25 5.6 33.3 36.1 69.4 Total 5.2 8.9 14.1 55.1 20.0 10.8 30.8

Above table shows that about 56% academic staff and 55% alumni agree that facilities for conducting research are adequate in the department. Also, we observe that about 9%, 16%, 58%, 19%, 69%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on this issue. On the other hand, about 33% academic staff and 23% alumni disagree on the same issue. Also, about 9%, 10%, 24, 8%, 25%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree that facilities for conducting research are adequate. We observe from the above data that there are some research facilities available at the department but need to be improved and modernized.

5.4 Medical Facilities Medical facilities should be adequate, well equipped, accessible and useful to provide emergency healthcare services ensuring health and hygiene within the campus. The opinion of the respondents about the availability of medical facilities are given below:

Table 5.5 Availability of medical facilities. Strongly Disagree Total Disagree Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 44.4 22.2 66.6 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alumni 12.9 35.5 48.4 19.4 22.6 9.7 32.3 1st Year 42.1 33.3 75.4 8.8 15.8 0.0 15.8

2nd Year 56.6 33.7 90.3 2.4 6.0 1.2 7.2

3rd Year 49.3 34.3 83.6 7.5 9.0 0.0 9

4th Year 50.0 35.5 85.5 3.2 8.1 3.2 11.3 Student Masters 55.6 25.0 80.6 0.0 16.7 2.8 19.5 Total 50.8 33.1 83.9 4.6 10.2 1.3 11.5 52

Table 5.5 indicates that none of the academic staff and 32% alumni agree that indoor and outdoor medical facilities are adequate. On the other hand, about 67% academic staff and 48% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 16%, 7%, 9%, 11%, 19%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that indoor and outdoor medical facilities are adequate. But, about 75%, 90%, 84%, 86%, 81%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. We observe that majority of the responded disagree that indoor and outdoor medical facilities are adequate. Thus we may conclude that medical center are not well equipped and not useful to provide necessary emergency healthcare services ensuring health and hygiene within the campus. Enough doctors, medicine, diagnostic and hospital facilities are absent.

5.5 Other Facilities Some other facilities are also unavailable in the department such as indoor and outdoor sports facilities, gymnasium facilities and internet facilities. The opinion of the respondents about sports facilities are given below:

Table 5.6 Adequate sports facilities. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 55.6 55.6 44.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alumni 16.1 19.4 35.5 9.7 32.3 22.6 54.9 1st Year 24.6 26.3 50.9 15.8 24.6 8.8 33.4 2nd Year 30.1 20.5 50.6 10.8 34.9 3.6 38.5 3rd Year 17.9 37.3 55.2 9.0 25.4 10.4 35.8

4th Year 11.3 22.6 33.9 14.5 46.8 4.8 51.6 Student Masters 22.2 36.1 58.3 5.6 30.6 5.6 36.2 Total 21.6 27.5 49.1 11.5 32.8 6.6 39.4

From table 5.6, almost none of the academic staff, 55% alumni and 39% current student agree that there are adequate sports facilities (indoor and outdoor). But about 56% academic staff, 36% alumni and 49% current student disagree with this statement. Since significant no. of respondents disagree with this statement hence we may conclude that sports facilities (indoor and outdoor) are not adequate.

53

The opinion of the respondents about existing gymnasium facilities are given below:

Table 5.7 Existing gymnasium facilities. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 11.1 66.7 77.8 22.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alumni 19.4 25.8 45.2 6.5 45.2 3.2 48.4 1st Year 26.3 22.8 49.1 38.6 10.5 1.8 12.3

2nd Year 38.6 21.7 60.3 25.3 10.8 3.6 14.4

3rd Year 25.4 32.8 58.2 4.5 28.4 9.0 37.4

4th Year 22.6 40.3 62.9 16.1 17.7 3.2 20.9 Student Masters 36.1 30.6 66.7 2.8 25.0 5.6 30.6 Total 29.8 29.2 59 18.7 17.7 4.6 22.3

We observe from the above data that none of the academic staff, 48% alumni and 22% current student at least agree that existing gymnasium facilities are good enough. But 78% academic staff, 45% alumni and 59% current student at least disagree with this statement. So, we say that existing gymnasium facilities are not good enough.

The opinion of the respondents about internet facilities with sufficient speed are given below:

Table 5.8 Availability of internet facilities with sufficient speed. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 22.2 22.2 0.0 55.6 22.2 77.8 Alumni 9.7 12.9 22.6 16.1 41.9 19.4 61.3 1st Year 35.1 28.1 63.2 5.3 21.1 10.5 31.6

2nd Year 45.8 41.0 86.8 2.4 9.6 1.2 10.8

3rd Year 34.3 43.3 77.6 0.0 14.9 7.5 22.4

4th Year 54.8 27.4 82.2 1.6 9.7 6.5 16.2 Student Masters 36.1 30.6 66.7 11.1 16.7 5.6 22.3 Total 42.0 35.1 77.1 3.3 13.8 5.9 19.7

From the survey result it is observed that 78% academic staff, 61% alumni and 19% current student agree that internet facilities with sufficient bandwidth capacity are available. But about 22% academic staff, 23% alumni and 77% current student disagree with this statement. Interestingly whereas most of the academic staff and alumni agreed on the statement but a large number of students disagreed. This may be because the office room of the academics have internet connection but computers with internet facilities are not adequate for the students in the department. 54

CHAPTER SIX

Teaching, Learning and Learning Assessment

Teaching, learning and assessment should be best organized in order to allow students to reach the intended learning outcomes of study. Introduction to teaching, learning and assessment introduces and applies core skills and techniques to teaching situations, set within a broader context of how students learn in higher education.

Teaching, learning and assessment are the vital parts of academic program to achieve learning objectives. Teaching, learning constitute the core of education. It is the responsibility of the educational institutions to ensure effective-teaching learning for quality in education. For the purpose of effective teaching-learning the critical factors are quality staff, appropriate teaching learning methods, use of lesson plan, technology integration, focus, skill development mechanism and assessment of student performance. In this chapter the opinion of alumni, current students and academician has been provided.

6.1 Quality Staff It is to be ensured that the staffs of all categories including academic, support, technical and administrative are adequate and skilled to meet the requirements of academic standards and strategies of teaching learning.

Explicit comment should be made over adequacy, knowledge and skills of academic and non- academic (technical and administrative) whether they are fit/not fit to meet the requirements of academic standards and strategies of teaching learning.

6.2 Teaching Learning Methods

A teaching method comprises of the principles and methods used by teachers to enable student learning. For a particular teaching method to be appropriate and efficient it has to be in relation with the characteristic of the learner and the type of learning it is supposed to bring about.

The teachers should use innovative teaching techniques to make the students keen, focused and interested to learn the subjects taught, and are able to maintain a scholarly approach for engaging students in academic activities. Teachers need to be diligent in transferring new knowledge to the students effectively so that the goal of teaching learning succeeds. Teaching methods include 55

lectures, and practical classes. Theory work is backed up by independent or group-based practical study. Assessment methods typically both for theoretical and practical courses comprise 70% final exam, 10% class attendance and 20% in-course tests/assignments. The opinion of stakeholders about teaching learning methods is given below:

Table 6.1 Interactive and supportive teaching-learning.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 22.2 66.7 0.0 66.7 Alumni 6.5 6.5 13 16.1 61.3 9.7 71 1st Year 1.8 12.3 14.1 5.3 68.4 12.3 80.7 2nd Year 3.6 18.1 21.7 19.3 54.2 4.8 59 3rd Year 0.0 7.5 7.5 9.0 56.7 26.9 83.6

4th Year 9.7 32.3 42 9.7 40.3 8.1 48.4 Student Masters 11.1 16.7 27.8 16.7 44.4 11.1 55.5 Total 4.6 17.4 22 12.1 53.4 12.5 65.9

Table 6.1 indicates that about 66% academic staff and 70% alumni agree that teaching-learning is interactive and supportive. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 13% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 80%, 58%, 82%, 48%, 55%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that teaching-learning is interactive and supportive. But, about 14%, 22%, 8%, 42%, 28%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. It is known that teaching method is mostly lecture based. Learning is thus teacher-centered. Diverse, interactive, participatory, interesting and collaborative teaching methods are less practiced. Teachers do not frequently use innovative teaching techniques to make the students keen, focused and interested to learn.

56

Table 6.2 Optimal class size for interactive teaching-learning.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 11.1 11.1 22.2 33.3 33.3 11.1 44.4 Alumni 0.0 6.5 6.5 0.0 80.6 12.9 93.5 1st Year 0.0 7.0 7 7.0 52.6 33.3 85.9

2nd Year 16.5 43.4 59.9 1.2 28.9 12.0 40.9

3rd Year 1.5 23.9 25.4 6.0 56.7 11.9 68.6

4th Year 12.9 30.6 43.5 4.8 40.3 11.3 51.6 Student Masters 11.1 19.4 30.5 8.3 47.2 13.9 61.1 Total 8.2 26.9 35.1 4.9 43.9 16.1 60

From the above table it is observed that, about 44% academic staff and 94% alumni agree that class size is optimum for interactive teaching, learning. Also, about 86%, 40%, 67%, 52%, 61%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on this issue. On the other hand, about 22% academic staff and 7% alumni disagree that class size is optimum for interactive teaching, learning. Also, we observe that 7%, 60%, 25%, 44%, 31%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. It is evident from the above table that most of the respondents agreed that class size is optimum for interactive teaching-learning.

Table 6.3 Assessment strategies.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 33.3 33.3 22.2 55.5 Alumni 0.0 6.5 6.5 12.9 67.7 12.9 80.6 1st Year 0.0 3.5 3.5 12.3 64.9 19.3 84.2 2nd Year 2.4 14.5 16.9 30.1 48.2 4.8 53 3rd Year 0.0 1.5 1.5 3.0 44.8 50.7 95.5

4th Year 4.8 22.6 27.4 4.8 59.7 8.1 67.8 Student Masters 8.3 8.3 16.6 5.6 72.2 5.6 77.8 Total 2.6 10.5 13.1 12.8 55.7 18.4 74.1

Table 6.3 indicates that about 56% academic staff and 81% alumni agree that both formative (tutorials assignments, presentations, etc.) and summative assessment (final examination) strategies are followed. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 7% alumni disagree 57

with this statement. On the other hand, about 84%, 53%, 96%, 68%, 78%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on this issue. We observe that 4%, 17%, 2%, 27%, 17%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students at least disagree that both formative (tutorials assignments, presentations, etc.) and summative assessment (final examination) strategies are followed. It is evident that a good number of respondents agreed with the assessment strategies.

