chinhoyi university of technology performance rep… · 2.5.2.2 mphil/dphil student to lecturer...

CHINHOYI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

DIRECTORATE OF QUALITY ASSURANCE AND GRADUATE STUDIES

REPORT ON KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR 2012 AND KEY STRATEGIC INITIATIVES OFTHE INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME

INSIDE

OUR VISION

OUR MISSION

OUR VALUES

1. GOVERNANCE.........................................................................................................................1

1.1 COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS.......................................................................................................1

1.2 SENATE RESOLUTIONS.........................................................................................................1

2. THE UNIVERSITY’S CORE BUSINESS .................................................................................................3

2.1 OUR STUDENTS ...................................................................................................................3

2.1.1 Applications, Admissions, Enrollment and Yield Rates ..........................................................3

2.1.2 Students’ Entering Grades ..................................................................................................4

2.1.3 Students admitted into programmes of their first choice......................................................5

2.1.4 Geographic Source ..............................................................................................................5

2.1.5 Student Financial Support ...................................................................................................6

2.1.6 Undergraduate Student Awards ..........................................................................................7

2.1.7 Diversity of Students ...........................................................................................................7

2.1.8 Accessibility Services ...........................................................................................................7

2.1.9 Proportion of Students in Science Programmes ....................................................................8

2.2 OUR ACADEMIC STAFF ............................................................................................................9

2.2.1 Staff Profile.........................................................................................................................9

2.2.2 Staff Turnover ...................................................................................................................10

2.2.3 Research Chairs.................................................................................................................10

2.2.4 Teaching Awards and Honours...........................................................................................11

2.3 ACADEMIC PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT..............................................................................12

2.4 RANKINGS ............................................................................................................................12

2.5 RESEARCH.............................................................................................................................14

2.5.1 University Research Income and Yield................................................................................14

2.5.2 Level of Research Activity ..................................................................................................15

2.5.2.1 Active researcher index..................................................................................................15

2.5.2.2 MPhil/DPhil student to lecturer ratio and proportion of full-time researchers....................16

2.5.3 Productivity of Research Activities.....................................................................................16

2.5.3.1 Number of publications and citation indices ...................................................................16

2.5.3.2 Number of patents, licenses, new invention disclosures and spin-off companies.................17

2.5.3.3 Research prizes and honours...........................................................................................18

2.6 TEACHING AND LEARNING ....................................................................................................19

2.6.1 Academic Bridging Programme..........................................................................................19

2.6.2 Student to Lecturer Ratio ..................................................................................................19

2.6.3 Class Size Experience .........................................................................................................20

2.6.4 Students’ Course Experience..............................................................................................21

2.6.5 Undergraduate Instructional Engagement..........................................................................21

2.6.6 Student Graduation...........................................................................................................21

2.6.7 Degree Classes ..................................................................................................................22

2.7 COMMUNITY SERVICE...........................................................................................................23

2.8 PUBLICITY .............................................................................................................................24

3. RESOURCES...........................................................................................................................25

3.1 FINANCE ...........................................................................................................................25

3.1.1 Operating Revenue by Source............................................................................................25

3.1.2 Operating Budget/Student Ratio .......................................................................................26

3.1.3 Budgetary Allocation to Academic Activities ......................................................................26

3.1.4 Financial Health ................................................................................................................26

3.2 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY................................................................................................27

3.2.1 Investment........................................................................................................................27

3.2.2 E-learning and Courseware Applications ............................................................................27

3.2.3 Number of Computers per Student ....................................................................................28

3.3 LIBRARY................................................................................................................................28

3.3.1 Library Expenditure as a Percentage of Operating Expenditure...........................................28

3.3.2 Library Resources Budget per Student...............................................................................29

3.3.3 Library Holdings ................................................................................................................29

3.4 SPACE INVENTORY ................................................................................................................30

3.5 FUNDRAISING .......................................................................................................................31

3.6 STAFF SATISFACTION.............................................................................................................31

SECTION II........................................................................................................................................32

KEY STRATEGIC INITIATIVES OF THE INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME.....................32

4.1 KEY STRATEGIC INITIATIVE 1..................................................................................................33

DEVELOPING PHYSICAL STRUCTURES................................................................................................33


BUILDING PUBLIC-PRIVATE SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS (PPPs)................................................................34


BUILDING A STRONG PROFESSORIATE ..............................................................................................35


ENHANCING RESEARCH PERFORMANCE............................................................................................37


DEVELOPING GRADUATE PROGRAMMES ..........................................................................................39


STRENGTHENING INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE ..............................................................................40


STRENGTHENING RESOURCE MOBILISATION.....................................................................................40


INTERNATIONALISATION OF ACADEMIC PROGRAMMES ...................................................................41


MAINSTREAMING QUALITY ASSURANCE...........................................................................................42

5. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................44

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .........................................................................................................44

OUR VISION

To be a world-class centre of excellence for technological innovation and entrepreneurship.

OUR MISSION

To produce innovative graduates, create knowledge, enhance entrepreneurship andprovide community service through quality teaching, training, and technologically-oriented research.

OUR VALUES

Integrity

Excellence

Entrepreneurship

Dynamism

Democracy

Culture

LETTER OF REMITTAL

The Chief Executive OfficerZimbabwe Council for Higher EducationP.O. Box CY7785CausewayHarare

Dear Sir

In terms of Section 21, subsection (1) (a) of the Zimbabwe Council for Higher EducationAct, Chapter 25:08, I have pleasure in submitting the Chinhoyi University ofTechnology’s 2012 Annual Report.

Yours Faithfully

Professor D. J. SimbiVice Chancellor

OVERVIEW OF 2012

The year 2012 marked the end of our first decade as a fully-fledged University. It also markedthe first year of our second Strategic Plan for the period 2011 – 2015. The year wascharacterized by perennial challenges and problems. There was a significant transition inacademic provision and related structural and systemic mechanisms. The year marked the endof tenure of the third University Council.

Major highlights of 2012 were:

(a) The University changed its degree nomenclature by replacing the designator ‘Bachelorof Technology’ with other designators such as ‘Bachelor of Science’.

