The conclusion answered research questions described in Chapter 5. There are four researcher questions in this study. Chapter 5 was divided into four parts by four researcher questions.
The Critical Successful Factors Lead to Pass the Competency-Based Course Accreditation
To answer research question one, according to the discussion, there are success factors and failure factors lead to different result. As the most obvious failure factors discussed at previous stage. The reasons leads to successful result are as follows: the determination and intention, the deep knowledge of competency-based course accreditation of preparing the whole process, prepare for pervious plan, making the document organized, collecting all needed evidence and prove document, doing the complete analysis, developing complete competency structure, making sure the logic of course design, searching for the resources from stakeholders, consultants andteamwork support and communication with stakeholders.
Those factors were shared by interviewees. When they preparingfor the accreditation, those factors are main cause lead to success result.
The Categories of Those Common Processes
After the discussion, the researcher clustered it infive main factors, which are attitude to the accreditation, information, course, resources and communication and convincing,showed in Table 5.1. The reason to put the determination and the knowledge of competency-based course accreditation in one cluster is because the attitude for the accreditation is important factor for the whole process. The facility’s mind had a big influence in the result since the whole process is a time consuming work. The cluster information includes pervious plan, organized document and evidence and prove document. These three factors influence the
56
reviewers when they are identifying. The previous plan makes the following steps distributed and help check if there is missing part. When the steps are correct, the following evidences will show naturally. The course cluster includes the ADDIE model in the competency-based accreditation. The applicants need to follow from analysis to evaluation, so course design cannot be messy. There is a liner way to follow. The cluster resource includes all stakeholders, consultants and teamwork with coworkers. The last cluster is communication and convincing.
The communication to all stakeholders is important. It is important to convince them do the things in the right way.
The Processes of Course Design and Preparation They Prepare in Order to Pass the Competency-Based Course Accreditation
The applicants did their best to try to understand the accreditation since it is still very new to everyone. The manual announced on the official website is very clear. What they should do is follow all the steps of ADDIE model and involve competency analysis in the course design. The meeting with stakeholders between stages is every important. Therefore, it is anevent which cannot be leaved out.
The Difficulties during the Whole Process
Since the competency-based course accreditation is very new, most of applicants weren’t familiar with it so on of the difficulties is that the facilities didn’t have enough knowledge of the whole design process. The other challenge is to convince all stakeholders to corporate with them in order to follow the stages of the model. The speakers have long year experience of teaching already so they believe themselves more than what facility said. Therefore, it is a challengefor facilities to convince them. The third main challenge is that in order to fulfill the competency-based course accreditation, the facilities need to conquer the process which is time consuming and be patient with long pages paper work. After doing all these tiring process, it seems that there is no significant distinct influence and feedback. Therefore, it is a challenge to have enough intention to go through the whole process.
57
SUGGESTIONS
In this section there are four parts which include limitation, Suggestion for future applicants, for the competency-based accreditation and for future research.
Limitation
Since the competency-based course accreditation only hold for three years till now. The population for this study is still quite few. There are only forty-four passed cases. In the number of forty-four cases, most of them outsourced the process of applying for the competency-based course accreditation. Therefore, the researcher focused on the cases which did the whole process by themselves. Since the interview number was not quite large and the target of population was few, the result of the study is limited.
Suggestion for Future Applicants
The ability of cooperating with stakeholders and the ability of writing report are important. How to ask information and put them in the report is a skill. The facility need to know the timing to involve different stakeholders. Therefore, the previous plan is important, which help list down all stage issue and task to finish. By checking the list, the process can be finish more completely. The document needs to be systematic. After the logic course design which is in the right order, the document will appear naturally. The evidence need to be reserve as the event occurs. The period of the course do need to be too large. The larger the course is the lower possibility to make it organized and logic.
The facility need to be very familiar with the manual which announced on the official website. There are some terms not so easy to understand. The facility need to have enough knowledge of the competency-based accreditation and the course design. They need to be involved in some official course which teaches the concept of the competency-based course.