6.3 Use of Lesson Plan

A lesson plan is a teacher’s detailed description of the course of instruction for a lesson. A daily lesson plan is developed by a teacher to guide class learning. Details will vary depending on the preference of the teacher, subjects being covered and the needs of the students.

Each student is provided with a hard copy of the syllabus and academic calendar so that they are aware about various important events/activities well in advance. The Table 6.4 presents the opinions regarding the lesson plan of the department.

Table 6.4 Lesson plans are provided to the students in advance.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 0.0 77.8 11.1 88.9 Alumni 3.2 6.5 9.7 12.9 58.1 19.4 77.5 1st Year 5.3 24.6 29.9 7.0 45.6 17.5 63.1 2nd Year 1.2 4.8 6 7.2 34.9 51.8 86.7 3rd Year 1.5 1.5 3 0.0 44.8 52.2 97

4th Year 6.5 11.3 17.8 8.1 37.1 37.1 74.2 Student Masters 19.4 30.6 50 5.6 30.6 13.9 44.5 Total 5.2 12.1 17.3 5.6 39.0 38.0 77

From table 6.4 it is observed that about 89% academic staff and 78% alumni agree that lesson plans/course outlines are provided to the students in advance. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 10% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 63%, 87%, 97%, 74%, 45%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on this issue. Also, we observe that 35%, 6%, 3%, 18%, 50%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree that lesson plans/course outlines are provided to the students in advance. A significant proportion of respondents agreed in favour of the statement. 58

6.4 Technology Integration

Technology, when integrated into the curriculum, revolutionized the learning process. More and more studies show the technology integration in the curriculum improves students’ learning process and outcomes.

Technology is put into maximum use in the teaching-learning process. Our classrooms with multimedia facility can make teaching sessions more interactive and help effective time management. The e-transactions can cover the entire academic and related activities, thus can contribute to significant enhancement of the learning process. The department has the latest scientific instruments for the students. The department has a dedicated computer laboratory with 40 high-end computers and dedicated internet line of 560 Mbps from university network. Our central library is well equipped with rich database catering to the needs of students and faculty- access to e-book and e-journals. For this, questionnaire survey was conducted among alumni’s, students and faculties of the department to know their views about existing technologies used in teaching. The outcomes of the survey have been presented in the Table 6.5.

Table 6.5 Use of modern devices to improve teaching-learning process.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.2 44.4 33.3 77.7 Alumni 0.0 12.9 12.9 16.1 51.6 19.4 71 1st Year 3.5 15.8 19.3 5.3 68.4 7.0 75.4 2nd Year 2.4 22.9 25.3 2.4 60.2 12.0 72.2 3rd Year 3.0 1.5 4.5 1.5 53.7 40.3 94

4th Year 6.5 11.3 17.8 4.8 64.5 12.9 77.4 Student Masters 2.8 8.3 11.1 8.3 50.0 30.6 80.6 Total 3.6 12.8 16.4 3.9 60.0 19.7 79.7

Table 6.5 indicates that about 78% academic staff and 71% alumni agree that modern devices are used to improve teaching-learning process. On the other hand, none of the academic staff and 13% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 75%, 72%, 94%, 77%, 81%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on this issue. Also, we observe that about 19%, 25%, 5%, 18%, 11%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree that modern devices are used to improve teaching- learning process. 59

Multimedia as a tool for effective teaching and learning is widely used by the teachers in the department. One of its advantages is that this technique makes the lectures more focused. On average more than 70% respondents agreed that modern devices are effectively used to improve teaching learning process.

Table 6.6 Use of diverse methods for assessment.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 22.2 55.6 11.1 66.7 Alumni 3.2 9.7 12.9 32.3 48.4 6.5 54.9 1st Year 0.0 15.8 15.8 36.8 43.9 3.5 47.4 2nd Year 1.2 3.6 4.8 14.5 73.5 7.2 80.7 3rd Year 3.0 32.8 35.8 23.9 35.8 4.5 40.3

4th Year 4.8 3.2 8 12.9 56.5 22.6 79.1 Student Masters 8.3 5.6 13.9 5.6 52.8 27.8 80.6 Total 3.0 12.5 15.5 19.3 53.8 11.5 65.3

From the above table 6.6 it is observed that about 67% academic staff and 55% alumni agree that diverse methods are used for assessment. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 13% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 47%, 81%, 40%, 79%, 81%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that diverse methods are used for assessment. But, about 16%, 5%, 36%, 8%, 14%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. Since a small number of the respondents disagree on this issue hence we may conclude that diverse methods are used for assessment properly.

Table 6.7 Adequate opportunities for practical exercises.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 22.2 22.2 33.3 22.2 22.2 44.4 Alumni 3.2 9.7 12.9 22.6 35.5 29.0 64.5 1st Year 7.0 15.8 22.8 26.3 47.4 3.5 50.9 2nd Year 10.8 25.3 36.1 14.5 42.2 7.2 49.4 3rd Year 7.5 25.4 32.9 14.9 34.3 17.9 52.2

4th Year 9.7 14.5 24.2 27.4 43.5 4.8 48.3 Student Masters 8.3 19.4 27.7 8.3 44.4 19.4 63.8 Total 8.9 20.7 29.6 18.7 42.0 9.8 51.8 60

Table 6.7 indicates that about 44% academic staff and 65% alumni agree that entity provides adequate opportunities for practical exercises to apply in real life situation. On the other hand, about 22% academic staff and 13% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 51%, 49%, 52%, 48%, 64%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that entity provides adequate opportunities for practical exercises to apply in real life situation. But, about 23%, 36%, 33%, 24%, 11%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. It is evident from the above table that opportunities for practical exercises to apply in real life situation are not adequate.

Table 6.8 Teaching-learning process encompasses co-curricular activities enrich students’ personal development.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 22.2 22.2 33.3 22.2 22.2 44.4

Table 6.8 indicates that 44% academic staff at least agree that teaching-learning process encompasses co-curricular activities to enrich students’ personal development. But, about 22% academic staff disagree with this statement. Teaching learning practices do not provide enough scope to integrate co-curricular and extra-curricular activities for intended skill development of students.

Table 6.9 Practice of diverse methods to achieve learning objectives

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 22.2 55.6 11.1 66.7 Alumni 3.2 12.9 16.1 29.0 48.4 6.5 54.9 1st Year 1.8 12.3 14.1 14.0 61.4 10.5 71.9 2nd Year 0.0 14.5 14.5 14.5 59.0 12.0 71 3rd Year 4.5 40.3 44.8 14.9 34.3 6.0 40.3

4th Year 6.5 17.7 24.2 11.3 56.6 8.1 64.7 Student Masters 11.1 22.2 33.3 2.8 44.4 19.4 63.8 Total 3.9 21.3 25.2 12.5 51.8 10.5 62.3

61

Table 6.9 indicates that about 67% academic staff and 55% alumni agree that diverse methods are practiced to achieve learning objectives. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 16% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 72%, 71%, 40%, 65%, 64%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that diverse methods are practiced to achieve learning objectives. But, about 14%, 15%, 45%, 24%, 33%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. It is evident from the above table more diverse methods should be used to achieve learning objectives.

6.5 Assessment of Student Performance

Assessment of student performance is a systematic process of collecting, analyzing and interpreting information to determine the extent to which intended learning outcomes have been achieved. Assessment creates a basis for judgment on the performance of student.

The purpose of higher education is to make the students capable of using knowledge and understanding to identify, clarify and provide best possible solutions to issues and emerging problems relating to individual, workplace, society and the country. Students are required to gain the multiple skills to make them capable of serving the purposes of higher education. Students gain these multiple skills through the achievement of intended learning outcomes of study programs. Effective and appropriate performance assessment procedure is very important to judge the level of attainment of learning outcomes and skill development. The opinion of academic staff, alumni and students regarding some statement related with assessment procedure is given below.

Table 6.10 Assessment procedures meet the objectives of the course.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 77.8 Alumni 0.0 6.5 6.5 16.1 61.3 16.1 77.4 1st Year 1.8 0.0 1.8 28.1 64.9 5.3 70.2 2nd Year 3.6 8.4 12 12.0 59.0 16.9 75.9 3rd Year 1.5 10.4 11.9 14.9 47.8 25.4 73.2

4th Year 6.5 22.6 29.1 22.6 43.5 4.8 48.3 Student Masters 8.3 5.6 13.9 22.2 55.6 8.3 63.9 Total 3.9 9.8 13.7 19.0 54.1 13.1 67.2 62

Table 6.10 indicates that about 78% academic staff and 77% alumni agree that assessment procedures meet the objectives of the course. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 7% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 70%, 76%, 73%, 48%, 64%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that assessment procedures meet the objectives of the course. But, about 2%, 12%, 12%, 29%, 14%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. It is evident from the above table that assessment procedures generally meet the objectives of the course. Existing policy for students performance assessment does not fit assessment of ILOs.

Table 6.11 Providing feedback to the students immediately after assessment.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 22.2 22.2 33.3 33.3 11.1 44.4 Alumni 3.2 25.8 29 19.4 38.7 12.9 51.6 1st Year 24.6 49.1 73.7 10.5 15.8 0.0 15.8 2nd Year 16.9 43.4 60.3 7.2 30.1 2.4 32.5 3rd Year 14.9 55.2 70.1 9.0 17.9 3.0 20.9

4th Year 21.0 50.0 71 6.5 16.1 6.5 22.6 Student Masters 33.3 36.1 69.4 8.3 19.4 2.8 22.2 Total 20.7 47.5 68.2 8.2 20.7 3.0 23.7

Table 6.11 indicates that about 44% academic staff and 52% alumni agree that the students are provided feedback immediately after assessment. On the other hand, about 22% academic staff and 29% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 16%, 33%, 21%, 23%, 22%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that the students are provided feedback immediately after assessment. But, about 74%, 60%, 70%, 71%, 69%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. Since a significant number of the respondents disagree on this issue hence we may conclude that students are not provided feedback immediately after assessment.