(b) A 35% increase in office space and 10% in teaching space through acquisition of newproperties and creation of new space on campus;

(c) Establishment of three laboratories, namely Biotechnology Laboratory, Post-HarvestScience and Technology Laboratory and Mechatronics Laboratory;

(d) Investment of $125,000 in renovation of student hostels and $400,000 in extension ofthe student canteen;

(e) A variance of $839,200 on the operations grant from Government;

(f) A 12% increase in enrollment of undergraduate students (from 4,827 to 5,420students), with a 15% increase in population of female students (from 1,991 to 2,280students);

(g) Recruitment of 20 lectures with PhD-qualifications into academic ranks acrossDepartments to bring the total to 35 lectures with PhD qualifications;

(h) A review of academic programmes and introduction of one master’s programme inPost-harvest Science and Technology and two undergraduate programmes in AnimalProduction and Technology and in Environmental Engineering;

(i) Introduction of a credit system for both undergraduate and postgraduateprogrammes; and

(j) Establishment of a Quality Assurance Directorate for oversight of all quality assuranceand enhancement issues.

(k) Purchase of a 250 kVA generator to boost power supply on campus.

PREAMBLE

This is the first Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) Report of Chinhoyi University of Technology.This report is published to highlight progress relative to the University’s Strategic Plan whichwas approved in 2011 for the period 2011 – 2015.

The University celebrated its first decade in 2012. Today, the University has a national presenceand continues to work towards building an international profile. The University has come a longway since it was founded in 2002. The foundational pillars of the University are academic andresearch excellence, knowledge-driven service to the community, technological innovation andentrepreneurship.

The purpose of this report is to:

(a) Record the University’s performance;

(b) Be a reference for institutional performance analysis; and

(c) Provide evidence that can be used for institutional planning.

The primary audiences of this KPI report are the University Council, Senate, management, staff,students and regulatory stakeholders.

The first section of report is in the form of key performance indicators which have beenselected for our key result areas of teaching, research and community service. The Universitywill continue to develop more performance indicators which will be used in future reports.

Two dimensions are given for each performance indicator. These are:

(a) Relevance – this describes the importance of the indicator in terms of what it measuresand why it is important to consider that indicator.

(b) Performance – this describes how the University performed in each of the performanceareas. This describes the results achieved. It is in no way intended to be judgemental.

Key performance indicators presented in this report enable the University to track progressalong its strategic direction, demonstrate results, and take action to improve the quality of itseducational services.

There are pluralistic views of quality in higher education. We are aware that different views ofquality generate different ways of assessing quality and use of different sets of KPIs. Thus,interpretation of the KPIs presented in this report is left to the perspectives of disparatestakeholders.

Some of the indicators given in this report have no data or information available. Suchindicators are presented not for the sake of completeness but to indicate that the Universityregards them as paramount and will start measuring them in 2013. The report states only majorCouncil and Senate resolutions that are directly linked to the quality of academic provision.

We need to state that in our articulation of the PIs presented in this report we are cognizant ofthe wisdom Einstein had when he posited that “everything that can be counted does notnecessarily count and everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted’. The gloss is thatthere are some intangibles (things that cannot be counted) which are essential in qualitymeasurement. As such, we are aware that there are many dimensions of functional quality thatare not covered in this report.

The second section of this report presents a profile of Key Strategic Initiatives (KSIs) that willunderpin the 2011 – 2015 Strategic Plan. The period 2011 – 2015 is the first phase of ourInstitutional Transformation Programme (ITP). The ITP is designed to spearhead the emergenceof the University from the ravages of the economic meltdown of 2004 – 2008. The KSIs weredeveloped and will be implemented for the purpose of positioning CUT as a relevant andeffective national institution. The KSIs provide a systemic architecture for the ITP and form ourflagship projects.

Three dimensions are given for each KSI. These are:

(a) Relevance – this describes the importance of the initiative in terms of what it providesfor institutional transformation;

(b) Scope – this describes the main activities covered under the KSI; and

(c) Performance – this describes the progress made up-to-date on the KSI.

We need to emphasise that the KSIs are not an end in themselves but only serve to providearchitecture for our growth and continuous improvement. There are many attendant issuesassociated with these KSIs that are not presented in this report. Their omission is by no means atrivialization.

SECTION I

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR 2012

1

1. GOVERNANCE

1.1 COUNCIL RESOLUTIONSPerformance

The University Council amended the structure of senior management in the University bycreating the post of a second Pro-Vice Chancellor (PVC) responsible for Development andResource Mobilisation.

Relevance

One of the goals of the University’s Strategic Plan 2011 – 2015 is to mobilise funds at the rate ofat least 30% of the operating budget each year. The University needs to complement fiscalsubvention by mobilizing additional resources. Creation of the post of PVC Development andResource Mobilisation is a measure of the University’s commitment to this portfolio andindicates the translation of its strategic objectives into action.

Performance

The post is in abeyance for now.

1.2 SENATE RESOLUTIONSPerformance

The Senate made the following resolutions pertaining to academic programmes:

Change of degree nomenclature by replacing the designator ‘Bachelor of Technology’with other designators such as ‘Bachelor of Science’, ‘Bachelor of Engineering’, etc.

Introduction of the credit system for all graduate and undergraduate programmes

Creation of the School of Natural Sciences and Mathematics

Creation of the Departments of Crop Science and Technology, and Animal Productionand Technology

Relevance

Appropriate degree nomenclature is required to designate correctly the typology of academicqualifications as recognized nationally and regionally. The alignment of our degreenomenclature with regional degree-naming conventions is good practice. Credits are a system

2

of grading courses in a universal currency. The two resolutions indicate a transition in theUniversity towards compliance with national and regional best practices.

3

2. THE UNIVERSITY’S CORE BUSINESS

2.1 OUR STUDENTS

2.1.1 Applications, Admissions, Enrollment and Yield Rates

Relevance

The University strives to attract and recruit talented students in all its programmes. The successof our recruitment efforts can be measured by the volume of applications, admission,enrollment and yield rates. A good indicator of the quality of our University is our ability toattract students to whom we formally offer admission (enrollment rate). Yield rates measureregistrations as a percentage of applications.

Performance

In 2012 the University received 2,624 applications for undergraduate programmes. Figure 1shows the applications, admission and enrollment rates in our five Schools. Our overall yieldrate was 52%.

There were 11 students in the MPhil/DPhil stream in 2012. Four were registered on thedoctoral stream. These are internal members of staff who were offered studentships by theUniversity.

4

There were 789 total applications for our two taught master’s programmes. Figure 2 shows theapplications, admission and enrollment rates in the two programs.