Therefore, the support from the consultant is very important. With the help from consultant, the applicants found errors instantly before the course was developed. Also, besides the facility, it is important to let the speaker realize the whole process. The sooner to involve
58
speakers in some big meeting is better.
It took a lot of effort and extra time of the facilities’ original tasks. Therefore, the applicants need to have strong passion. The whole work is time consuming, so it is easy to give up without the motivation. Both inner and outside motivations are important to be found by applicants.
Suggestion for the Competency-Based Accreditation
Since the competency-based course accreditation is very new, most of applicants weren’t familiar with it so on of the difficulties is that the facilities didn’t have enough knowledge of the whole design process.Therefore, Taiwan Workforce Development Agency dealt with the competency-based course accreditation needs to offer consultants and to hold some meetings to introduce the whole process. The training of consultants still needs to be improved. The more knowledge of the competency-based course accreditation of consultant, the more help the applicants will get from consultants. The reputation of the competency-based course accreditation is low. Most of companies only take their course to apply for the TTQS system but not the competency-based course accreditation. Taiwan Workforce Development Agency needs to do something to promote and let more target applicant recognize this accreditation.
The more credibility the accreditation has the more applicants are willing to apply for the accreditation. There are four ways to promote the competency-based course accreditation.
First, they can do what IIP did to collect the data to show the performance improve after the applicants passed the competency-based course accreditation to show the follow benefit the applicants get. Therefore, by proving where the benefit is the potential applicant will have more willing to do efforts to apply for the competency-based course accreditation. The second way is combined with some public policy to give subsidy. Since Taiwan Workforce Development Agency had already offered some budget for company training course. With the motivation of subsidy, the applicant will have higher possibility to apply for the accreditation.
The third way is to hold the event to commend and praise the applicants who passes the
59
accreditation. By holding this kind of event, it not only increase the opportunity to exposure achieve the goal to promote but also by asking manager to join the ceremony they seem it as a honor instead of only a piece of paper certification. The last suggestion to promote is also the most difficult one. The Taiwan Workforce Development Agency can figure out how to make the accreditation adapted by other countries not only being used in Taiwan. By increase the population adapt and acknowledge the accreditation, more potential applicants will be willing to apply for the accreditation.
Suggestion for Future Research
The age of the competency-based course accreditation is still young. Future study can follow the progress and the improvement the competency-based course accreditation does.
Since it is still a young and immature system, the progress it can be improve is still quite big.
This study discussed about the critical success factor of passing the competency-based course accreditation which has more benefit on the applicants. Future study can focus on discussing about the system and the way to improve for the competency-based course accreditation.
60
61
REFERENCES
Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (2015). Accreditation standards and guidelines for the professionalprogram in pharmacy leading to the doctor of pharmacy degree. Retrieved from
http://www.acpeaccredit.org/pdf/ACPE_Revised_Pharm.D._Standards_Adopted_Jan152 006.pdf.Accessed.
Barron, J. (2006). Top ten secrets of effective e-learning. Industrial and Commercial Training, 38(7), 360-364.
Baumgartner, I., & Shankararaman, V. (2013). Actively linking learning outcomes and competencies to course design and delivery: Experiences from an undergraduate information systems program in Singapore. Retrieved from
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6530112&url=http%3A%2F%2F ieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D6530112
Blanchard, P.N., & Thacker, J. (2010). Effective training (4th ed.). Jurong, Singapore:
Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd.
Boyatzis, R. E. (2000). Clustering competence in emotional intelligence: Insights from the emotional competence inventory. Handbook of Emotional Intelligence, 5(2), 343-362.
Branon, F. (2011).Learning objects: A user-centered design process (Master’s thesis).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No.3488034)
Bullen, K. E. (1986). An introduction to the theory of seismology. Geophysical Journal Internationa, 86(1), 385-386
Custer, R., Scarcella, J., & Stewart, B. (1999). The modified Delphi technique: A critical success factors and small business. American Journal of Small Business, 8(3),49-57.
