http://www.aaccupqa.org.

ph/

the agency for accreditation

The accreditation of curricular programs in the Philippines, particularly for state universities and colleges,
is the main function of the Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges and Universities in the Philippines
(AACCUP), Inc. Organized in 1987, though officially registered and recognized under the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) on September 4, 1989, it is the youngest of the four (4) accrediting agencies
in the country until late 2003. Under its charter, one of the functions, if not the main purpose of AACCUP,
is "to develop a mechanism of, and conduct the evaluation of programs and institutions."
AACCUP is now closely allied with the Association of Local Colleges and Universities Commission on
Accreditation, Inc. (ALCUCOA), organized only in the later part of year 2003.
The AACCUP is a member of the:

National Network of Quality Assurance Agencies, Inc. (NNQAA), formed by AACCUP and
the Association of Local Colleges and Universities Commission on Accreditation, Inc. (ALCUCOA).
Asia-Pacific Quality Network (APQN) which is based in Shanghai, China.
International Network of Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE) based in
Barcelona, Spain

The program of accreditation

What is Accreditation?
Accreditation is viewed as a process by which an institution at the tertiary level evaluates its educational
activities, in whole or in part, and seeks an independent judgment to confirm that it substantially achieves
its objectives, and is generally equal in quality to comparable institutions.

Program As the Unit of Assessment

Currently, accreditation in state colleges and universities is by program. A program is defined as a course
or a group of related courses packaged in a curriculum and leading to a graduate or undergraduate degree.
Examples of programs are elementary teacher education, civil engineering, agriculture, etc.
AACCUP is now considering other models, like, accrediting by institution as alternatives to, or to
complement program accreditation.

Other Attributes
Aside from being program-focused, accreditation is:

1. based on standards of the accrediting agency, which are normally higher than those set by
the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) and other appropriate agencies, e.g. Professional
Regulation Commission (PRC).;
2. voluntary on the part of the higher education institution that may want to be accredited;
3. an evaluation by peers, i. e. the external accreditors are mostly faculty members from other higher
education institutions; and
4. non-governmental.
The Outcomes-Based Quality Assurance
Details

Written by Dr. Manuel T. Corpus

Hits: 4344

1. To us in AACCUP, the current strongest factor to harmonize QA practices, and the best means to
promote a level playing field, is the CHED-initiated Outcomes-Based Quality Assurance System
(CMO 46).

2. Upon the invitation of CHED, and as accepted by the AACCUP Board of Trustees, a one-year
CHED-AACCUP contract was crafted in 2014, with CHED providing funding assistance amounting
to P2 Million for AACCUP to revise its instruments of program and institutional accreditation in line
with outcomes-based quality assurance (AACCUP completed the one-year contract on time on
September 30, 2015.

3. Tapping the services of AACCUP Officials and Senior Accreditors, Academic Program Specialists,
the AACCUP Pool of Institutional Accreditors and International Experts, the following sequence of
steps was pursued:

a. Formulation of AACCUP QA Framework aligned to CHED, by top-AACCUP officials.

b. Preparation of the Master Survey Instrument by top AACCUP officials and a pool of Senior
Accreditors
c. Preparation of the 42 Outcomes-Based Program Accreditation Instruments by 42 Curricular
Program Specialists
d. Review of the draft Outcomes-Based Program Accreditation Instruments by a small group of
Senior Accreditors
e. Review, in a national workshop, of the draft Instruments
f. Finalization of the Instruments, and Preparation of the Guidelines in preparing the Program
Performance Profile (PPP) and Institutional Portfolio (IP)
g. Validation of the Instruments
h. Copyrighting of all the Instruments

4. Output of the Contract:

a. One (1) Instrument on Institutional Accreditation

b. Forty-two (42) Instruments on forty-two (42) Program Accreditation
c. One (1) Guidelines in preparing the Outcomes-Based Program Performance Profile
d. One (1) Guidelines in preparing the Institutional Portfolio

5. The AACCUP Outcomes-Based Framework is aligned to the CHED policy of defining Quality as
exceptional i.e., exceeding very high standards as against Quality as fitness of purpose and/or
developing a culture of quality.
6. The accreditation instruments are also aligned to the definition of outcomes-based Quality
Assurance as measurement of , but still consider inputs and processes as important. Thus,
AACCUP measurement of quality of programs and institutions include:

a. System (inputs and processes)

b. Implementation
c. Outcomes

AACCUP evaluation also gives premium to best practices

7. There are 10 Areas (Standards/Key Result Areas) in all Program Accreditation Instruments:

Area I - Vision, Mission, Goals, and Objectives

Area II - Faculty

Area III - Curriculum and Instruction

Area IV - Support to Students

Area V - Research

Area VI - Extension and Community Involvement

Area VII - Library

Area VIII - Physical Plant and Facilities

Area IX - Laboratories

Area X - Administration

8. Each area is composed of Indicators and Parameters e.g.,

Area II Faculty
Indicators

PARAMETER A: Academic Qualifications and Professional Experience

- System Inputs and Processes

- Implementation

- Outcomes Outcomes

PARAMETER B: Recruitment, Selection and Orientation

- System Inputs and Processes

 - Implementation

- Outcomes Outcomes

PARAMETER C:

Etc.