2.1.2 Students’ Entering Grades

Relevance

Entering grades (A-Level points) are one indicator of the quality of students. Student enteringgrades reflect our ability to attract a well-qualified student body. Performance and time tograduation is a reasonable indicator of the quality of training students received during theduration of the problem.

Performance

Figure 3 shows the entering grade points for undergraduate programmes in 2012. Data forprevious years are not readily available to show trends. In future reports, a longitudinal trendwould show our ability to consistently attract high quality students. The University will start in2013 carrying out a longitudinal study on the performance of students entering with ‘weakpasses’ or coming through the bridging programme.

The median range of entering grades was 5 – 7 points across Schools.

5

2.1.3 Students admitted into programmes of their first choice

Relevance

Students who are admitted into programmes of their first choice are well motivated. Admittingstudents into programmes of their first choice promotes both vocational and academic intrinsicorientation i.e. students choose their courses on the basis of a desired career path.

Performance

The information was difficult to decipher from the database. The University will put in place asystem to easily capture this information in future.

2.1.4 Geographic Source

Relevance

The University strives to attract students from all parts of the country in order to build a strongnational presence. The geographical distribution of our student body indicates our reputationand influence beyond our local communities. Enrollment of international students indicates theeffectiveness of our efforts to create an international reputation.

Performance

The geographical distribution of first-year undergraduate students is shown in Figure 4.However, the University had no international students in 2012.

6

2.1.5 Student Financial Support

Relevance

Access to university education is influenced by several factors including financial circumstances.We believe that higher education broadens life chances, especially in poor communities.Financial support from the government (cadetships) widens access to university educationacross the spectrum of income levels. The population of students receiving financial supportfrom Government reflects the accessibility of the University to students from low incomebackgrounds.

Support for graduate students can be provided in a number of ways which include various typesof scholarships. Levels of financial support for graduate students indicate our reputation forgraduate training.

Performance

Five percent of all undergraduate students enrolled in 2012 received financial support fromGovernment. Ninety-one percent of MPhil and DPhil students were supported by the Universityto the tune of $200,000. Only one student was supported by external research funds.

Fig. 4 Geographical distribution of first-year students in 2012

7

2.1.6 Undergraduate Student Awards

Relevance

Talented students usually attract awards and scholarships at various stages of their training.Undergraduate awards and scholarships are important metrics for assessing the quality of ourstudents. There are basically two types of scholarships, entrance scholarships (awarded at thebeginning of students’ studies) and exit scholarships (awarded at the end of studies). Theformer provide a measure of the University’s success in attracting excellent students. The latterdemonstrate the University’s ability to produce excellent graduates.

Performance

About 0.03% (151 students) of our students received entrance scholarships in 2012. There wasno information on students who might have received exit scholarships in 2012.

2.1.7 Diversity of Students

Relevance

We recognize that access to university education can be influenced by socioeconomic andcultural issues. The University strives to attract students from varied backgrounds and providethe support they need to successfully complete their studies.

Performance

Currently the University does not measure the diversity of its students. The University shallbegin to collect ethno-cultural information from its first-year students in 2014.

2.1.8 Accessibility Services

Relevance

Access to university education can be influenced by disability. The University strives to providesupport needed by disabled students in order to successfully complete their studies. Thenumber of disabled students reflects the success of the University in attracting and serving thispopulation.

Performance

There were eight students registered in 2012 who had varying disabilities. These studentsreceived services from the Division of Student Affairs to assist them with their special needs.

8

2.1.9 Proportion of Students in Science Programmes

Relevance

As a university of technology we strive to increase the population of students in ourscience/technology-oriented programmes. The ratio of science students to non-sciencestudents is a good indicator of our success in recruiting science students in sufficient numbersto meet our mandate.

Performance

The ratio of science-students to non-science students in 2012 was 1:4. In order to enlarge itsportfolio of science programmes the University created the School of Natural Sciences andMathematics, Departments of Crop Science and Technology and Animal Production andTechnology. The University is devising mechanisms to incentivise science in order to attractsufficient numbers of such students.

9

2.2 OUR ACADEMIC STAFF

2.2.1 Staff Profile

Relevance

A world-class university needs highly competent staff. One of our major goals in our seconddecade is to increase the number of lecturers with PhD qualifications to at least 60% in eachDepartment. The University also aims to increase the proportion of female academics.

Performance

In 2012 the University recruited 19 lecturers with PhD qualifications. Amongst these were fivewomen. Figure 5 shows the profile of our academic staff in 2012.

Table 1 shows the disaggregation of our academic staff by School and gender. Across theSchools female staff ranged from zero percent in the School of Natural Sciences andMathematics to 37% in the School of Hospitality and Tourism.

10

Table 1 Academic staff profiles in Schools in 2012

Full professorsAssociateprofessors PhDs Master's

School Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

Agricultural Science & Technology 2 0 0 0 4 2 24 13

Engineering Sciences &Technology 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 11

Hospitality and Tourism 0 0 1 0 3 2 8 5

Natural Sciences 0 0 1 0 3 0 4 0

Business Sciences and Technology 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 11

Art and Design 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 4

Institute of Life Long Learning 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 3

Staff attraction and retention are part of the KSIs of the University. Further details on theseissues are given in Section II.

2.2.2 Staff Turnover

Relevance

The University aims to recruit academic staff of the highest quality. Consequently, theUniversity strives to retain such staff. Our ability to retain staff is a proxy measure of the qualityof our professional environment. At the same time, new academics bring new perspectives intoour academe.

Performance

The rate of voluntary staff turnover was 4% for academic staff.

2.2.3 Research Chairs

Relevance

Presence of research chairs in our Departments is a measure of excellence in scholarly researchin the University. Research chairs work at creating knowledge, strengthening our researchcompetitiveness and training the next generation of highly skilled people through studentsupervision, teaching and mentoring early career researchers.

11

Performance

The University is crafting a framework for Research Chairs and models for funding them. TheUniversity hopes to have its first Research Chair in 2014. There were no Endowed Chairsestablished in 2012.

2.2.4 Teaching Awards and Honours

Relevance

Awards received by our lecturers indicate excellence in teaching and contribution to theirdisciplines. The University is putting in place mechanisms to recognise its academic staff forexcellence in teaching performance. Any external awards received by our lecturers, if available,further vindicate this recognition.

Performance

This is a PI under development.