Ducrot, J., &Shankararaman, V. (2015). Leveraging competency framework to improve teaching and learning: A methodological approach.Education and Information Technologies. 14(2), 343-350. doi: 10.1007/s10639-015-9383-7
Gagné, R. M., Golas, K. C.,Keller, J. M.,&Wager, W. W. (2005). Principles of instructional design (5th Edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
62
Gustafson, K.L., & Branch, R.M. (2002). What is instructionaldesign?. In R.A. Reiser & J.V.
Dempsey (Eds.), Trendsand issues in instructional design and Technology (pp. 16-25).
Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Ivey, J. (2013). Interpretive phenomenology. Pediatric Nursing, 39(1), 27.
Johnson, M.,& Hager, P. (2008). Navigating the wilderness of professional learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 20(2), 526-536.
McLagan, P. A. (1997). Competencies: The next generation. Training & Development, 51(5), 40-47.
Melbourne Department of Human Services (2005). Competency standards for health and allied health professionals in Australia. Retrieved from
http://www.womenandbirth.org/article/S1871-5192(11)00201-0/references
Parry, S. B. (1998). Just what is a competency and why should you care?. Training, 35(6), 58-61.
Passow, H. (2012). Which ABET competencies do engineering graduates find most important in their work?. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(1), 95-118.
Power, D., Sohal, A.,& Rahman, S.(2001). Critical success factors in agile supply chain management‐An empirical study. International Journal of Physical Distribution &
Logistics Management, 31(4), 247-265.
Ranil, R. S., Carween, M., Sydney, M., Polina, M., Markku, N., Oleg, S., William, K., Peter, F., Benjamin, A., & Richard, R. (2014). Reflections on competency-based education and training for surgical residents. Journal of Surgical Education, 71(1), 151-158.
Ravinder, K., Rajesh, K., & Ravi, S. (2015). Critical success factors for implementation of supply chain management in Indian small and medium enterprises and their impact on performance. IIMB Management Review, 27(2), 92-104.
Rezaiea, K., Ostadib, B., Tadayoun, S., &Aghdasi, M. (2009). Critical success factors (CSFs) for process management projects. Retrieved from
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5344625&url=http%3A%2F%2F ieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5344625
63
Rockart, J.F. (1986). The changing role of the information systems executive: A critical success factors perspective. Sloan Management Review, 5(1), 3-13.
Rothwell, W.,&Lindholm, J. (1999). Competency identification, modelling and assessment in the USA. International Journal of Training & Development, 3(2), 90. doi:
10.1111/1468-2419.00069
Shih, Y. Y., & Huang, S. S. (2009). Exploring the critical success factors of mobile commerce via qualitative method in case of insurance industry. Retrieved from
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5070747&url=http%3A%2F%2F ieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5070747
Thonguthai, S., &Kaewkuekool, S. (2011). The development of a competency based course of study to meet Thailand's mound and die industry needs. Social Sciences, 6(3), 241-249. doi: 10.3923/sscience.2011.241.249
Wills, S. (1993). MCI and the competency movement: The case so far. Journal of EuropeanIndustrial Training, 17(1), 9-11. doi: 10.1108/03090599310023682
Woodruffe, C. (1993). What is meant by a competency?. Leadership &Organization Development Journal, 14(1), 29-36.
Xiao, D. B. (2013, May). Practical competency-based course design. Quality Magazine, 51(3), 24-28. (Original papers published in Chinese)
Zhou, Q., Huang, W., & Zhang, Y. (2011).Identifying critical success factors in emergency management using a fuzzy DEMATEL method. Safety Science, 49(2), 243-252.