The Rating for the Parameter = (System + Implementation + Outcomes) / 3

9. There are nine (9) Areas (Standard/Key Result Areas) in Institutional Accreditation

Area I - Governance and Management

Area II - Teaching, Learning and Evaluation

Area III - Faculty and Staff

Area IV - Research

Area V - Extension, Consultancy and Linkages

Area VI - Support to Students

Area VII - Library

Area VIII - Infrastructure and Other Learning Resources

Area IX - Quality Assurance Culture

10. Rating Scale

RATING SCALE
NA 0 1 2 3 4 5

Very
- Poor Fair Satisfactory Excellent
Satisfactory

Not Missing Criterion is Criterion is Criterion is Criterion is Criterion is

Applicable met met in most met in all fully met in fully met
minimally in respects, but respects. all respects, with
some some at a level that substantial
respects, but improvement (100% demonstrates number of
much is needed to compliance good good
improvement overcome with the practice. practices, at
is needed to weaknesses. standards) (50% greater a level that
overcome (50% lesser than the provides a
weaknesses. than the standards) model for
standards) others.
 (75% lesser (75%
than the greater than
standards) the
standards)

Our Best Practices in the Implementation of Outcomes-Based Quality Assurance

1. The Framework and Instruments are thoroughly prepared by our experienced Senior Accreditors
with appropriate qualifications: these are accepted by SUCs and Accreditors as validated; and
copyrighted.

2. Before using the instruments, Senior Accreditors and New Accreditors have been given training
separately in different AACCUP Training Centers: National, Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao

Training Activities in Outcomes-Based Quality Assurance

Year Name of Training Number of

Participants

2014 Training on OBQA for Senior 349

Accreditors 922
Training on OBQA for New Accreditors
2015 Training on OBQA for Senior 243
Accreditors 717
Training on OBQA for New Accreditors
2016 Training on OBQA for Accreditors 442
Training on OBQA Team Leadership 400
Training-Workshop for Internal Quality 265
Assurance Units
The professionalization of the AACCUP Accreditors primarily through its Training Programs has
earned for the AACCUP the award of
2016 APQN Quality Award for the Professionalization of Quality Assurance

3. The OBQA was adopted for implementation in 2015 but not fully as many SUCs which were
scheduled in 2015 for their next accreditation cycle preferred still using the old framework. In 2016,
OBQA was adopted in all programs and all levels of accreditation. This year, AACCUP assessed a
total of 1,419 programs broken down by levels as follows:
 Candidate - 307 (22%)

Level I - 413 (30%)

Level II - 496 (34%)

Level III - 192 (13%)

Level IV - 11 (.78%)

The production in terms of number of programs and institutions accredited has been consistently large.
This gained for AACCUP the
2014 APQN Quality Service Award
for Most Vibrant Quality Assurance Body

4. The Applications for Accreditation for Survey Visits have consistently been larger than AACCUPs
capacity to accommodate, especially in the last five (5) years. Thus, AACCUP has developed the
strategy of calling for applications which were made the bases for scheduling of programs on a first-
come, first-served basis. This is the Final Annual Schedule of Accreditation Visits. Applications
which could not be accommodated are placed in the Waiting List.

5. The AACCUP publishes two (2) Reports on Assessed Programs:

a. List of Assessed (in a particular year), 2016; and

b. Consolidated List of Assessed Programs circa 1992. (List of updated Assessed Programs,
1992-2016). This is updated regularly every year.

6. AACCUP has adopted a policy of gradually delegating to SUCs the accreditation of their programs.
In 2016, it started implementing the long-range policy by delegating to qualified SUCs the conduct
of the Preliminary Survey of their respective programs. So far, only two (2) SUCs, the Visayas State
University and the West Visayas State University have qualified and used this privilege. In 2017,
this internalization of QA will be pursued with greater vigor as SUCs develop their internal quality
assurance systems.

Affiliations
What's New

The Board of Trustees 2017-2019

The 30th AACCUP Annual National Conference
New AACCUP Board of Trustees 2017-2019 Elected
CHEd Chair Dr. Patricia Licuanan Graces Day 2 of the 30th AACCUP Annual National
Conference; Talks on Quality Assurance and Internationalization
PASUC President Turns Man of the Hour; Gently Calls SUC Presidents on Support to AACCUP
Survey Visits
Internalizing the Quality Assurance Systems (IQAS) in SUCs
Details

Written by Dr. Tess H. Borres

Hits: 1894

The long-range vision of AACCUP is to develop among SUCs a culture of quality such that quality
assurance is then rested inside the school system, that SUCs shall maintain a certified roster of quality
programs and processes.
AACCUP has always advocated quality assurance in harmony with national and international standards.
In keeping with national standards, ACCUP upholds the CHED-initiated Outcomes-Based Quality
Assurance System, through CMO 46, s. 2014, carefully considering CHED definition of quality as
exceptional, to be exceeding very high standards as against defining quality as fitness for purpose or
developing a culture of quality. On the other hand, quality assurance frameworks of international
counterparts were accordingly considered; thereby, coming up with its two battles of internalization and
internationalization.
From 2014-2016, AACCUP exerted its effort of revising the instrument, pilot-testing it, conducting studies
on validity and reliability and finally launched the Outcomes-Based Quality Assurance System. All these
were made possible through the concerted effort of the different member-SUCs, its faculty and
accreditors, the AACCUP Board of Trustees, and the national and international quality assurance
partners who journeyed with AACCUP into what it is today. Finally, the AACCUP Quality Assurance
Framework is conceptualized in Fig. 1, taking into account the program and institutional accreditation
that all SUCs need to undergo in accreditation, the IQAS, the levels of accreditation and the areas for
accreditation, which all encompass the vision of AACCUP on Building a Culture of Quality in SUCs.