Table 6.12 Review of the assessment systems at regular intervals.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 66.7

63

Table 6.12 indicates that about 67% academic staff agree that the assessment system is reviewed at regular intervals. On the other hand, about 33% academic staff undecided on this statement. So from the above data, we may conclude that the assessment system is reviewed at regular intervals.

Table 6.13 Maintenance of fairness and transparency in assessment system.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 55.6 44.4 100

Table 6.13 indicates that all of the academic staff agree that fairness and transparency are maintained in the assessment system.

Table 6.14 Duly communication of assessment systems to students at the outset of the academic year.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 100 Alumni 3.2 6.5 9.7 8.7 64.5 16.1 80.6 1st Year 1.8 1.8 3.6 10.5 52.6 33.3 85.9 2nd Year 3.6 10.0 13.6 7.2 60.2 16.9 77.1 3rd Year 3.0 14.9 17.9 11.9 52.2 17.9 70.1

4th Year 3.2 24.2 27.4 22.6 43.5 6.5 50 Student Masters 11.1 11.1 22.2 0.0 55.6 22.2 77.8 Total 3.9 13.1 17 11.1 53.1 18.7 71.8

Table 6.14 indicates that about 100% academic staff and 81% alumni agree that assessment systems are duly communicated to students at the outset of the academic year. On the other hand, none of the academic staff and 10% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 86%, 77%, 70%, 50%, 78%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that assessment systems are duly communicated to students at the outset of the academic year. But, about 4%, 14%, 18%, 27%, 22%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. It is evident from the above table that maximum of the respondents agreed on the above statement. So, assessment systems are duly communicated to students.

64

CHAPTER SEVEN Student Support Services

Student support services are to meet the personal and academic needs of the students. The support system is an educational necessity and both students and staffs benefit from it. It contributes to the social and academic development of the students, enhance quality learning experience and educational achievement of the students by meeting their diverse needs. It also promotes intellectual development. Student support services facilitate to build a student level community that creates a sense of belongingness, friendly and academic environment through socialization, collaborative efforts and student involvement. Generally the provisions of student support services includes academic guidance and counseling, co-curriculum and extra- curriculum activities, career and placement, alumni services and community services. In the following tables we provide the opinion of the alumni, current students and academics about whether or not these student support services are maintained in the department.

7.1 Academic Guidance and Counseling

An important part of the mission of the department is to improve the quality of the graduate students. To that end, the department has a student advisor. The advisor with other members of the faculty spend a considerable amount of time talking with students about their goals, concerns and suggestions for improving their experience. The academic committee is working towards enhancing the institutional culture to better serve the needs of an ever-changing and dynamic learning community. It offers career guidance on all aspects of career planning, job searching and post-graduate studies. We provide individual counseling through scheduled appointments. Besides each faculty member helps to solve different academic, personal and psychosocial problems faced by the students.

Class Deliveries:  Monitoring of class deliveries as per the time table is done by the academic committee.  Monthly review of syllabus coverage is conducted and necessary corrective measures are suggested.  The attendance of students is monitored continuously and defaulter students are counseled.  The attendance are recorded for each theory/laboratory subjects and also the performance of students in the class tests. 65

The questionnaire surveyed among with alumni, current students and academic are made about academic guidance and counseling of the department and their opinions are presented in table 7.1.

Table 7.1 Arrangement of academic guidance and counseling.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 22.2 22.2 44.4 33.3 0.0 33.3 Alumni 3.2 16.1 19.3 19.4 38.7 22.6 61.3 1st Year 10.5 15.8 26.3 26.3 36.8 10.5 47.3 2nd Year 13.3 16.9 30.2 16.9 43.4 9.6 53 3rd Year 19.4 50.7 70.1 7.5 19.4 3.0 22.4

4th Year 8.1 14.5 22.6 17.7 50.0 9.7 59.7 Student Masters 13.9 27.8 41.7 5.6 44.4 8.3 52.7 Total 13.1 24.9 38 15.4 38.4 8.2 46.6

Table 7.1 indicates that about 33% academic staff and 61% alumni agree that there is an arrangement in the entity to provide an academic guidance and counseling. On the other hand, about 22% academic staff and 19% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 47%, 53%, 22%, 59%, 53%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that there is an arrangement in the entity to provide an academic guidance and counseling. But, about 26%, 30%, 70%, 22%, 48%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. We observed inconsistency in the respondent’s opinion and from the above table it indicates that there is a lack of procedures for academic guidance and counseling and need to be improved.

7.2 Co-curricular and Extra-curricular Activities

Learning should not be confined to the classroom only. Besides curricular activities, students need to engaged in co-curricular and extra-curricular activities. This is normally done by students association named ‘Rasayan Sangsad (Chemistry Students Association) of Jahangirnagar University’. It is an official organ of the students of the department and the executive committee members are elected/selected from the students. Besides, the chairman of the department is the president and one of the faculty member acts as a treasurer of the association. In addition to that there is a student’s advisor who looks after the welfare of the 66

students. Student advisor is a teacher nominated by the academic committee for a period of 2 years. Co-curricular and extra-curricular activities provide opportunities for students to explore new fields of interest, cultivate leadership skills and to buildup teamwork. Generally, all students participate in a wide-range of activities organized by the association.

Co-Curricular Activities: Each year there is an abundance of stimulating programs and activities from which students may select for provocative and important use of their time out of regular classes. Broadly known as co-curricular activities, these opportunities for involvement are an integral part of university life, offering students additional avenues in which to explore their talents, passions and interests. Participating in co-curricular activities, our students continue to apply what they learn in the classroom to enhance their knowledge and performance.

Extra Curricular Activities: Activities undertaken throughout the year are as follows:  Sports In the university, there is a physical education department which conducts annual sports, hall sports, inter-department various games like football, cricket, volleyball, badminton, etc. All departments participate in the various sports events. The student’s advisor of the department look after this affair. In addition to that, department itself conducts various sports among the students of the department.

 Cultural Day Every year, a reception ceremony for the freshers and farewell for the departing students is organized by the department. On that day, a day long cultural program is held to encourage students to participate in performing arts and games. This program is very useful to bring out the talent of students. In the first part of the program, the freshers are given necessary instructions regarding their classes, tutorials, exams and evaluation standards. In the second part, various events like singing, playing musical instruments and dance are performed by the students. The department have a number of scholarship for the students for their performances in year-end exams, BSc final, MS and MPhil exams. Every year, the departmental students association organize a few day long study tour.

The questionnaire surveyed among alumni, current students and academics are made about the co-curriculum and extra curriculum activities of the department and their opinions are presented in Table 7.2. 67

Table 7.2 Distribution of co-curricular and extra-curricular exposures to the students.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 33.3 33.3 22.2 44.4 0.0 44.4 Alumni 3.2 9.7 12.9 12.9 54.8 19.4 74.2 1st Year 10.5 19.3 29.8 22.8 35.1 12.3 47.4 2nd Year 50.6 31.3 81.9 9.6 7.2 1.2 8.4 3rd Year 7.5 35.8 43.3 11.9 38.8 6.0 44.8

4th Year 33.9 33.9 67.8 6.5 19.4 6.5 25.9 Student Masters 22.2 36.1 58.3 11.1 19.4 11.1 30.5 Total 26.9 31.1 58 12.1 23.3 6.6 29.9

Table 7.2 indicates that about 44% academic staff and 74% alumni agree that the entity provides co-curricular and extra-curricular exposures to the students. On the other hand, about 33% academic staff and 13% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 47%, 8%, 45%, 26%, 31%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that the entity provides co-curricular and extra-curricular exposures to the students. But, about 30%, 82%, 43%, 68%, 58%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. We observe that a significant number of respondents disagree with this statement hence we may conclude that there is a lack of policy for co-curricular and extra-curricular activities in the entity.

7.3 Career & Placement

Most of our graduates are career oriented. After graduating from the department of chemistry they are placed in a good position at different international organizations, chemical industries, pharmaceuticals, research organizations, academic institutions, cadre services, NGO’s, social services, etc. The opinion of academic staffs, alumni and current students about the availability of financial grants to the students are given below:

68

Table 7.3 Availability of financial grants to the students.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 22.2 22.2 44.4 33.3 0.0 33.3 Alumni 6.5 16.1 22.6 32.3 45.2 0.0 45.2 1st Year 3.5 0.0 3.5 35.1 38.6 22.8 61.4

2nd Year 26.5 38.6 65.1 7.2 24.1 3.6 27.7

3rd Year 7.5 20.9 28.4 7.5 40.3 23.9 64.2

4th Year 17.7 35.5 53.2 16.1 24.2 6.5 30.7 Student Masters 13.9 36.1 50 22.2 27.8 0.0 27.8 Total 14.8 26.6 41.4 16.1 30.8 11.8 42.6

Table 7.3 indicates that about 33% academic staff and 45% alumni agree that financial grants are available to the students in case of hardship. On the other hand, about 22% academic staff and 23% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 61%, 28%, 64%, 31%, 28%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that financial grants are available to the students in case of hardship. But, about 4%, 65%, 28%, 53%, 50%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. The survey results present in the table 7.3 indicates that responses are very much inconsistence. This implies that although some scholarships are available in the department but as a whole it is not sufficient to meet the needs of the students in case of hardship.

7.4 Alumni Services

The university and program offering entities should have well organized and meaningful alumni association to support the quality education efforts. The university and program offering entities should have a formal system to collect alumni feedback on the effectiveness of academic programs, emerging changes in the industry and working life.

We have an alumni association “Chemistry Department Alumni Association, JU”. It has around 850 members with an Executive Committee of 24 members. The association hold regular official meeting and arrange seminars and local congregations. The association also creates funds to help the current students in need of severe medical attention. Some alumnis also donate funds as scholarship/stipend for poor students of the department.

The questionnaire surveyed among with alumni, current students and academics are made about alumni association as organized and supportive association of the department and their opinions are presented in Table 7.4. 69

Table 7.4 Organized and supportive alumni association.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 22.2 22.2 11.1 44.4 22.2 66.6 Alumni 6.5 6.5 13 3.2 48.4 35.5 83.9 1st Year 0.0 1.8 1.8 28.1 50.9 19.3 70.2 2nd Year 1.2 8.4 9.6 10.8 49.4 30.1 79.5 3rd Year 0.0 6.0 6 0.0 40.3 53.7 94

4th Year 6.5 8.1 14.6 12.9 46.8 25.8 72.6 Student Masters 6.5 2.8 9.3 2.8 55.6 33.3 88.9 Total 2.3 5.9 8.2 11.1 47.9 32.8 80.7

Table 7.4 indicates that about 67% academic staff and 84% alumni agree that there is an organized and supportive alumni association in the department. On the other hand, about 22% academic staff and 13% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 70%, 80%, 94%, 73%, 89%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that there is an organized and supportive alumni association in the department. But, about 2%, 10%, 6%, 15%, 9%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. The table 7.4 shows most of the respondents agreed that there is an organized and supportive alumni association present in the department. The chemistry department alumni association is working effectively for the walefare of the students as well as for the entity.