12

2.3 ACADEMIC PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT

Performance

The following changes and additions to academic programmes were approved by Senate in2012:

(a) Review of all academic programmes to align them with level descriptors for honoursdegrees

(b) Merger of the Bachelor of Science Honours in Water and Irrigation Engineering withBachelor of Science Honours in Agricultural Engineering into the Bachelor of ScienceHonours in Agricultural Engineering with Specialisation in Agricultural Engineering orIrrigation Engineering

(c) Addition of new programmes, namely Bachelor of Science Honours in AnimalProduction and Technology, and Bachelor of Science Honours in EnvironmentalEngineering

(d) Addition of a graduate programme (Master of Science in Post-Harvest Science andTechnology)

Relevance

Review of academic programmes provides one measure of the University’s commitmenttowards continuous curriculum improvement. Addition of new programmes indicates theUniversity’s responsiveness to emerging national needs for human capital development.

2.4 RANKINGS

Relevance

Rankings provide a measure of the University’s academic standing nationally, regionally andinternationally. Though at times subjective, rankings indicate the reputation of the University inhigher education business. The University strives to be among the best institutions in thecountry and in the region.

Performance

The University was ranked number six in Zimbabwe according to the 4International Collegesand Universities web ranking. The University will continue to improve its performance in critical

13

areas such as research and international outlook. Figure 6 compares the University’s rankingrelative to other universities in Zimbabwe.

Catholic University 12th

11th

Lupane State University10th

Solusi9th

Harare Institute of Technology8th

Great Zimbabwe University7th

Women’s University in Africa6th

Chinhoyi University of Technology5th

Africa University4th

Bindura University3rd

National University of Science and Technology2nd

Midlands State University1st

University of Zimbabwe

Fig. 6 Ranking of Universities in Zimbabwe 2012 (4International Colleges and Universities)

14

2.5 RESEARCH

2.5.1 University Research Income and Yield

Relevance

The number and value of research grants and contracts is a good proxy for research quality. Theresearch yield indicator measures the share of funding received by our lecturers relative to theshare of eligible lecturers in the respective disciplines. A research yield of 1.0 indicates that theUniversity is receiving funding in proportion to the size of our lecturers. Funding from industrialsources indicates the extent of collaborative relationship between the University and industry.

Performance

The University’s Research Fund was allocated 5% of the operating budget. The total amountallocated to direct research costs was $148,000. External research grants received by theUniversity amounted to $61,000. The rate of external grants in relation to eligible lecturers wastoo low to compute a meaningful research yield. Most of the eligible lecturers were still new in2012. There were no research funds from industrial sources.

Sources of research income are shown in Table 7a.

15

The disbursement of the University Research Fund according to our research thematic areas isshown in Figure 7b.

2.5.2 Level of Research Activity

2.5.2.1 Active researcher index

Relevance

This is a reliable indicator of the level of involvement in research by our academic staff. It isdriven by three main activities. These are supervision of MPhil/DPhil students, receipt ofresearch grants and contracts, and publishing scholarly works in academic media.

Performance

Using only internal research grant allocations the proportion of lecturers actively engaged ininternally funded research was 32%. Figure 8 shows the number of researchers in each of ournine research themes. The proportion of women researchers is also shown.

Fig. 7b Disbursement of research funds by thematic areas

16

2.5.2.2 MPhil/DPhil student to lecturer ratio and proportion of full-time researchers

Relevance

The University recognizes the centrality of graduate studies by research in enhancement ofresearch activities in the University. Full-time researchers such as those found in researchinstitutes are pivotal in raising the research profile of a university. These two indicators areassociated with the level of research intensity in a university.

Performance

The University is in the process of developing graduate studies and setting up positions for full-time researchers. Currently there is not enough data to compute these indicators.

2.5.3 Productivity of Research Activities

2.5.3.1 Number of publications and citation indices

These indicators measure our research outputs. Research output has two dimensions-production and productivity. Production measures the volume of publications. Productivitymeasures the impact of research, and its academic metric is the citation index.

17

Performance

The publications/lecturer ratio in the Schools is shown in Figure 9. The University does not havea mechanism for recording the citation indices. The mechanism is being developed.

2.5.3.2 Number of patents, licenses, new invention disclosures and spin-off companies

Relevance

The translation of our research outputs into products and processes with economic and socialvalue is a measure of the impact of our research beyond the academic community. TheUniversity recognizes that research outputs must be evaluated for their potential to createbusiness ventures. As a University with a technology and entrepreneurship mandate, thesecommercially-inclined indicators measure our success in creating technology-driven wealth.

Performance

There were no results for these indicators. However, the University is strengthening its researchinfrastructures in order to set up the appropriate environment to carry out research thatproduces outputs with a commercial value.

18

2.5.3.3 Research prizes and honours

Relevance

There are several research awards and honours available in various research disciplines. Theirpurpose is to honour and reward excellence in research. The University recognises thatresearch prizes and honours received by our academics measure their quality as researchers.

Performance

The University is developing a policy framework for internal awards and honours for research.No prizes and honours were received from outside the institution in 2012.

19

2.6 TEACHING AND LEARNING

2.6.1 Academic Bridging Programme

Relevance

The University seeks to widen access to university education to students who do not meetminimum entry requirements by offering an academic bridging programme. Currently theprogramme covers mathematics at Ordinary Level. The programme is intended to bridge thegap between a student’s secondary education and requirements of first-year university courses.

Performance

One hundred and twenty-eight applicants were offered bridging mathematics in 2012. Onehundred and twenty-five of them successfully completed the programme and were enrolledinto various degree programmes.

2.6.2 Student to Lecturer Ratio

Relevance

A student - lecturer ratio is a reasonable indicator of the quality of education in the University.The ratio also indicates the deployment of available human resources in our academicdepartments. The time and attention a lecturer devotes to each individual student is directlyrelated to the quality of that student’s educational experience. Thus, the University strives tocreate a student/lecturer ratio that promotes effective engagement between individualstudents and their lecturers.

Performance

The University considers its entire students to be full-time equivalent students (FTE). Thestudent-lecturer ratios in our Schools for undergraduate studies are shown in Figure 10. Thestudent-lecturer ratios were 4:1 and 30:1 (FTE) in the M.Sc. Post-Harvest Technology and M.Sc.Strategic Management programmes, respectively.

20

2.6.3 Class Size Experience

Relevance

The University is committed to providing students with a learning environment that supports avariety of learning formats which include small class sizes. Small class sizes promote morestudent-lecturer interaction. The size of the class indicates the group-learning experiences ourstudents are receiving.

