Question

Evaluate the performance of national University Singapore (NUS)

Answer 1

In recent years , the National University of Singapore has pursued many strategies for assessing their efficiency. The implementation of the Quality Control System for Universities (QAFU) was reported to the workers by the National University of Singapore ( NUS). The Ministry of Education created this system to promote continuing self-learning and quality improvements, as well as to pursue transparency from universities for the usage of public funds. Institutional self-evaluation will be set against established institutional goals and self-selected success metrics covering administration, management, instruction, research, and operation. Universities were required to evaluate how there were sufficient and effective processes in effect to produce the intended results, metrics and goals. In 2002 the NUS began sending action strategies, primary success metrics and consistent scorecards to the University administration to satisfy the expectations of a more organized assessment cycle. The NUS today uses a mix of both conventional and modern methods to evaluate its efficiency. The NUS has historically assessed its output by evaluating data on input metrics such as number of completed programs, rise in inventory, amount of loan purchases, number of questions treated, number of tutorials performed and Job volume performed in cataloging, indexing, sales, sorting and linking of serials. Data on usage of the software and access to University's pages have also been introduced in recent years. Additionally, NUS launched a survey to collect written input from users directly. The hardcopy form has been made available from the University's web site online. It is a basic survey in which people were told if they viewed the University's services, the quality of its books , journals and online materials, the University's staff's standard of service and the University's overall ranking. Rankings ranging from 1-6 were offered to users where 1 was for a very poor ranking and 6 was for an excellent ranking. If they have incorrectly rated the University (1 or 2), they've been asked to tell us why. The findings have been loaded into an Excel database. Compliments and feedback obtained via contact or email have since been applied to the tallies on the website.