Observational Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2024.
World J Clin Cases. Feb 6, 2024; 12(4): 758-765
Published online Feb 6, 2024. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v12.i4.758
Table 1 Comparison of pre- and post-commission knowledge, n (%)
QuestionPrePost
McNemer χ2 value
P value
Agree
Disagree
National academic accreditation enhances University’s status and prestigeAgree120 (40)32 (10.67)29.530.1
Disagree94 (31.33)54 (18)
National academic accreditation enhances the colleges status and prestigeAgree130 (43.33)20 (6.67)2.70.05a
Disagree10 (3.33)140 (46.67)
National academic accreditation is essential to attract quality national and international facultyAgree154 (51.33)12 (4)0.570.2
Disagree8 (2.67)126 (42)
National academic accreditation is essential to attract quality students to join the programAgree154 (51.33)31 (10.33)0.450.03a
Disagree23 (7.67)92 (30.67)
National academic accreditation increases opportunities for enhancing research and publications in the collegeAgree150 (50)21 (7)3.870.02a
Disagree37 (12.33)92 (30.67)
National academic accreditation assures program to be more rigorous in meeting international and national standardsAgree164 (54.67)23 (7.67)0.920.16
Disagree16 (5.33)97 (32.33)
National academic accreditation supports an environment of collaboration across departments and committees in the collegeAgree139 (46.33)47 (15.67)4.870.01a
Disagree27 (9)87 (29)
National academic accreditation process helps improve the clinical and lab, and other facilities in the collegeAgree44 (14.67)21 (7)54.670.47
Disagree105 (35)130 (43.33)
National accreditation alone is sufficient for ensuring a quality program, and international accreditation is not requiredAgree121 (40.33)78 (26)28.870.12
Disagree23 (7.67)78 (26)
The benefits of national academic accreditation for faculty outweigh the costs and efforts of the accreditation processAgree157 (52.33)26 (8.67)2.430.05a
Disagree15 (5)102 (34)
The benefits of national academic accreditation for administrative staff outweigh the costs and efforts of the accreditation processAgree142 (47.33)32 (10.57)8.20.002a
Disagree12 (4)114 (38)
Table 2 Comparison of pre- and post-commission attitudes, n (%)
Question
Pre
Post
McNemer χ2 value
P value
High
Low
In your opinion, the time investment in national academic accreditation by faculty wasHigh92 (30.67)57 (19)5.310.01a
Low34 (11.33)117 (39)
In your opinion, the time investment in national academic accreditation by administrators wasHigh106 (35.33)29 (9.67)13.030.01a
Low65 (21.67)100 (33.33)
The resources which the college needed for national academic accreditationHigh70 (23.33)79 (26.33)0.090.3
Low84 (28)67 (22.33)
The overall impact of the accreditation process on faculty stress levelHigh112 (37.33)44 (14.67)0.190.3
Low39 (13)105 (35)
What was your level of involvement in the national academic accreditation processHigh58 (19.33)93 (31)3.90.02a
Low67 (22.33)82 (27.33)
During your participation in the accreditation process, your stress level wasHigh134 (44.67)25 (8.33)6.1250.05a
Low47 (15.67)94 (31.33)
Table 3 Comparison of perceived stress regarding the commission, n (%)
QuestionPrePost
McNemer χ2 valueP value
Agree
Disagree
Overall, the national academic accreditation process (online and visit) was less rigorous and stressful than expectedAgree90 (30)52 (17.33)3.50.03a
Disagree74 (24.67)84 (28)
You noticed high-stress levels in faculty directly involved in the accreditation processAgree113 (37.67)72 (24)67.120.05a
Disagree1 (0.33)114 (38)
You felt mentally and physically relieved after the accreditation process endedAgree149 (49.67)91 (30.33)86.090.05a
Disagree1 (0.33)59 (19.67)