Performance

The range of class sizes for undergraduate classes are shown in Figure 11.

Agricultural Sci. & Tech. 100%

Engineering Sci. & Tech. 63% 18% 16% 3%

Art & Design 89% 11%

Hospitality & Tourism 76% 21% 3%

Lifelong Learning 92% 8%

Business Sciences & Management 41% 17% 28% 13%

50 students or less Between 51 and 100 students Between 101 and 200 students Over 200 students

Figure 11 Class sizes in 2012

21

2.6.4 Students’ Course Experience

Relevance

Students are the designated recipients of educational services. Students’ satisfaction is animportant quality dimension for universities. A measure of the level of their satisfaction withthe quality of academic provision is a reasonable indicator of the quality of our programmesand teaching. Students’ satisfaction with their educational experience is positively correlatedwith desired outcomes such as high retention or graduation rates.

Performance

Information on students’ evaluation of courses and lecturers was not available for 2012.

2.6.5 Undergraduate Instructional Engagement

Relevance

The University strives to enrich the learning experience for undergraduate students by ensuringthat they interact with scholars at the forefront of knowledge creation. Such scholars areusually Research Chair scholars, Endowed Chair scholars and professors. This metric measuresthe number of such scholars directly engaged in undergraduate instruction.

Performance

This is a performance indicator still being developed. Data in 2012 were not adequate to makemeaningful computation of relevant ratios.

2.6.6 Student Graduation

Relevance

The University is committed to providing students with an environment that is conducive tolearning. The rate at which students continue their studies and graduate in a timely mannerreflects our success in providing a suitable learning environment. Graduation rate is theproportion of first-time, full-time registrants graduating by the end of the programme duration.

Performance

The graduation rates in our Schools generally hovered in the range 70 – 76%. Data on thismetric were difficult to clean because of several noise factors.

22

2.6.7 Degree Classes

Relevance

Grades of degrees obtained by our students provide general information on levels ofattainment of learning outcomes. This indicates the competencies of our students and thequality of learning processes they went through.

Performance

The distribution of degree classes for the graduating groups of 2012 are shown in Figure 11b forundergraduate students. For the M.Sc. Strategic Management programme 85% of the studentspassed with the Merit class and 15% got the Pass class.

23

2.7 COMMUNITY SERVICE

Relevance

The University strives to be responsive to the needs of the community and support social,economic and cultural development. Our community service activities indicate the University’slevel of engagement with society and the public’s confidence in services offered by theUniversity.

Performance

Table 2 provides a summary of major community service activities in 2012.

Table 2 Key community service activities

Activity Key School/Department Beneficiaries

Trained farmers in conservation agriculture Irrigation and WaterEngineering

Farmers in Makonde andZvimba Districts

Conducted a feasibility study on biogastechnology on behalf of SNV

Fuels and Energy Households in Insiza andthe peri-urban suburbs ofHarare

Participated in World Tourism day campaign byorganizing cleanup campaigns

Hospitality and Tourism Chinhoyi community

Conducted short courses in Cosmetology,Motor Mechanics, Machine shop engineering

Institute of LifelongLearning

Chinhoyi community

Co-ordinated the activities of the ZimbabweFoundation of Technological Services


Chinhoyi community

Conducted training in waste management inpartnership with EMA


Community of Chinhoyi

Organised cleanup campaigns Institute of LifelongLearning

Chinhoyi community

Worked in community projects for orphans Art and Design Musoromuchena Orphanagein Alaska

24

2.8 PUBLICITY

Relevance

The University recognizes that publicity is essential for success in business in this era ofcompetitive markets and globalization. The University is also aware of the role played by boththe print and electronic media in promoting and safeguarding the image of its brand. Thepresence of the University in the media measures our success in publicising our activities tosociety.

Performance

The University received widespread publicity in 2012 both in the print and electronic media.There were 40 articles that appeared in the media about the University. Five of these articlesprojected a negative image about the University.

2.9 ACCREDITATION

Relevance

Accreditation is the process by which external regulatory or professional bodies evaluate thequality of the educational infrastructures of the University in order to formally recognize theUniversity as having met certain pre-determined minimal criteria or standards. The result of theprocess is awarding of a status of recognition and a licence to operate within a time-limitedvalidity.

Performance

The process of accreditation of the University was initiated by ZIMCHE in 2012. The Universitycompleted a self-evaluation exercise which was followed by an institutional visit by ZIMCHE.The process of accreditation of the University will be completed in 2013.

25

3. RESOURCES

3.1 FINANCE

Financial stability is essential for the successful implementation of the University’s StrategicPlan. The University strives to mobilize as much as possible financial resources required forexecution of its mission.

3.1.1 Operating Revenue by Source

Relevance

It is the University’s aim to diversify its revenue streams in order to meet the growing demandfor resources. Diversity of sources of operating revenue indicates the extent to which theUniversity was successful in broadening its revenue streams in 2012.

Performance

Fiscal subvention to the University continued to be a challenge in 2012. The sources of theUniversity’s operating revenue are indicated in Figure 12. The actual amounts were$14,678,820 Government grant, $5,907,248 fees and $1,406,694 other income.

26

3.1.2 Operating Budget/Student Ratio

Relevance

This indicator provides a picture for accountancy purposes of the cost of university education.This provides a measure of the University’s resource situation.

Performance

The operating expenses per student in 2012 were $3,130 for the year. This represents theactual cost of education per student.

3.1.3 Budgetary Allocation to Academic Activities

Relevance

Teaching, learning and research are the core business of the University. Direct academic costsas a percentage of total operating expenditure are those costs associated with operating theseacademic activities. It is one measure of how well we are supporting our core functions ascompared to other functions in the University.

Performance

Figure 13 shows the major cost centres in 2012. Direct budget allocation to academic activitiesaccounted for 68% of the total costs.

3.1.4 Financial Health

27

Relevance

Financial health and credit rating information for the University is useful to determine thecapacity of the University to repay borrowing. The higher the number of times the Universitycovers its debt, the better security for creditors and support for the University’s mission.

Performance

Our liquidity ratio was 58% in 2012.

3.2 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

3.2.1 Investment

Relevance

The University strives to create an e-based learning environment. Investment in ITinfrastructure is a measure of our commitment to support staff and students in teaching,learning and research in a digital era. It is one measure of how well we are supporting our corefunctions.

Performance

The University invested a total of $461,646 in IT expenses in 2012. This was 2.2% of totalUniversity operating expenses.