Table 7.5 Collection of alumni feedback to update the learning outcomes of the program.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 33.3 33.3 44.4 22.2 0.0 22.2 Alumni 0.0 12.9 12.9 9.7 54.8 22.6 77.4 1st Year 1.8 3.5 5.3 33.3 52.6 8.8 61.4 2nd Year 2.4 3.6 6 79.5 10.8 3.6 14.4 3rd Year 0.0 6.0 6 16.4 47.8 29.9 77.7

4th Year 6.5 17.7 24.2 30.6 38.7 6.5 45.2 Student Masters 8.3 5.6 13.9 38.9 38.9 8.3 47.2 Total 3.3 7.2 10.5 42.3 35.7 11.5 47.2

70

Table 7.5 indicates that about 22% academic staff and 77% alumni agree that the entity collects alumni feedback to update the learning outcomes of the program. On the other hand, about 33% academic staff and 13% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 61%, 14%, 77%, 44%, 47%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that the entity collects alumni feedback to update the learning outcomes of the program. But, about 5%, 6%, 6%, 24%, 14%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. From the above table we observe that although a significant number of respondents agreed on this issue but only 22% academic staffs agreed on the same statement indicates that the policy of collection of the alumni feedback to update the learning outcomes of the program need to be introduced.

7.5 Community Services

Students should have the opportunity to involve themselves in community services under the management of the program offering entity in an organized manner on a regular basis. Community involvement is an effective way of understanding the social issues and working with people. It aims to enhance students knowledge, skills and confidence. It also makes an important contribution towards promoting lifelong learning, social inclusion and active citizenship.

Like other institutes, Jahangirnagar University also has Bangladesh National Cadet Core (BNCC) headed by a university teacher. Some of the students of the department of chemistry are also cadets of BNCC. Through BNCC students regularly take part in community services. They take part in blood donation camps and donate bloods. Students also take part in different relief camps. The opinion of the academic staffs, alumni and students about the involvement of opportunities with community services are given in table 7.6.

Table 7.6 Involvement of opportunities with community services.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 33.3 56.6 0.0 56.6 Alumni 0.0 6.5 6.5 12.9 61.3 19.4 80.7 1st Year 1.8 0.0 1.8 19.3 63.2 15.8 79.0

2nd Year 37.3 24.1 61.4 10.8 21.7 6.0 27.7

3rd Year 0.0 9.0 9 1.5 64.2 25.4 89.6

4th Year 6.5 11.3 17.8 22.6 50.0 9.7 59.7 Student Masters 5.6 30.6 36.2 5.6 52.8 5.6 58.4 Total 12.5 14.4 26.9 12.1 48.2 12.8 61.0

71

Table 7.6 indicates that about 57% academic staff and 81% alumni agree that there are opportunities to be involved with community services. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff and 7% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 79%, 28%, 90%, 60%, 58%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that there are opportunities to be involved with community services. But, about 2%, 61%, 9%, 18%, 36%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. The survey results indicate, majority of the respondents feel students have enough opportunity to involve themselves in community services. It is always beneficial for them to be familiar with real life situations.

72

CHAPTER EIGHT Staff and Facilities

The academic and nonacademic staffs are the major players in teaching, learning and research of the entity. Efficiency and commitment of these staffs are the key factors to all academic activities and quality assurance system. Teaching staffs are creating knowledge through research and transferring to the students through teaching learning practices. On the other hand, nonacademic staffs must have active role with the necessary depth and breadth of technical knowledge and experience to support the academic activities of the entity.

The chemistry department currently has 35 regular faculty members. Among them 26 faculties have PhD degree and 4 faculties are doing PhD at well reputed universities in North America, Europe and Asia, while the remaining faculties have MS degree. All the faculty members in the department of chemistry are highly qualified, well groomed and equipped with quality & updated knowledge in chemistry & have a strong command on the subject.

A list of faculty members with their terminal degree, position, main area of specialization and their e-mail contacts is given below.

Sl.No. Name Designation Qualifications Specialization E-mail

1 Dr. Shariff Enamul Kabir Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Inorganic [email protected] PhD (London), C Chem. FRSC 2 Dr. Md. Elias Molla Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Organic [email protected] DPhil (Sussex) 3 Dr. Md. Manzurul Karim Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Inorganic [email protected] PhD (London) 4 Dr. Md. Nurul Abser Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Inorganic [email protected] PhD (U.K.) 5 Dr. Mahbub Kabir Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Physical [email protected] PhD(Cambridge) 6 Dr. Md. Enamullah Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Physical [email protected] PhD (Austria)

7 Dr. Md. Arzu Miah Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar) Inorganic [email protected] PhD (Vienna)

8 Dr. Nurun Nahar Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Physical [email protected] PhD (Japan)

73

9 Dr. D. M. Shafiqul Islam Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Physical [email protected] PhD (Japan) 10 Dr. Tapan Kumar Saha Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Physical [email protected] PhD (Japan) 11 Dr. Khurshida Khayer Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Organic [email protected] MPhil (St.Andrews, U.K.), Ph.D.(Germany) 12 Dr. Koushik Saha Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Organic [email protected] PhD (Malaysia) 13 Dr. Md. Abdullah Khan Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Physical [email protected] PhD (Japan) 14 Dr. Md. Mamun Hossain Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Organic [email protected] PhD (Japan) 15 Dr. Md. Ataur Rahman Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Organic [email protected] PhD (Japan) 16 Dr. Subarna Karmaker Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Physical [email protected] PhD (Japan) 17 Dr. Md. Anamul Hoque Professor MSc (Jahangirnagar), Physical [email protected] PhD (Jahangirnagar) 18 Dr. Md. Minarul Islam Associate MSc (Jahangirnagar), Physical [email protected] Professor PhD (Taiwan) 19 Dr. Tahmina Haque Associate MSc (Jahangirnagar), Organic [email protected] Professor PhD (Japan) 20 Dr. Shishir Ghosh Associate MSc (Jahangirnagar), Inorganic [email protected] Professor PhD (England) 21 Dr. S M Tareque Abedin Associate MSc (Jahangirnagar) Inorganic [email protected] Professor PhD (Canada) 22 Dr. Nasrin Jewena Associate MSc (Jahangirnagar), Organic [email protected] Professor PhD (Japan) 23 Dr. Shahed Rana Associate MS (Jahangirnagar), Physical [email protected] Professor PhD (Japan) 24 Dr. Md. Awlad Hossain Associate MS (Jahangirnagar), Organic [email protected] Professor PhD (Japan) 25 Mr. Md. Abdus Sabur Assistant MS (Jahangirnagar) Inorganic [email protected] Professor 26 Dr. Md. Kamal Hossain Assistant M.S. (Jahangirnagar), Inorganic [email protected] Professor PhD (Sweden) 27 Dr. Mir Tamzid Rahman Assistant MS (Jahangirnagar), Inorganic [email protected] Professor PhD (Japan)

74

28 Mr. Subas Rajbangshi Assistant MS (Jahangirnagar) Inorganic [email protected] Professor

29 Mr. Md. Aminur Rahman Lecturer MS (Jahangirnagar) Inorganic [email protected]

30 Mr. Ananda Kumar Ghosh Lecturer MS (Dhaka) Physical [email protected]

31. Mr. Shafikul Islam Lecturer MS (Jahangirnagar) Inorganic [email protected]

32. Mr. Rokonuzzaman Lecturer MS (Jahangirnagar) Inorganic [email protected]

33. Mr. Md. Mahbub Alam Lecturer MS (Jahangirnagar) Inorganic [email protected]

34. Mrs. Suimaya Khan Lecturer MS (Jahangirnagar) Organic [email protected] 35. Mrs. Tamanna Binte- Lecturer MS (Jahangirnagar) Organic [email protected] Mahmud Chowdhury

A table indicating program areas and number of faculty in each area is given below.

Program areas Number of faculty Number of faculty with PhD members in each area

Physical Chemistry 11 10 (in addition 1 remaining faculties are doing PhD) Inorganic Chemistry 14 8 (in addition 3 more faculties are doing PhD) Organic Chemistry 10 8

Non-academic staff: Supporting Staff in the Department of Chemistry Sl.No. Name Designation Qualifications Section 1 Md. Billal Hossain Senior Instrument Engineer MSc Office 2 Md. Abdul Mannan Deputy Registrar MA Office 3 Md. Nurul Islam Technical Officer (Glassblower) SSC Office 10 Md. Atuar Islam Khan Assistant Registrar MA Store 4 Ahmed Ali Technical Officer (Lab) SSC Inorganic Lab 5 Md. Bashir Ullah Technical Officer (Lab) HSC Physical Lab 6 Md. Mizanur Rahman Technical Officer (Lab) SSC Physical Lab 7 Md. Abdur Razzaque Technical Officer (Lab) SSC 2nd year Lab 8 Md. Abed Hossain Technical Officer (Lab) HSC Organic Lab 9 Md. Solayman Hossain Technical Officer (Lab) HSC Organic Lab 75

11 Md. Shirajul Islam Deputy Assistant Librarian MA Seminar Library 12 Sultan Uddin Ahmed Technical Officer (Lab) HSC Inorganic Lab 18 Mohammad Salah Uddin Technical Officer (Lab) MA 2nd year Lab 13 Mohammad Abul Hossain Senior Assistant MA Office 14 Md. Monsur Ali Store Keeper HSC Store 15 Md. Alauddin Upper Computer Lab Assistant HSC Computer Lab 16 Md. Shahidul Islam Senior Sorter Grade-3 HSC Office 17 Md. Akteruzzaman Senior Lab Technician MA Organic Lab 19 Md. Hatem Ali Sikder Senior Lab Technician SSC 1st year Lab 20 Md. Shahidul Islam Senior Lab Technician BSS Office 21 Md. Abdul Salam Lab Technician BA 2nd year Lab 22 Md. Abu Sayed Mondol Senior Computer Attendant SSC Office 23 Md. Zachan Ali Mali Grade-1 Class V Office 24 Md. Saidur Rahman Pannu Senior Sorter Class VIII Office 25 Mohammad Ali Ashraf Senior Sorter HSC Office 26 Md. Asaduzzaman Senior Lab Attendant SSC 1st year Lab 27 Shree Moti Lasmi Senior Suiper Class V Office 28 Md. Kamal Miah Senior Suiper Class VIII Office 29 Md. Altaf Hossain Senior Lab Attendant Class V 1st year Lab 30 Mohammad Ismail Hossain Lab Attendant HSC Office 31 Md. Hasan Ali Lab Attendant Class VIII Inorganic Lab

All faculties of the department meet the criteria for appointment in their respective field. Most of the faculties generally participate in seminars, conferences and workshops at national/international levels. Faculties take interest in teaching and involve themselves in research and consultancy. Faculties are generally available in the department or in library or research laboratory. Full time faculty members have sufficient time for scholarly and professional development.

