Institutional Performance Evaluation

The University of Agriculture, Peshawar

HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION ISLAMABAD

Background of IPES Review Process

The visit to The University of Agriculture, Peshawar was conducted on 23rd – 25th April, 2013 on the basis of following eight IPE Standards i.e. Mission and Goals, Planning and Evaluation, Organization and Governance, Faculty, Students, Institutional Resources, Academic Programs & Curricula and Assessment & Quality Assurance. Prior to the team visit, the university provided to HEC the University Portfolio Report (UPR) which was prepared based on the guidelines provided to them by HEC. This also included a series of answers to the questions related to each of the eight selected standards. During the visit to the university the Review Panel saw the infrastructural facilities, acquainted itself with the institutional resources and held discussions with the faculty members, administrative officials and students. The well prepared UPR facilitated the job of the Review Panel to the great extent. Efforts put in the preparation of the UPR and cooperation extended by all administrative and academic officials, especially the focal person, Prof. Dr. Farman Ullah are gratefully acknowledged. Vice Chancellor’s extended meeting with the Panel and elaborate discussion on the matters relating to uplift the functioning of the university and enhancing the quality of teaching and research was appreciable.

IPES Review Panel was comprised of following members.

•	Mr. Muhammad Ismail Director Quality Assurance 

National University of Science of Technology, Islamabad 

•	Prof. Dr. A. Razak Mahar Director QEC 

Shah Abdul Latif University, Khairpur 

•	Prof. Dr. Muhammad Zubair Siddique Director QEC 

Government College University, Faisalabad 

•	Syed Dara Shikoh Amir Director QEC 

Balochistan University of Information Technology and Management Sciences, Quetta 

•	Mr. Muhammad Shoaib 

Project Director Quality Assurance Agency Higher Education Commission, Islamabad 

Page 2 of 7

1.	Mission Statement and Goals 

1.1	Commendation 

•	University has prepared its 4 layer mission statement which represents current activities. 

1.2	Findings 

•	There are some differences among the "Mission Statement" and Goals of the university. 

1.3	Recommendations 

•	University may look in this matter to align its "Goals" with its Mission Statement. 

Status: Actions taken/to be taken:
The mission statement has been revised and the new Mission statement is available on University website.. 

2.	Planning and Evaluation 

2.1	Commendation 

•	P&D Department has ensured timely completion of the ten projects in the recent years and submitted their PC-IVs. Currently, the work on four projects approved through PC-Is are under process and following the timelines. 

2.2	Findings 

•	Initial Master Plan of the University was revised and submitted to the Government of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, but the case is not being pursued rigorously. 

2.3	Recommendations 

•	The case for the approval of the revised Master Plan may be pursued. 
Status: Actions taken/to be taken:
The Master Plan of  AMK campus Mardan is under process and is actively been pursued. 	However, The Master Plan of Main campus was prepared earlier during TIPAN Project 	and will be revisited.  

3.	Organization and Governance 

3.1	Commendation 

•	Establishment of the sub-committees for reviewing of “AUP Financial Rules” and “Progress of Civil Works under S&D Projects” is appreciated. This is expected to improve the governances. 

•	The Syndicate, Finance and Planning Committee (F&PC) and Board of Advance Studies and Research (BASAR) are meeting regularly which indicates the thrust of the university towards the good governance. The Syndicate and F&PC held 40 and 43 meetings over last 10 years, respectively, whereas BASARC has conducted 12 meetings during last 5 

years. Minutes of all these meeting were recorded, distributed and their record is well

maintained.

•	De-politicization of the Campus and the hostels by present Vice Chancellor and his administration is appreciated. 

3.2	Findings 

•	The Statutes of all the statutory bodies were written in year 2000 and are 12 years old. 

•	There is no organogram of the university. 

•	Academic Council has met for only 10 times during 12 February 2000 to 7 March, 2013 (12 years). 

3.3	Recommendations 

•	There is a dire need to revise / update the statutes. 

•	For the ease of understanding of organizational structure of the university, it is recommended that an Organogram be prepared. 

•	The Academic Council needs to be more active and its meeting need to be conducted more frequently. 

Status: Actions taken/to be taken:
•	The statutes have been revisited in light of new University Act 2016. Now University is running under approved UAP Statutes-2016.
•	The Registrar has prepared University Organogram and soon it will be available on the University Website.
•	Now, the meetings of Academic Council are arranged frequently.(twice an year) 

4.	Faculty 

4.1	Commendation 

•	University has satisfied and motivated faculty. 

4.2	Findings 

•	University faculty is not involved in reviewing the curricula of its programs. 

4.3	Recommendations 

•	The university should involve the relevant faculty members while reviewing the curricula that will enhance the ownership and motivation of the faculty members. 
Status: Actions taken/to be taken:
Faculty members are involved in curricula revision at department level.