3.2.2 E-learning and Courseware Applications

Relevance

The University wants all its course materials made available on its e-learning platform. Studentsnowadays want course materials to be available over the web to support new learning models.Putting materials on the web increases convenience to students and staff.

Performance

Figure 14 below shows the number of courses that used the e-learning platform on our intranetin 2012. The University does not have courseware applications such as Blackboard AcademicSuite for online presence.

28

3.2.3 Number of Computers per Student

Relevance

Access to computers is a requirement in modern day learning. The ratio of computers tostudents is an indicator of the computing infrastructure available to support student learningand research.

Performance

The ratio of computers to students was 1:8 in 2012. A ratio of 1:4 is normally the acceptablestandard.

3.3 LIBRARY

3.3.1 Library Expenditure as a Percentage of Operating Expenditure

Relevance

29

Library resources are central to the University’s mission of teaching, learning and research. Oneway of measuring the University’s commitment to improving library resources and services is tomeasure the proportion of the University budget allocated to the Library.

Performance

Library expenditure as a proportion of total University operating expenditure was 0.01% in2012.

3.3.2 Library Resources Budget per Student

Relevance

Well-resourced libraries are essential to promote quality teaching, learning and research. Thesize of the budget supporting library resources for our students is an indicator of ourcommitment to build a strong library collection.

Performance

The level of financial support to the Library was $29.52/student.

3.3.3 Library Holdings

Relevance

The University is consistently building a strong library collection. The size of the librarycollection is one of the indicators of how well we are supporting our core functions.

Performance

The levels of Library holdings in 2012 are shown Table 3.

Table 3 Library holdings in 2012

Indicator Value

Total Library holdings (printed material)* 34 746

Total Library holdings per student (printed material) 6

Number of electronic books 75 000

Number of print serial titles 4

30

Number of electronic serial titles 7 000

*printed material – monographs, printed journals, and other printed publications –excludes electronic material.

3.4 SPACE INVENTORY

Relevance

ZIMCHE stipulates guidelines for space requirements for various purposes such as teachingspace, office space, library space and so forth. For example, minimum classroom floor area perstudent is 1.5 m2 with desk and chair, and 0.9 m2 with chairs only . Space inventory andutilization levels indicate how efficiently we are utilizing existing space.

Performance

The University has an acute shortage of space. The total teaching space in 2012 was 6,642 m2

against an optimum of about 8,000 m2 required for our student population. Total office spacewas 3,423 m2 and total laboratory floor area was 3,116 m2.

However, in 2012 the University embarked on a number of projects earmarked to increase thespace inventory. Table 4 indicates new space inventory for 2012. Development of physicalstructures is one of our KSIs. More information is given in section II.

Table 4 New space inventory in 2012

Space type New Inventory in 2012 (m2)

Office space (Main Campus) 112

Office space (Orange Grove Campus) 270

Office space (Dilmitis Campus) 84

Teaching space (Orange Grove Campus) 1,070

Teaching space (Dilmitis Campus) 270

Laboratory space (Dilmitis Campus) 83

Laboratory space (Orange Grove Campus) 44

31

3.5 FUNDRAISING

Relevance

In an era of limited fiscal subvention to public universities, fundraising is essential to mobilizeresources required to create an enabling environment that will allow our staff and students toexcel in academic activities. Total funds raised in 2012 indicate the results of these endeavours.

Performance

In 2012 the University enriched the mandate of the Directorate of Research to include theportfolio for Resource Mobilisation. Fundraising was instituted as a key result area for all unitsin the University. A total of about $300,000 was raised in 2012 for various University activities.About 96% of this amount was raised from various income generating activities in theUniversity.

3.6 STAFF SATISFACTION

Relevance

The University strives to be an employer of first choice by creating a fertile landscape for bothpersonal and professional development for our staff. Incidences of satisfaction result inperceptions of quality. The level of satisfaction of our staff is a reasonable indicator of how wellwe are providing an enabling environment for our staff.

Performance

The University is in the process of establishing a mechanism for measuring staff satisfaction.This indicator will be presented in the 2013 report.

32

SECTION II

KEY STRATEGIC INITIATIVES OF THE INSTITUTIONALTRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME

33

4.1 KEY STRATEGIC INITIATIVE 1

DEVELOPING PHYSICAL STRUCTURESRelevance

Tangibles such as physical structures are key success factors for the realization of the goals ofour Strategic Plan. Academic provision and support services of the University are affected bythe quality and quantum of physical structures. Our level of investment in the built-environment is a reasonable measure of the University’s commitment to build a modernuniversity with adequate and appropriate physical structures.

Scope

This initiative involves construction, refurbishment and resourcing of classrooms, laboratories,offices, toilets, staff and student accommodation. The University will mobilize resources forthese projects.

Performance

The University has a number of projects designed to increase the inventory of physicalinfrastructures. Table 5 shows the progress achieved in this endeavour. The works shown inTable 5 were funded by internal resources mobilized by the University.

Table 5 Physical structures inventory

Item Total inventory as ofDecember 2011

New inventoryas of May 2013

Value of newinventory ($)

Total inventoryas of May 2013

Office space (m2) 2 957 466 116,500 3 423

Teaching space (m2) 5 302 1 340 0 6 642

Staff houses (number) 28 3 244,000 31

Toilets (number) 125 0 0 125

Laboratory equipment ($ value) - - 105,998 -

New space inventory was acquired through the purchase of properties and creation of newoffices on the Main campus. The University is taking a multi-campus approach in setting up itsphysical structures. There are now four campuses as follows: Main campus; Orange Grovecampus; Dilmitis campus and Shankuru campus.

34

Table 6 shows the current standing of the University in terms of provision of physical space forits staff and students. This is measured against ZIMCHE standard specifications.

Table 6 Current space offerings

Type of space Current provision (m2)Recommended standard

(ZIMCHE – m2)

Dean’s office 35 -

Head of Department office 9 18

Senior Lecturer/Professor’s office 9 18

Lecturer’s office 3 13

Non-academic staff office 4.5 7

Science laboratory (per FTSE) + 5.8 2.8

Hospitality kitchens (per FTSE) + 2.7 2.8

Fine and Creative Art (per FTSE) + 4.7 2.8+It is only the number of laboratories that is not adequate.