The department ensures fair, timely selection, appointment/promotion as per the set criteria of the university. Posts are advertized in the national dailies and recruitment/selection/promotion is done through the selection board in due course. The teaching load of the faculties is within the set limits and the faculty members can devote time to research and other scholarly activities. Several faculty members generally participate in development programs at the departmental and university level. These programs include participation in local and international meetings, course 76

development programs, participation in seminars and workshops. The department maintains a good working environment for quality teaching and research.

To have an effective team composed of academic and non-academic staffs the critical areas to be considered are entry qualification, recruitments, staff development, peer observations, career development and key performance indicators. In this chapter we have provided the opinion of the non-academic and academic about entry qualifications, recruitment, staff development and key performance indicators for academic and non-academic staff. Fulfillment of entry qualification for recruiting staffs is mandatory. Entry qualification varies in terms of posts. In some non-academic position experienced staffs are needed. For teaching staff, generally the entry post is a Lecturer.

8.1 Recruitment For the recruitment of both teaching as well as supporting staff, there is no bias or reservation based on gender, caste and creed etc. During the recruitment process, equal opportunities are provided for all eligible candidates. This, in itself brings in a large uniformity in the university‘s approach towards the various sectors of the society.

Recruitment Procedure  The approval to the sanctioned posts is first taken from the University.  Approval from University is then taken for publishing the advertisement to invite applications.  The advertisement is published at local and national level.  Selection committee is duly appointed by the university authority to conduct the interviews.  The eligible and selected candidates names are recommended by the selection committee for approval of the university syndicate.

The opinion of the non-academic and academic staff about recruitment policy and practices is given below:

77

Table 8.1 Good recruitment policy and practices for recruitment of competent academic and non-academic staff.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 33.3 33.3 11.1 55.6 0.0 55.6 Non-academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.1 42.9 100

Table 8.1 indicates that 100% non-academic staff agree that recruitment policy and practices are good enough for recruitment of competent academic and non-academic staff. On the other hand, about 56% academic staff agree with this statement. But 33% academic staff disagree that recruitment policy and practices are good enough for recruitment of competent academic and non-academic staff. In fact, there is lack of policy and practices for recruitment of competent academic and non-academic staff.

Table 8.2 Attractive salary and incentives to retain the academic and non-academic staff.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.1 11.1 66.7 11.1 77.8 Non-academic 0.0 14.3 14.3 0.0 11.3 71.4 82.7

From the above table 8.2 it is observed that about 78% academic staff and 83% non-academic staff agree that salary and incentives are attractive enough to retain the academic and non- academic staff. But 11% academic staff and 14% non-academic staff at least disagree on this issue. Majority of the respondents’ opinion is in favour of the statement indicates that academic and non-academic staffs are satisfied in their present salary.

8.2 Staff Development

Faculty members who wish to pursue MPhil/PhD/Post Doc studies are granted study leave with full pay for a period up to 7 years. Also the University encourages the faculty to attend national and international conferences/workshops with leave.

Survey result about the staff development of the department among the academic and non- academic staffs are presented in Table 8.3-8.5. 78

Table 8.3 Congenial atmosphere prevails to enhance professional knowledge through research and higher studies.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 77.8 22.2 100 Non-academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 100

From the above table it is observed that all of the academic staff and non-academic staff agree that a congenial atmosphere prevails to enhance professional knowledge through research and higher studies.

Table 8.4 Opportunities of academics to take part in different seminar/workshop/training programs for skill development.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 22.2 22.2 22.2 33.3 22.2 55.5 Non-academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 100

From the above table it is observed that about 56% academic staff and 100% non-academic staff agree that academics have enough opportunity to take part in different seminar/workshop/ training programs for skill development. But about 22% academic staff disagree with this statement. In fact, academic staffs do not have enough opportunity to take part in different seminar/workshop/training programs for skill development. All academic staff should have training or orientation for effective academic guidance and counseling.

Table 8.5 Opportunities of non-academics staff to take part in different training programs for skill development.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 22.2 55.6 77.8 22.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Non-academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.9 57.1 100

Table 8.5 indicates that none of the academic staff agree and 100% non-academic staff agree that non-academics have enough opportunity to take part in different training programs for skill development. But about 78% academic staff disagree with this statement. Although 100% non- 79

academic staffs agreed with this statement but in fact non-academic staffs do not have enough opportunity to take part in different training programs for skill development.

8.3 Peer Observation

Peer observation is an effective approach to get useful insights to improve teaching capacity and quality. In some cases it is very difficult to identify ones’ own mistakes and limitations. In that case, peer observation provides an opportunity to learn from each other and to improve. Peer observation also helps experienced staffs to share the good practices with the new and relatively less experienced staff members. Such provision of mentoring is very effective to develop the professional skills of young and newly recruited staff. Peer observation means a process in which a colleague or other nominated individual is invited to observe ones’ class or way of doing a particular job and give feedback. Peer observation is a powerful tool for developing a culture of good practice. Such good practice may be used for the students also under the oversight of the faculty members.

Table 8.6 Policy of entity to provide mentoring/continuous guidance for new academic staff.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 11.1 11.1 22.2 44.4 33.3 0.0 33.3 Non-academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 71.4 100

Table 8.6 indicates that about 53% academic staff and 100% non-academic staff agree that the entity has a policy to provide mentoring/continuous guidance for new academic staff. But about 23% academic staff disagree with this statement. Some disagreement of respondents opinion indicates that entity has lack of policy to provide mentoring/continuous guidance for new academic staff.

8.4 Career Development

All employees are expected to participate in some form of career development every year. Career development encourages continuous self-improvement and a commitment to lifelong learning. It results in increased job satisfaction, enhanced capabilities and higher performance. Thus, career development provides staffs with opportunities to build productive and satisfying careers while contributing to the achievement of the university’s mission. 80

Table 8.7 Practice of seminars and workshops by the entity to share knowledge and experience among the faculty members.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 100 Non-academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 100

Table 8.7 indicates that all of the academic staff and non-academic staff agree that the entity practices seminars and workshops to share knowledge and experience among the faculty members.

Table 8.8 Performance of award policy of the entity to inspire academic staff.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 11.1 55.6 66.7 22.2 11.1 0.0 11.1 Non-academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 100

Table 8.8 indicates that about 33% academic staff and 100% non-academic staff agree that the entity has a performance award policy to inspire academic staff. But about 67% academic staff disagree with this statement. We see that majority of the academic staff disagree on this issue. It indicates that the entity does not have a performance ward policy to inspire academic staff.

8.5 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

Well-defined KPIs may act as a source of motivation and means to ensure accountability of staff. Performance of an academic institution should not be confined to producing graduates in terms of quantity only. It is important to have specific performance and success indicators that contribute to graduates’ skills development, national and international recognition and contribution to socio-economic development. Similarly, faculty members should not limit their activities within self-development by research and publications only. Rather, teaching performance should be measured based on student evaluation and peer observation, contribution to skill development of the students, quality teaching-learning.

Teaching performance and progress are evaluated through monthly review in the academic committee meeting. The key performance indicators are: number of theory/practical class taken per month, number of research student supervised per year and number of research paper 81

published per year. The opinion of the respondents on performance indicators are the criteria for promotion/up-gradation are given below:

Table 8.9 Criteria for promotion/up-gradation.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 33.3 33.3 11.1 55.6 0.0 55.6 Non-academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 100

Table 8.9 indicates that about 56% academic staff and 100% non-academic staff agree that performance indicators are the criteria for promotion/up-gradation. But about 33% academic staff disagree with this statement. It indicates that the entity has lack of key performance indicators (KPI) tools. Promotion or appointment to any higher position or assigning any responsibility in the university should be on the basis of well-defined key performance indicator (KPI).

82

CHAPTER NINE Research & Extension

The prime objective of higher education is to contribute to the sustainable development and improvement of society as a whole. For this, research plays an important role. Research comprises creative work undertaken on a systematic basis in order to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of humans, culture and society and use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications. Research makes teaching-learning more effective and practical oriented.

9.1 Policy and Program The department of chemistry is engaged in carrying out extensive research work in the areas of organic, inorganic, physical and environmental chemistry. This has been reflected by the number of research papers published in the journals home and abroad.

University should have a system and policy to disseminate and transfer the research findings to the industry and community through extension services. The factors that influence research and extension are policy and program, fund and facilities, fund hunting’s and dissemination of research findings of the department. The opinion of alumni, current student and academic staff about whether these factors are available in the department or not are given below:

Table 9.1 A well-defined research and development policy of the entity.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 33.3 33.3 0.0 66.7 0.0 66.7 Alumni 6.5 12.9 19.4 9.7 45.2 25.8 71.0 1st Year 0.0 0.0 0.0 47.4 38.6 14.0 52.6 2nd Year 0.0 2.4 2.4 83.1 14.5 0.0 14.5 3rd Year 4.5 17.9 22.4 10.4 55.2 11.9 67.1

4th Year 1.6 3.2 4.8 64.5 25.8 4.8 30.6 Student Masters 5.6 22.2 27.8 22.2 38.9 11.1 50.0 Total 2.0 7.9 9.9 49.5 33.1 7.5 40.6

83

Table 9.1 indicates that about 67% academic staff and 77% alumni agree that entity has a well- defined research and development policy. On the other hand, 33% academic staff and 19% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 53%, 15%, 67%, 31%, 50%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree that entity has a well-defined research and development policy. Also, about 0%, 2%, 22%, 5%, 28%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. It is evident from the above table that majority of the academic and alumni agreed with this statement whereas the response from the students is mixed. It may be concluded from the survey results that a well-defined research and development policy should be designed and well circulated.

