Format For Academic Audit Reporting
Format For Academic Audit Reporting
1.2: Dates on which audit was undertaken: Date Started Date Ended
Chairman of Governing
Council
Administrative Head eg.
Vice chancellor/
Rector/Principal/President
etc
1.4.2: Names, qualifications and designations of key officers of the institution Table
2
Key Officers Name Qualification Rank Number of Years of
Relevant
Experience
Deputy Administrative
Head eg. Pro VC/ Vice
Principal/Vice Rector etc
Finance Officer/Head of
Finance
Registrar/Director of
Administration
Librarian
Internal Auditor
Development Officer
1.4.2: Names, qualifications and designations of staff of the institution that the auditors
interacted with (provide information in the template below). Table 3
Name Qualification Designation
List of all documents pertaining to the TOR requested from the Institution and tick as
appropriate.
Yes No
Page|1
9. Examination Regulations hand
book/ students’ guide
10. Payroll for the past three months
11. List of lecturers and courses taught
12. Files of all academic staff
13. List of Moderators and their CVs
14. Moderators’ report for the past two (2)
academic years
15. List of external examiners and their CVs
16. External Examiners’ report for the past two
(2) academic years
17. List of permanent and part-time Staff, showing
their highest qualifications
18. List of Council Members and their highest
qualifications
19. Copies of minutes of Council meetings
20. A copy of the affiliation agreement with
mentoring institution
21. Strategic Plan
22. All policies
23. Others (speify)
2.0 Please state your observations, findings and comments under the following
headings/sub-headings.
Page|2
2.2: Governance / Administration
Please use the checklist to evaluate the governance and administrative structures of
higher educational institutions for this section.
i. Admission Requirements
(a) State the institution’s general admission requirements for all levels of
programmes of the institution (e.g. PhD, Masters, Undergraduate,
HND and Diploma)
State step by step the prevailing Admissions Procedure for each mode of entry as
applicable to the institution (e.g. SSSCE/ WASSSCE, mature, foreign and students
with qualifications other than SSSCE/WASSSCE), starting from advertisement,
confirmation of results, use or otherwise of committees, involvement or guidance of
mentoring institution where applicable in the case of final selection of students.
(a) Summary Table on admission defects for each cohort of students, i.e
1st Year/Level 100, 2nd Year/Level 200, 3rd year/Level 300, 4th
year/Level 400 and other categories of students (e.g. post graduates).
(Please use the format in Table 5 below to provide information on the number of
students in each year/level and programme with defects in their qualifications at the time
of their admission).
Page|3
Table 5: Summary of Admissions Defects
Name of Programme: Year1/ Year 2/ Year 3/ Year 4/
Level Level Level Level
…………………………………………………… 100 200 300 400
Total No. of Students Admitted
Description of identified defects e.g i.
Total Aggregate at relevant examination
in excess of required minimum aggregate
(e.g. 27 instead of 24 for SSSCE).
TOTAL
Page|4
(a) Are external examiners and/or moderators involved in examinations?
If so, state the stages(s)
(c) Randomly select at least 20% of marked scripts and check if the
marks/grading agree with that of the results sheets in each programme.
2.3.3: Teaching/Learning
i. Student Workload
a. State the institution’s published students’ workload in hours per week for
each level of programme (e.g. certificate, diploma and bachelors).
Page|5
a. Calculate staff student ratio (SSR) for each programme (Total
number of students, divided by total number of staff- 3-part time staff
equivalent to 1 full time).
iii. Affiliation
(a) State the name of the mentoring institution to which institution being
audited is affiliated.
(e) Are there any plans to upgrade the MOU into a proper Legal Agreement?
Yes/No.
Page|6
If yes, state the time frame………………………………………………………
(g) Ascertain the extent of compliance with the terms of the A.D. by each party
(institution).
ii. Check if staff teaching and supervising post-graduate programmes have terminal
degrees and also of at least a rank of a senior lecturer.
1. Highest
Qualifications (no.
Page|7
of Staff)
(i)Academic M
F
(ii)
Professional:
a) Full M
F
M
b) Partial F
2. Course(s)
Taught in relation to
highest qualification
Relevant M
F
Not relevant M
F
3.Teaching
Experience at the
Tertiary Level:
a) 20 years and M
above F
b) 10 to 19 years M
F
c) 5 to 9 years M
F
d) 1 to 4 years M
F
Page|8
Table 9: Summary of Data on Non-Teaching Staff Numbers by Departments
Name of Programme: 1
st Others
Profe- Ph.D Masters Non Degree (Specify)
Sex FT/ ssional (Research) Research
PT Masters
1. Higher Qualifications
(no. of Staff)
(i)Academic M
F
(ii) Professional:
a) Full M
F
M
b) Partial F
2. Course(s) Taught in
relation to highest
qualification
Relevant M
F
Not relevant M
F
3. Experience at the
Tertiary Level:
a) 20 years and above M
Page|9
F
b) 10 to 19 years M
F
c) 5 to 9 years M
F
d) 1 to 4 years M
F
P a g e | 10
a. Does the institution have an Internal Quality Assurance (IQAU) unit?
P a g e | 11
2.5.3 Distribution of Students across programmes
Use the format in table 4 to provide a distribution of students across programmes.
2.5.5 Check for documented policies and procedures for the design and review of
courses/programmes.
P a g e | 12
2.5.9 Certification:
ii. Describe the processes that the awarding institution undertakes prior to
the award of its certificates to students?
P a g e | 13
a. Institutional Level
b. National Level
c. International Level
b. Perspective of management
Please state your findings (areas of concern) on each of the listed sections and subsections.
Positive findings that conform to best practice can be highlighted.
P a g e | 14
2.5 Quality Enhancement (Sections 2.5.1 & 2.5.9)
Please state your recommendations to GTEC based on your findings as itemised under
section
3.0.
P a g e | 15
Name Signature Date
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
P a g e | 16