BUILDING PUBLIC-PRIVATE SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS (PPPs)Relevance

The University recognizes that a partnership with the private sector, which approaches businesswith a commercial or application orientation, contributes to achieving the goals of our StrategicPlan. We are aware that higher education is no longer just a social enterprise, but aninteractive public/private sector business where a university must work with developmentpartners. The private sector is a major stakeholder in higher education. Thus, CUT wishes toleverage the PPPs for development.

Scope

The University will build PPPs with willing development partners. These will focus onconstruction of physical structures, joint business projects (especially for our strategic businessunits), setting up laboratories, research and innovation (including establishing a technopark)and any other areas of mutual interests.

35

Performance

Two companies have been engaged for possible partnerships. These are ARUSOME Propertiesand Studio Arts. ARUSOME Properties will invest in water reservoirs and sporting facilities onthe Main campus. Studio Arts will invest in student accommodation facilities. These projectswill be guided by the University Master Plan. The University has acquired 11 ha of land in theenvirons of Chinhoyi for residential property development. The property at Shankuru has 7 hathat will be developed into teaching and student residential infrastructures.


BUILDING A STRONG PROFESSORIATERelevance

One of the major goals of our ITP is to strengthen our professoriate in all our academicdisciplines. The target is to reach at least 60% of academic staff in all departments holding PhDqualifications. Senior academics (Senior lecturers and professors) are pivotal for ourtransformation into a research-intensive university. The trinity of research-teaching-service andthe continuum science-technology-innovation are emboldened by a strong professoriate.

Scope

The University will leverage the opportunity of Zimbabwean scholars returning from theDiaspora (from brain drain to brain gain) by offering incentives to attract them. We will also tapfrom the pool of Zimbabwean scholars outside the country whose PhD scholarships havematured and are now returning home. The University will invest in training of academic staff toacquire PhD qualifications at local and external universities.

Performance

Table 1 in Section I showed our academic staff profiles as of December 2012. Table 7 shows theprofiles as of May 2013. Eight scholars have been recruited through the Zimbabwe HumanCapital website. These are Zimbabwean scholars returning from the Diaspora.

36

Table 7 Academic staff profiles in Schools as of May 2013

Full professorsAssociateprofessors PhDs Master's

School Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

Agricultural Science & Technology 2 0 1 0 8 2 19 12

Engineering Sciences & Technology 0 0 0 0 0 1 23 4

Hospitality and Tourism 0 0 2 0 3 2 11 10

Natural Sciences 0 0 1 0 3 0 5 1

Business Sciences and Technology 0 0 1 0 3 2 28 4

Art and Design 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 7

Institute of Life Long Learning 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 3

In section 2.2.1 we stated the need to have at least 60% of our academic staff in eachdepartment holding PhD qualifications. In Table 8 we show the position for each department asof May 2013.

Table 8 Proportion of PhD holders in Departments as of May 2013

Department Total*Lecturers

%PhD Department TotalLecturers

%PhD

Agricultural Sciences &Technology Business Sciences & Management

Animal Production & Technology 5 60 Accounting Sciences & Finance 6 0

Crop Science & Technology 3 67 Marketing 8 0

Agricultural Engineering 4 0 Supply Chain 4 50

Food Science 9 22 Business Man. & Entre. 12 0

Environmental Science 6 0 Consumer Science 3 0

Biotechnology 8 38

Irrigation & Water Engineering 7 14

Engineering Sciences & Technology Hospitality & Tourism

Production Engineering 7 0 Hospitality 10 20

Mechatronics 2 0 Wildlife & Safari Management 9 44

ICT 13 0 Travel & Recreation 2 0

Fuels and Energy 4 0

Environmental Engineering 2 50

37

Natural Sciences & Mathematics Art & Design

Physics 3 66 Creative Art & Design 10 20

Chemistry 1 100 Clothing & Textile Technology 4 0

Biology 1 0 Institute of Life Long Learning

Mathematics 3 0 Adult & Continuing Education 6 0

Curriculum & Instruction 4 0

* The full complement of staff in a department is an average of 12 lecturers

As of May 2013 the University had invested $89,260 in a training programme for members ofacademic staff to attain PhDs at Binary University in Malaysia. Table 9 shows the details of thisPhD training programme.

Table 9 Details of the PhD training progrmme for academic staff sponsored by the University

Area of Specialisation Number of Staff University

Fuels – combustion technology 2 CUT

Environmental science and technology 1 CUT

Wild life 2 CUT, University of Pretoria

Business sciences and management 8 Binary University, Malaysia


ENHANCING RESEARCH PERFORMANCERelevance

Research is the cornerstone of every reputable university. We are a research-focused Universitythat believes in the following: Research creates open and critical minds necessary for thepursuit of knowledge and the truth; research is vital for the provision of a stimulating academicenvironment that nurtures the culture of enquiry-driven scholarship; research informs teachingand teaching informs research; students should interact with academics at the forefront ofsubject knowledge and lecturers contributing to knowledge development instill confidence intheir students.

Scope

38

The University has set nine priority research areas in order to move away from an ad hocmanner of doing research to a more systematic approach. These are: biotechnology; foodsecurity and quality; information and communication technology; entrepreneurship;engineering; energy; hospitality and tourism; and art. The University will also establish researchcentres and research institutes for flagship research programmes in these niche areas.

Performance

We summarise in Table 10 the major highlights of activities that have been undertaken toenhance our research performance.

Table 10 Research-enhancing activities

Activity Scope of work Performance as of May 2013 Partners

Set up the FarmResearch, Teaching &Extension Unit

Experimentation plotsfor staff and students

Crop and livestockresearch

Energy crops research

Irrigation andagricultural engineeringresearch

171 cattle, 134 pigs, 9 sheep, 24goats

Research trials for Jatropha, birdeye chillies, and maize

Conservation agriculture

Commercial maize and soyabeanproduction to raise resources forresearch

Seed houses

FAO

Established the InvasiveSpecies Research andManagement Unit

All invasive species

Focus on water hyacinth

Unit being established

Unit will grow into a researchinstitute with time

Work in progress

Partner in theZimbabwe InternationalNanotechnology Centre

Energy nanotechnology Centre officially launched

Formative work in progress

University ofZimbabwe

State Universityof New York atBuffalo

Ministry ofScience &Technology

Local contextualizationof graduate studies

DPhil studies to solvelocal problems

Four DPhil students registered Industry

39

The University is promoting publication of scholarly works in local journals in order to enhanceaccess of our research outputs by local scholars and end users. Our Journal (Zimbabwe Journalof Technological Sciences) has now published three volumes. A new editorial team made up ofsenior scholars is running the affairs of the Journal.