9.2 Fund and Facilities

University must develop capacity with appropriate facilities and provisions to undertake research with national relevance and give due motivation and recognition to researchers.

Table 9.2 Existence of mechanism for engaging the students in research and development.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.1 88.9 0.0 88.9 Alumni 3.2 5.6 8.8 12.9 54.8 22.6 77.4 1st Year 1.8 3.5 5.3 49.1 31.6 14.0 45.6 2nd Year 0.0 7.2 7.2 80.7 10.8 1.2 12 3rd Year 1.5 7.5 9 10.4 59.7 20.9 80.6

4th Year 1.6 4.8 6.4 46.8 14.9 4.8 19.7 Student Masters 11.1 2.8 13.9 22.2 44.4 19.4 63.8 Total 2.3 5.6 7.9 45.6 35.7 10.8 46.5

Table 9.2 indicates that about 89% academic staff and 77% alumni agree that mechanism exists for engaging the students in research and development. Also, about 46%, 12%, 81%, 20%, 64%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agree on this issue. But none of the academic staff and 9% alumni disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 5%, 7%, 9%, 6%, 14%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree that mechanism exists for engaging the students in research and development. We observe that majority of the respondents agreed on this issue. The 2nd year and 4th year students do not agree 84

with the statement and most of them remained undecided. Hence we may conclude that mechanism exists for engaging the students in research and development.

9.3 Fund Hunting/Collection

The faculty members in the department of chemistry, Jahangirnagar University are conducting their research by collecting funds from both internal (university) and external (other than university) sources. The general sources are tabulated below.

Internal (University) External (Other than University) Sources Sources University Grant Commission, Bangladesh (UGC) Ministry of Science and Technology, Govt. of people republic of Bangladesh (S&T) Jahangirnagar Jahangirnagar University-University Grant Commission (JU-UGC) University (JU) HEQEP (Higher Education Quality Enhancement Project) Third World Academy of Science Ministry of Education, Bangladesh

Table 9.3 Initiatives of teachers to hunt research fund for smooth running of the research.

Total Strongly Total Strongly Disagree Undecided Agree Respondent Disagree (%) agree Agree (%) disagree (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) Academic 0.0 11.1 11.0 22.2 33.3 33.3 66.6

Table 9.3 indicates that about 67% academic staff agree that teachers always take initiative to hunt research fund for smooth running of the research. On the other hand, about 11% academic staff disagree with his statement. We see that few academic staff disagree on this issue. It indicates that teachers do not always take initiative to hunt research fund for smooth running of the research.

9.4 Dissemination of Research Findings University should have a system and policy to disseminate and transfer the research findings to the industry and community through extension services.

85

Table 9.4 Community service policy of entity.

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 22.2 22.2 44.4 11.1 22.2 22.2 44.4 Alumni 3.2 9.7 12.9 32.3 48.4 6.5 54.9 1st Year 22.8 21.1 43.9 47.4 7.0 1.8 8.8 2nd Year 44.6 15.7 60.3 33.7 6.0 0.0 6.0 3rd Year 17.9 37.3 55.2 22.4 14.9 7.5 22.4

4th Year 14.5 30.6 45.1 30.6 22.6 1.6 24.2 Student Masters 33.3 36.1 69.4 19.4 0.0 11.1 11.1 Total 27.2 26.9 54.1 31.5 10.8 3.6 14.4

Table 9.4 indicates that about 44% academic staff and 55% alumni agree that the entity has a community service policy. On the other hand, 44% academic and 13% alumni at least disagree with this statement. Also, we observe that about 9%, 6%, 22%, 24%, 11%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students agreed that the entity has a community service policy. Also, about 44%, 60%, 55%, 45%, 69%, respectively, 1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, 4th year and MS students disagree on this issue. It is evident from the above table that the entity does not have a good community service policy.

86

CHAPTER TEN

Process Management and Continuous Improvement

Quality assurance system refers to a set of administration and procedural activities with systematic assessment in respect of standard feedback, remedial measures and monitoring. The total system is focused on process output which refers to quality in education and achievement of objectives. Several interventions are needed to assure internal quality and continuous improvement which include faculty development, external evaluation and linkage program with corporate world, adapting good proactivity and developing quantity in all walks of academic management. The process by which quality assessment (QA) activities will be executed and quality in education will be assured must be in place, properly managed, periodically reviewed, evaluated and updated for continuous improvement. Self-assessment, improvement plan, stakeholders’ feedback, use of peer observations result, use of all feedback should be maintained in the department. These were surveyed whether it is maintained or not. The results are given below.

10.1 Self-Assessment Self-assessment is a systematic process of evaluating the various aspects of institution or academic programs including the major QA areas in respect of national qualifications framework and criteria whether quality standards are being met. For the purpose of further improvement SA collects information and evidences from the stakeholders, reviews those and identify the weaknesses and areas need further improvement to enhance quality of teaching- learning and education. Self-assessment does not mean that evidences of quality education are not available. The general objectives of the self-assessment are:

 To evaluate the existing curriculum, review process and identify the strengths and weaknesses.  To assess the effectiveness of teaching-learning and performance assessment methods.  To identify the areas needing support and improvement to demonstrate quality and excellence in higher education.

The specific objectives of self-assessment exercise are:  Identify learning needs.  Assess the teaching learning capacity of the department. 87

 Review the existing procedures.  Identify the areas need to be improved.  Create a basis for external assessment and validation.  Provide guidelines or direction to the program offering entity or to the university for strategic planning.

Table 10.1 Review of academic programs by the entity for the enhancement of students learning. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 100

Table 10.1 indicates that 100% academic staff agree that academic programs are reviewed by the entity for the enhancement students learning. Since all numbers of respondents agree with this issue, hence we may conclude that academic programs are reviewed by the entity for the enhancement of students learning. A self-assessment has been done five years back in the department.

10.2 Improvement Plan

An improvement plan (IP), also known as an action plan, is a great way to give struggling employees the opportunity to succeed while still holding them accountable for past performance. The objectives of the improvement plans are:

 To consider updating of syllabus/curriculum as per subjects-credit system.  Smart class room teaching to be introduced.  Improvement of laboratory infrastructure.  Improvement of computer and internet facilities.  To organize national/international level symposium.  Students’ feedback will be taken as per QAC guideline.  Collaborative research work with industries and other departments of the University.  Efforts to be taken for the research work with foreign countries.  Academic guidance and counseling to be introduced.  National problem solving work should be considered in M.Phil and Ph.D. research.  Every faculty or a research group may present his/their work in a particular day of the year.  Income of the department to maintain departmental facilities should be increased. 88

Table 10.2 The action of entity in compliance with the decision of the university regarding continuous quality improvement. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.1 55.6 33.3 88.9

Table 10.2 indicates that about 89% academic staff agree that the entity always acts in compliance with the decision of the university regarding continuous quality improvement. But about 11% academic staff undecided on this issue.

Table 10.3 Embracement of the spirit by the entity for continual quality improvement. Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 0.0 22.0 22.0 11.1 56.6 11.1 67.7

Table 10.3 indicates that about 67% academic staff agree that the entity embraces the spirit of continual quality improvement. But about 22% academic staff disagree on this issue. In fact the entity has no structured long-term improvement plan.

After completion of external peer review the PSAC of the department will prepare a draft improvement plan with benchmarking in respect of the SA report findings and the recommendations of the external peer review panel. Finally, the PSAC will submit the improvement plan to the head of the program offering entity for further necessary actions.

10.3 Stakeholders’ Feedback

Quality is a matter of negotiation between the academic institution and the stakeholders. In this negotiation process, each stakeholder needs to formulate, as clearly as possible, his/her requirements. The university or faculty, as ultimate supplier, must try to reconcile all these different wishes and requirements. Sometimes the expectations will run parallel but they can just end up in conflict.

For the purpose of further improvement SA collects information and evidences from the stakeholders, reviews those and identify the weaknesses and areas need further improvement to enhance quality of teaching, learning and education. Self-assessment does not mean that evidences of quality education are not available.

Table 10.4 Ensuring a usual practice by the entity for students’ or alumnis’ feedback as a culture. 89

Strongly Disagree Total Undecided Agree Strongly Total Respondent disagree (%) (%) Disagree (%) (%) (%) agree (%) Agree (%) Academic 22.2 0.0 22.2 11.1 66.7 0.0 66.7

Table 10.4 indicates that about 67% academic staff agree that the entity ensures a usual practice for students’/alumnis’ feedback as a culture. But about 22% academic staff disagree on this issue. Actually entity does not practice students’/alumnis’ feedback as a culture as often as expected.

10.4 Use of Peer Observation Results Peer observation partnerships can help teachers improve their teaching practice, transform their educational perspectives and develop collegiality. Peer observation of teaching is a key element of academic development, yet it is not widely reported as part of tutor development programs. It offers many benefits such as improvements in teaching practice and the development of confidence to teach and learn more about teaching. However there may be negative aspects of peer observation including that it may be seen as intrusive and challenging academic freedom. These negative aspects can be overcome in conditions where peer observation is designed to be non-judgmental and developmental rather than evaluative and externally required. Peer observation of teaching defines as: “collaborative, developmental activity in which professionals offer mutual support by observing each other teach; explaining and discussing what was observed; sharing ideas about teaching; gathering student feedback on teaching effectiveness; reflecting on understandings, feelings, actions and feedback and trying out new ideas”.

The self-assessment committee (SAC) of the department prepared a self-assessment report (SAR). It is expected that the peer observers (individual consultant) go through the SAR, visit the university and critically observe the various aspects of the graduate programs of the department. Finally, on the basis of the observation and critical review of the SAR, the peer observer panel submit an external validation report. On the basis of the observations and recommendations in the external validation report, the external peer reviewer prepare the improvement plan for quality assurance in teaching and learning. Peer observation under structured plan is not fully practice in the department of chemistry.

10.5 Regular Updating of Program Objectives and ILOs All feedback are presented in the seminar, attending faculty and experts from QAC of the university and the suggestions made by them will be considered for improvement.