5.	Students 

5.1	Commendation 

•	The University managed to get scholarships from 26 national and international donor organizations to the tune of 147 million for 3350 students over 6 years from 2006 to 2011. 

•	Two thousand seven hundred laptops have been obtained for the AUP students under KPK government laptop distribution scheme. Students are using these laptops effectively for their educational purposes. 

5.2	Findings 

•	The institute is unable to provide internship facility to its all students. 

5.3	Recommendations 

•	Internships for all students may be arranged by the university for giving them hands-on experience and exposure to industry/corporate sector in their respective areas of interest. 
Status: Actions taken/to be taken:
Internships are mandatory for all students for fulfilling their degree programs. If it means 
Financial internships, then HEC is requested for financial support because University 	have no funds for it.

6.	Institutional Resources 

6.1	Commendation 

•	The university administration has taken many initiatives in the interest of the university and the community, such as: 
•	Establishment of Milk Parlour, Dairy, Poultry, and Quail Farms 

•	Production of Seeds and Poultry Feed 

•	Setting up of Rabbitory and Crane Corner 

•	IBGE has produced a wheat seed titled as Atta-Habib which has increased the per hectare yield from 1.5 to 4.5 tons. The university claimed that ninety percent of the wheat cultivated in KPK province uses this seed. 

•	The idea of establishment of Goat Farm is commendable as this will be a beneficial initiative for the university and the community. 

6.2	Findings 

•	Library is housed in a very spacious room having a current collection of 124,000 text and reference books. Currently, the library is not automated 

•	The HEC Digital Library resources are not being used effectively. 

•	Budget Directorate sends the questionnaires to departments for getting their input for preparing the budget estimates but the departments don’t take interest in giving their input. 

6.3	Recommendations 

•	The university should consider automating its library functionalities and processes. 

•	University should take appropriate steps in order to enhance the usability of digital library in more effective and efficient manner; this would also enhance the research culture in the university. 

•	In order to have realistic budget estimates, the Deans/ HoDs be encouraged to provide their input to the Budget Directorate. 

Status: Actions taken/to be taken:
•	For automation of Library, Library Integrated Software KOHA has been purchased and installed under the project “Strengthening and development of library at UAP”. Through this software, departmental libraries are connected / integrated. 
•	To enhance the usability of digital library in more effective and efficient manner, Awareness seminars/workshops are arranged frequently for students and faculty.

7.	Academic Programs and Curricula 

7.1	Commendation 

•	The academic courses and programs are designed by the respective Chairperson of the department keeping in view the aims and objectives of the programs, the university and need of the nation and local community. 

•	The process for the development/approval of academic courses and programs is very well defined and adopted. Same procedure is applicable in case revision is required. 

•	The curricula are distributed to concerned Dean, Chairperson, Controller of Examination, Registrar office and Vice-Chancellor office which is a very good practice. 

7.2	Findings 

•	Curricula of various subjects are not reviewed at the university. 

•	The frequency of revision for curricula is not defined by the university. 

•	Currently, there is no dedicated officer assigned for keeping all the records of curricula revision. 

7.3	Recommendations 

•	The university should ensure that all the curricula should be reviewed periodically at the university. 

•	The university needs to define a minimum period, after which the curricula should be reviewed mandatorily. This period should not exceed the HEC defined period. 

•	It is proposed that all updated curricula may be maintained properly by a specific officer/ official and record should be easily traceable. 

Status: Actions taken/to be taken:
	
•	The Curricula are reviewed at department level.
•	Curricula Officer should be nominated by Director Teaching for under graduate programs 
and DASAR for Post graduate programs.

8.	Assessment & Quality Assurance 

8.1	Commendation 

•	The University prepared a comprehensive university portfolio report with the requisite statistics and information as required by the HEC. The Report has been very helpful in conducting the visit. 

•	QEC is functioning efficiently and has managed to get Self-assessment Reports prepared for 18 out of 24 departments. The Reports are also accompanied by the Assessment Team Reports, Executive Summaries and Implementation Plans. 

•	QEC of the University has scored 94.7% in QEC Ranking 2013, conducted by HEC. 

•	QEC carries out the plagiarism check of all theses of postgrad students and AUP journal papers. It is suggested that any journal or conference paper supported by the university may also be checked for the plagiarism. 

8.2	Findings 

•	The Director QEC is on additional Charge. 

•	The webpage of QEC is not well maintained and updated. 

8.3	Recommendations 

•	The university should appoint full time, permanent Director QEC on immediate basis. 

•	The QEC should maintain its webpage in more efficient manner while updating it on regular basis. 

Status: Actions taken/to be taken:
	
o	In most of the Universities, the Director QEC is on additional charge because financial crises.

o	The QEC webpage is now updated regularly.

Page 7 of 7