DEVELOPING GRADUATE PROGRAMMESRelevance

Graduate studies are regarded as the cornerstone of every research university. No universitycan be research-intensive without paying particular attention to graduate studies. We recognizethat graduate training is one area which will have wide-ranging spin-offs for the nationaleconomy. Research performance and outputs are dependent on a critical mass of graduateresearchers.

Scope

Our graduate programmes are designed to resonate with national imperatives in order forthem to be relevant. We are aware of new approaches to graduate training and the emergenceof doctoral schools. All our academic disciplines are required to develop graduate courses andprogrammes that enhance national capacity for poverty reduction and sustainabledevelopment.

Performance

The University has set up the Directorate of Graduate Studies whose remit is to administer andcoordinate graduate training. The Directorate provides the requisite environment for graduatestudies and activities. It is the ‘centre’ that holds graduate studies. The University has also setup a Graduate Studies Fund which provides studentships for MPhil/DPhil studies in theUniversity. To date the University has invested $350,000 in this Fund. There were 10 academicmembers of staff supported by this fund as of May 2013.

40


STRENGTHENING INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCERelevance

According to experts, to be a ‘world-class’ university requires undertaking a transformationalprocess that would enable an institution, among others, to have a system that promotesfavourable governance. Good governance promotes good practices, shared envisioning,innovation and flexibility that are not encumbered by bureaucracy and centralization ofdecision-making.

Scope

The University is designing statutes (policies, regulations, guidelines and protocols) that createan enabling environment for both academic and administrative discourse and practices.

Performance

The University now has a supportive regulatory framework which supports staff promotions(Academic Staff Grading, Tenure and Promotions Ordinance 3), academic freedom (ResearchPolicy), and culture of excellence (Quality Assurance Policy). The University is developing apolicy for continuous professional development (Staff Development Policy) and is also devisingmechanisms to strengthen devolution of decision making to heartland units.


STRENGTHENING RESOURCE MOBILISATIONRelevance

It has been traditional practice for public universities to depend largely on government funds.The financial meltdown of 2004 – 2008 took its toll on the financial situation of the University.Even up to this day, the University is not receiving funds from the fiscus according to request.The effects of under-funding on infrastructure, research, staff morale and student intake havebeen well documented in higher education research. Our strategic plan has a total value of$215,824,568. This requires us to diversify our revenue streams in order to mobilize thesefinancial resources.

Scope

41

Sources of income being pursued include income generating projects, strategic business units,consultancy, investments, lifelong learning, endowments, development partnerships, donationsand others.

Performance

The University has set up a joint Council-Senate Fund Raising Committee. The remit of thisCommittee is to develop and manage the implementation of a fund-raising strategy. As of May2013 this was still in the formative stage. Resource mobilization is now a key performance areafor all units in the University. The enabling framework is being developed.


INTERNATIONALISATION OF ACADEMIC PROGRAMMESRelevance

Cross-border education has become big business in the 21st century with global annual returnsrunning into billions of dollars. The main drivers of internationalization of higher education arethe new means of communication, easier physical mobility and the need to reach a globalmarket. Higher education is a tradable service under the World Trade Organisation realms. Byinternationalizing our programmes the University will build an international profile andreputation.

Scope

The University will seek to internationalise its academic programmes using three strategies:

(a) Attracting international students from the SADC region;

(b) Offering our programmes in other countries; and

(c) Establishing joint programmes with institutions in other countries.

Performance

The Schools of Hospitality and Tourism and Business Sciences and Management have takenleadership in this endeavour by seeking to regionalize their programmes in SADC countries.Figure 15 shows a collage of University officials discussing partnerships with regional partners.The University has engaged Mananga Centre for Regional Integration and Management

42

Development in Swaziland as an affiliate college that will also market our programmes inSwaziland and Mozambique. An international relations portfolio has been created in theUniversity.

We recognize the variations in regional qualifications frameworks. As such, the University willprovide a Foundation Courses Programme for those regional students who do not meetminimum entry requirements for our programmes.

Fig. 15 CUT staff discussing with potential regional partners in Swaziland and Mozambique


MAINSTREAMING QUALITY ASSURANCERelevance

In one of its publications, Higher Education: The lessons of experience (1994a) the World Bankrecommended the introduction of policies and practices designed to give priority to qualityassurance in higher education. Since then, the quality assurance movement has gainedmomentum in higher education. By mainstreaming quality assurance in our University businesswe promote stakeholder confidence that the quality and standards of our academic provisionand awards is safeguarded and continuously improved.

Scope

The University embraces the ‘fit-for-purpose’ paradigm in its articulation of quality in highereducation. Our approach to quality assurance is underpinned by three general principles:

(a) The logic of competitive markets;

(b) Professional self-regulation; and

43

(c) Continuous improvement.

Our quality assurance framework is premised on three paradigms of Policy, Practice andPerformance. We will mainstream quality assurance in academic provision and serviceprovision, focusing on both technical and functional dimensions of the service quality construct.

Performance

A summary of our progress in developing quality assurance structures and systems is given inTable 11.

Table 11 Quality assurance milestones as of May 2013

Performance Indicator Performance

Establishment of quality assurance structuresand systems

A Directorate of Quality Assurance was set up. TheQuality Assurance Committee was set up as adelegate of Senate.

School Quality Assurance Committees were set up. An Academic Programmes Committee was set up.

Quality assurance statutory framework A draft Quality Assurance Policy was formulated.Three guidelines and protocols were developed foracademic provision.

Capacity building for quality assurance Several seminars and workshops were held for bothacademic and support staff.

Accreditation of the University The first phase of self-evaluation and institutionalvisitation by ZIMCHE was completed.

Academic programmes enhancement Degree nomenclatures were changed from thedesignator ‘Bachelor of Technology’ to otherdesignators such as ‘Bachelor of Science’ andBachelor of Engineering’.

A credit system was introduced for all academicprogrammes.

Programme reviews were done for all programmes. Academic audit was carried out for one School.

44

5. CONCLUSION

This report forms the baseline for future KPI reports of the University. The report provides anoverview of the performance of the University in key areas in 2012. The report also provides anoverview of our Institutional Transformation Programme.

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Directorate of Quality Assurance expresses its appreciation to all units for providing theinformation presented in this report.

chinhoyi university of technology performance rep… · 2.5.2.2 mphil/dphil student to lecturer...

Documents