90

CHAPTER ELEVEN

Stakeholders/Employers

11.1 Nature of the Stakeholders

The organization, institute and company that have an interest to give job to the graduates of the department are the stakeholders. For example different govt. and private universities, private banks, different educational institution, different research organization, different NGO, different pharmaceutical industries etc. are the stakeholders or employers.

Table 11.1 Types of employer.

Stakeholders Academic Frequency Percent Types 13.30% 20% Research Academic 3 20.0 26.70% Research 6 40.0 Business Enterprise Business Enterprise 4 26.7 40% Others Others 2 13.3 Total 15 100.0

Figure 11.1: Pie chart of nature of the organization.

The above frequency table shows that 20.0% of the data collected from academic organization, 40.0% from research organization, 26.7% from business enterprise, 13.3% from others employer.

11.2 Different Terms of Knowledge of Graduates

Different terms of knowledge of graduates are: job knowledge (knowledge on subject matter), IT knowledge and innovative knowledge. The percentage of frequency of different terms of knowledge is given below: The frequency options according to importance in recruitment are coded as F = fair, G = good, VG = very good, E = Excellent.

91

Table 11.2 Required knowledge of quality of graduates and competence of graduates.

Different terms Quality of graduates Competence of graduates of knowledge F G VG E F G VG E % % % % % % % % Job knowledge (knowledge on 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 0.0 33.3 66.7 0.0 subject matter) IT Knowledge 25.0 66.7 8.3 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 0.0

Innovative 0.0 58.3 16.7 25.0 25.0 66.7 8.3 0.0 Knowledge

Figure 11.2: Bar chart of required knowledge of quality of graduates and competence of graduates.

Job knowledge (knowledge on subject matter) IT Knowledge Innovative Knowledge

66.7 66.7 66.7

66.7

58.3

50

41.7

33.3

25

25 25

16.7 16.7

16.7

8.3 8.3

8.3

0 0 0 0 0

0 0

F G VG E F G VG E Quality of graduates Competence of graduates

Table 11.2 and Figure 11.2 indicates, none of the employer said that job knowledge of the graduates’ is fair, 8.3% said that is good, 50% said that is very good, 41.7% said that is excellent for recruitment whereas none of the employer said that competence of graduates based on their performance is fair, 33.3% said that is good, 66.7% said that their performance is very good and none said that the graduates’ competence in excellent. Also, we observed that 25% of the employer said that IT knowledge of the graduates’ is fair for recruitment while 66.7% of them said that is good and 8.3% said that IT knowledge is very good but none of the employers said that is excellent for recruitment of graduates. On the other hand, 16.7% of the employer 92

observed that competence in IT knowledge of graduates is fair, 66.7% said that their performance is good, 16.7% said that is very good but none of the employer said that competence in IT knowledge of graduates is excellent. Also none of the employer said that innovative knowledge of the graduates is fair, 58.3% said that is good, 16.7% said that is very good for recruitment and 25% said that is excellent. While 25% of the employer observed that competence in innovative knowledge of graduates is fair, 66.7% said that is good, 8.3% said that is very good but none of the employer said that is excellent. It is evident from the above table that job knowledge, IT knowledge and innovative knowledge of graduates are mostly good and very good. However, the job knowledge of a significant number of graduates is excellent and the innovative knowledge of a good number of graduates is excellent.

11.3 Different Quality of Graduates with Communication Skills for Stakeholders

Different quality of graduates with communication skills for employer are: oral communication, written communication and presentation skills. The percentage of frequency of different quality of graduates given by the employer is presented below.

Table 11.3 Importance of communication skills for recruitment and competence of graduates based on their performance.

Different terms of Quality of graduates Competence of graduates knowledge F G VG E F G VG E % % % % % % % % Oral 0.0 8.3 50.0 41.7 0.0 41.7 33.3 25.0 communication Written 0.0 8.3 75.0 16.7 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 communication Presentation skills 0.0 25.0 58.3 16.7 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0

93

Figure 11.3: Bar chart of communication skills for recruitment and competence of graduates based on their performance.

Job knowledge (knowledge on subject matter) IT Knowledge Innovative Knowledge

66.7 66.7 66.7

66.7

58.3

50

41.7

33.3

25

25 25

16.7 16.7

16.7

8.3 8.3

8.3

0 0 0 0 0

0 0

F G VG E F G VG E Quality of graduates Competence of graduates

Table 11.3 and Figure 11.3 indicates, none of the employer said that oral communication of the graduates’ is fair, 8.3 said that is good, 50% said that is very good for recruitment and 41.7% said that is excellent. Whereas none of the employer said that competence of graduates based on their performance is fair, 41.7% of them said that their performance is good, 33.3% of them said that is very good and 25% said that is excellent. Also, we observed that none of the employer said that written communication of the graduates’ is fair for recruitment while 8.3% of them said that is good, 75% said that is very good and 16.7% said that written communication is excellent for recruitment of graduates. On the other hand, none of the employer observed that competence in written communication of graduates is fair, 66.7% said that their performance is good and 33.3% said that is very good. None of the employer said that written communication of graduates is excellent. Also, none of the employer said that presentation skills is fair, 25% said that is good, 58.3% said that is very good and 16.7% said that is excellent. While none of the employer observed that competence in presentation skills of graduates is fair, 50% said that is good, 50% said that is very good and none said that is excellent. It can be concluded from the above data that the quality of the most of the graduates in oral and written communication and presentation is very good. While the competence of graduate in oral and written communications and presentation skills for majority of graduates is good. 94

11.4 Dimension of Quality of Graduates with Interpersonal Skills for Stakeholders

The dimensions of quality of graduates with interpersonal skills for stakeholders are: ability to work in teams, leadership, empathy, motivation ability, reliability, appreciation of ethical values and adaptability. The percentages of expected and observed frequency of different dimension of quality of graduates given by stakeholders are given below.

Table 11.4 Importance of interpersonal skills for recruitment and competence of graduates based on their performance.

Different terms of Quality of graduates Competence of graduates knowledge F G VG E F G VG E % % % % % % % % Ability to work in 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 0.0 41.7 33.3 25.0 teams Leadership 0.0 50.0 33.3 16.7 8.3 66.7 16.7 8.3

Empathy 0.0 41.7 41.7 16.7 8.3 58.3 25.0 8.3

Motivation ability 0.0 25.0 50.0 25.0 8.3 50.0 33.3 8.3

Reliability 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.7 0.0 58.3 33.3 8.3

Appreciation of 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 0.0 50.0 41.7 8.3 ethical values Adaptability 0.0 16.7 66.7 16.7 0.0 50.0 40.7 8.3

Figure 11.4: Bar chart of interpersonal skills for recruitment and competence of graduates based on their performance.

Ability to work in teams Leadership Empathy Motivation ability Reliability Appreciation of ethical values

Adaptability

66.7 66.7

58.3 58.3

50 50 50 50 50 50

41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7

40.7

33.7

33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3

25 25 25 25

16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7

8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

F G VG E F G VG E Quality of graduates Competence of gradates

95

Table 11.4 and Figure 11.4 indicates, the majority of employers think that the above quality terms in the importance of interpersonal skills for recruitment should be good or very good. However, the performance of our graduates in their work place ability to work in teams, leadership, empathy, motivation ability, reliability, appreciation of ethical values and adaptability is mostly good and very good.

11.5 Dimensions of Quality Graduates with Work Skills for Employer

The dimension of quality of graduates with work skills for employers are time management skills, judgment, problem formulation, solving and decision making skills, collecting and analyzing appropriate data, ability to link theory to practice, discipline and sense of responsibility. The percentage of expected and observed frequency of different terms of knowledge of work skills of graduates by employers are given below:

Table 11.5 Importance of work skills for recruitment and competence of graduates based on their performance. Different terms of Quality of graduates Competence of graduates knowledge F G VG E F G VG E % % % % % % % % Time management 0.0 8.3 25.0 66.7 0.0 16.7 75.0 8.3

Judgment 0.0 41.7 25.0 33.3 0.0 91.7 8.3 0.0 Problem formulation, solving and decision 0.0 8.3 66.7 25.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 0.0 making skills Collecting and analyzing appropriate 0.0 25.0 41.7 33.3 8.3 58.3 33.3 0.0 data Ability to link theory 0.0 16.7 50.0 33.3 8.3 50.0 41.7 0.0 to practice Discipline 0.0 16.7 41.7 41.7 0.0 41.7 41.7 16.7

Sense of 0.0 16.7 25.0 58.3 8.3 33.3 33.3 25.0 responsibility

96

Figure 11.5: Bar chart of work skills for recruitment and competence of graduates based on their performance.

Time management Judgment Problem formulation, solving and decision making skills Collecting and analyzing appropriate data Ability to link theory to practice Discipline

Sense of responsibility

91.7

75.00

66.7

66.70

58.3

58.3

50 50 50

41.7

41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7 41.7

33.3 33.3

33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3 33.3

25

25 25 25 25

25.00

16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7

16.70

8.3

8.30 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.30

0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.00

F G VG E F G VG E Quality of graduates Competence of gradates

Table 11.5 and Figure 11.5 indicates that a good number of employers think that the importance of time management, judgment, problem formulation, solving and decision making skills, collecting and analyzing appropriate data, ability to link theory to practice, discipline, sense of responsibility for graduate recruitment should be from good to very good to excellent. But they placed emphasis on skills like time management and sense of responsibility. However, the competence of our graduates on the above skills are mostly good and very good. It is also observed that some of our graduates have excellent sense of responsibility.

97

CHAPTER TWELVE

SWOT Analysis

SWOT Analysis SWOT analysis is a useful qualitative tool for understanding the strengths, weakness and for identifying both the opportunities opens to the department of chemistry and threats can face.

A SWOT analysis is carried out for a ‘high-level’ look at where the department of chemistry, Jahangirnagar University can build on current successes and focus on implementing continuous improvement methods to correct current weakness.

12.1 Strengths  Department has 26 highly qualified faculties holding PhD degree and 4 faculties are doing PhD degree at world renowned foreign universities.  Wide range of skills, positive attitude, flexibility of technical staff.  Ability of the members of the department to work together in a flexible manner.  Faculty with rich research activities.  Good number of publications by faculty and research students in peer reviewed journals.  Student advisor from one of the faculties was selected by department academic meeting to foster student-teacher interaction.  Available research and laboratory facilities.  Quality of teaching.  Admission policy is quite fair.  An active alumni association.  Internship program for students with industry.  Departmental seminar library has more than two thousand books, academic journals, research papers and theses. This seminar library runs parallel to the central library of the university.  Providing scholarship to a group of meritorious and poor students by alumni.

12.2 Weaknesses  No provision of academic audit in department of chemistry, Jahangirnagar University  Lack of strategic plan and coherent vision. 98

 Lack of a standardized and structured mechanism to use student feedback from course evaluations and faculty feedback as input for course improvement.  Lack of guidelines to assess key performance indicators for academic and non-academic staff.  Lack of job counseling for students.  There is no training center and guideline for staff development.  Lack of funding opportunity for postgraduate research.  There is no institutional framework to promote multi-disciplinary academic research programs.  Lack of virtual classroom/seminar room.  Lack of library automation.  Insufficient IT training for academic and non-academic staffs.  Lack of available optional courses.  Lack of peer review teaching.  Inadequate modern research equipment.  Lack of department-industry linkage activity.

12.3 Opportunities  A significant number of faculty member having international exposure.  Fully residential university, students are being engaged in academic activities.  Increase the quality and size of the facilities for the construction of some more classrooms and research space with new equipments and facilities to serve the need of students and faculty.  Hire a computer/programming technician for the department.  Take initiative for starting young teachers training.  Collect research funds from different fund providing authority.  Conduct graduating students survey regularly.  Increase alumni relationship with the faculty, staffs and graduating students.  Start teachers performance evaluation by students.  Start IT training for staffs.  Political interference free student environment.  Students participation in different national co-curricular activities.  Congenial atmosphere exists to promote participatory decision making process.  Regular seminar, presentation.  Website development for much greater effectiveness in information and recruitment.

12.4 Threats 99

 Continuous reduction of university fund for research and laboratory equipments.  Most of the students study for the sake of the degree, not for the knowledge.  Inadequate international funding for research work.  Seldomly organizing international seminar/conference, workshop.  Unscheduled closure of university.  Political influence on the administration.

100

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

Conclusion and Recommendation

13.1 Conclusion Self-assessment reporting is an integral part of the QA mechanism and internal quality assurance system of a university or program offering entity. It helps to manage and achieve the objectives in a more organized and disciplined manner. It is a self-reflective and critical evaluation of current state of QA practices. Self-assessment report will be used as the core document for the purpose of external peer review and strategic planning for further improvement. In all cases the self-assessment report should reflect to what extent each quality standard is met.

Self-assessment is a very important exercise to the academic institutions for continuous improvement and quality assurance in education. It refers to a comprehensive and systematic process of collecting and analyzing information from major stakeholders on the QA areas and related aspects of the educational institution. The SA process allows the organization 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. Self-assessment provides a direction and guidelines to prepare comprehensive improvement plan addressing the issues critical to quality assurance.

In particular we discuss different issues in different chapters, which are summarized in the following lines.

Chapter 1 is an introductory chapter including significance of program self-assessment, process of assessment, overview of the university, overview of the program offering entity, objectives and intended learning outcomes of the program and brief description of the program under review.

Chapter 2 presents governance. From the survey results among the students, alumni, academic and non-academic staffs of the department, we can produce the following points:

 Vision, mission and objectives of the entity are clearly stated and well-practiced.  Intended learning outcomes (ILOs) satisfy the stated mission and objectives. 101

 The entity has some facilities however need additional infrastructure to satisfy its mission and objectives.  All academic and administrative affairs are fairly maintained in compliance with rules and regulations.  Department is usually behind schedule to published the results in compliance with the ordinance.  The entity provides syllabus/curriculum and laboratory manuals to the students in advance.  The entity usually review its policy and procedures periodically for further improvement.  Codes of conduct for the students and employees are hardly communicated.  Department has inadequately maintained the academic calendar.  Website needs to be improved and updated properly.  Feedback process from both teachers’ and students’ are occasionally taken and not often honored.  Academic decisions taken by the entity are fair in most of the time.

Chapter 3 introduces curriculum design and review. From this chapter we can produce the following points:  Though academic and alumni agrees on the consistency of the curriculum but students are undecided.  Curriculum load is not optimum and exerts pressure.  Teaching strategies in details are not clearly stated in the curriculum.  Assessment strategies are explicit in the curriculum.  Curriculum addresses the program objectives and program learning outcomes.  Curriculum is reviewed and updated at regular intervals.  Gaps and lapses in existing curriculum are not identified through curriculum alignment.

Chapter 4 discusses about student admission, progress and achievements. From this chapter we can produce the following points:  Admission policy ensures the quality students.  Admission procedure is quite fair.  Commitment among students is not observed to ensure desired progress and achievement.  Recording of periodic progress and final achievements of the students are not done consistently. 102

 Teachers do not provide regular feedback to the students about their progress.  The entity maintains individual students record properly.

Chapter 5 presents physical facilities. From this chapter we can produce the following points:  Classroom facilities in terms of number, space, modern equipments are hardly adequate and need to be improved.  Overall classroom facilities are suitable for ensuring effective learning.  Lack of library facilities such as enough space for the students, referred books, technological support, place for group discussion, availability of food which should be developed.  Laboratory and research facilities are available but need to be improved and modernized.  Medical facilities are not well equipped and not useful to provide emergency healthcare services ensuring health and hygiene within the campus. Enough doctors, medicine, diagnostic and hospital facilities are absent.  Internet facilities with sufficient bandwidth capacity are absent.  Indoor and outdoor game facilities are adequate.  Existing gymnasium facilities are not good enough.  Adequate safety measures are not available.  Office equipments are not adequate to support the students’ need.

103

Chapter 6 introduces teaching, learning and assessment. From this chapter we can produce the following points:  Teachers do not frequently use innovative teaching techniques to make the students keen, focused and interested to learn.  Class size is close to optimum for interactive teaching, learning and need to be improved.  Formative and summative assessment strategies are followed.  Lesson plans/course outlines are not always provided to the students in advance.  Modern devices are used to improve teaching-learning process.  Diverse methods and tools are used for assessment properly.  Opportunities for practical exercises to apply in real life situation are not adequate.  Teaching-learning practices do not provide enough scope to integrate co-curricular and extra-curricular activities.  More diverse methods should be used to achieve learning objectives.  Existing policy for students’ performance assessment does not fit assessment of ILOs.  The assessment feedback is not usually provided to the students immediately.  Assessment systems are duly communicated to students at the outset of the term/semester.  Fairness and transparency are maintained in the assessment system.

Chapter 7 presents student support services. From this chapter we can produce the following points:  Lack of arrangement in the entity to provide an academic guidance and counseling.  The entity has lack of policy to provide co-curricular and extra-curricular exposures to the students.  Scholarships/grants are not sufficient to meet the needs of the students in case of hardship.  Alumni association is working effectively.  The policy of collection of the alumni feedback to update the learning outcomes of the program need to be introduced.  The opportunities to get involve with community services are inadequate.  The department does not have a written community service policy.

Chapter 8 presents staff and facilities. Form this chapter we can present the following points:  Recruitment policies and practices are not always good and transparent enough for the recruitment of competent academic and non-academic staff. 104

 Academic and non-academic are satisfied in their present salary.  A congenial atmosphere prevails at the entity.  Academics do not have enough opportunity to take part in different seminar/workshop/ training programs for skill development.  Non-academics do not have enough opportunity to take part in different training programs for skill development.  The entity has lack of policy to provide mentoring/continuous guidance for new academic staff.  The entity practices seminars and workshops to share knowledge and experience.  The department does not have any performance award policy to inspire academic staffs.  The entity has lack of key performance indicators (KPI) tools.

Chapter 9 introduces research & extension. Form this chapter we can present the following points:  Research and development policy should be designed and well circulated.  Mechanism exists for engaging the students in research and development.  Teachers do not always take initiative to hunt research fund for smooth running of the research.  The entity does not have a well community service policy.

Chapter 10 introduces process management and continuous improvement. Form this chapter we can provide the following points:  The academic programs are reviewed by the entity.  The entity always acts in compliance with the decision of the university.  The entity have no structured long term improvement plan.  The entity does not always collect students’/alumnis’ feedback.

Chapter 11 introduces stakeholders/employers opinions. From this chapter we can present the following points:  Job knowledge, IT knowledge and innovative knowledge of graduates are mostly good and very good.  The quality of most of the graduates in oral and written communication and presentation skills is very good. 105

 The work skills and competence of our graduates are mostly good and very good.

13.2 Recommendation

 Vision, mission and objectives of the entity should be clearly stated and well-practiced.  Academic calendar have to be maintained regularly and more effectively.  Students should be informed in advance about methods of assessment in theoretical and practical courses.  Stakeholders’ opinions should be considered regularly with due importance for academic development.  Students’ opinions have to be addressed in academic and non-academic matters properly.  The assessment feedback should be regularly provided to the students within short time.  Website should be informative, interactive and updated regularly.  Need based curriculum should be designed.  Curriculum should be reviewed periodically and designed in compliance to the ordinance of the university.  Teaching strategies should be stated in the curriculum in detail and clearly.  Curriculum should be effective enough in achieving day-one skills.  Regular teachers’ training are required.  Pattern of questions should be changed and made up-to-date.  Interactive teaching methods should be included.  Open discussion on specific topics should be organized regularly.  Students should be informed through regular counseling about their progress and drawbacks to stop dropouts.  More books, journals, online facilities should be available in the department.  Career planning office can be established to give guidance and information about employment to the students.  Enough influential counseling, job-relevant workshop and training program and establishment of help-desk for the graduates should be ensured.  Alumni associations can be engaged in various activities like seminar, research and publication as well as for providing information and guidance to the current students about career planning.  Financial facilities should be created for research and development. 106

 Sufficient economic support through scholarships should be arranged for students.  Effective initiatives should be undertaken to increase the interests of the students to improve their communication skills.  Adequate medical facilities have to be available.  The department should have a written policy to provide mentoring and continuous guidance for new academic staffs.  The department should have a written performance award policy to inspire academic staffs.  The existing mechanism for engaging the students in research and development should be reviewed and updated.  Self-assessment should be periodically done.  Use of peer observation results in performance appraisals for both academic and nonacademic staffs should be practiced.  Teaching performance evaluation by the students should be introduced.  Alumni and employers feedback should be regularly and duly addressed.