64
APPENDIXA: INTERVIEW CONSENT (CHINESE VERSION)
訪談研究同意書
1. 我願意參與此訪問研究計畫並將自己的經驗與研究者分享。
2. 研究過程中我願意接受研究者訪問，但當我感到不適之處時我有權利決定停止
參與此項研究。
3. 研究過程中我同意研究者在訪問過程中錄音，錄音帶與逐字稿僅作為此研究論
文之用。
4. 在研究過程中，若我有任何的疑問時，我有權利詢問研究者，研究者也必須進
一步說明、澄清我的疑惑。
5. 我已明白此研究的性質，參與研究的權利，因此我將簽名表示同意參與研究。
參與者：
中華民國年月日
研究者：
中華民國年月日
65
APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR REVIEWERS
Dear XXX: (For reviewers of competency-based accreditation)
My name is Chia-yu Chang, I am writing this letter to invite you to participate in the research of Critical Success Factors of Passing the Competency-Based Accreditation.
The interviews will be within an hour and recorded digitally and interviewees will be provided with file of the finaltranscripts. You retain the right to review and edit their interview transcript before the final version isdeposited.
I sincerely hope that you will consider participating in this study. I will be contacting you via telephone or email in the near future to confirm your interest in being interviewed.
Please feel free to contact me as specified below with any questions. Below are some related discussion questions. I hope that you could kindly give the answers through interview, and your kindly suggestions will be greatly appreciated!
Part I. Basic Information 1. The name of interviewee
2. What are the categories of the courses you have reviewed?
3. How many time you reviewed the courses?
Part II. Interview Questions
1. Do you need to realize the purpose of the applicants of applying for the competency-based course accreditation?
2. What is the main factor of passing the competency-based course accreditation?
3. Where did you put emphasis on when reviewing the course?
4. In what condition you will request for more information from applicants?
5. What factors influence the result when reviewing?
66
6. What made you to be strict or not so rigorous when reviewing the course?
7. How did you define courses between directly passed and passed with condition?
8. What is your suggestion for future applicants?
9. What is your suggestion for competency-based course accreditation?
67
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANTS
Dear XXX: (For case applications interviewees)
My name is Chia-Yu Chang, I am writing this letter to invite you to participate in the research of Critical Success Factors of Passing the Competency-Based Accreditation.
The interviews will be within an hour and recorded digitally and interviewees will be provided with file of the final transcripts. You retain the right to review and edit their interview transcript before the final version is deposited.
I sincerely hope that you will consider participating in this study. I will be contacting you via telephone or email in the near future to confirm your interest in being interviewed.
Please feel free to contact me as specified below with any questions. Below are some related discussion questions. I hope that you could kindly give the answers through interview, and your kindly suggestions will be greatly appreciated!
Part I. Basic Information
1. The name of interviewee/ organization/ position 2. The category of the interviewee apply
3. Which kind of institution your company (institution) belongs to?
4. How many times your company (institution) apply for the competency-based course accreditation?
Part II. Interview Questions
1. What is the purpose to apply for the competency-based course accreditation?
2. What’s your attitude and expectation facing the competency-based course accreditation?
3. Who purposed to apply for this accreditation? Why chose this course?
4. How to get resources and support during the process? Where to get those resources?
68
5. What is the main factor of passing the competency-based course accreditation?
6. How to fit the requests of the accreditation? Is there any difficulties or challenges?
7. When preparing for the whole process, how frequent do you contact with consultants?
8. What do you think it was the main influences on the competency-based course accreditation?
9. When preparing for the whole process, did you take any cases as a benchmark reference?
Where those references came from?
10. Did you build any systematic database for evaluation or for the convenience of next applying?
11. What was the result the competency-based course accreditation announced to you?
12. What is your suggestion for future applicants?
13. What is your suggestion for competency-based course accreditation?
69
APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR REVIEWERS (CHINESE VERSION)
訪談內容
訪談對象：職能導向課程品質認證審查者 第一部分：基本資料
1. 受訪者姓名
2. 審查單位之名稱(課程類別)、類型(所屬機關為學術團體、專業機構、工業團體、商
業團體、職業工會或協會)?
3. 審查者審核職能導向課程品質認證之次數?
第二部分：訪談問題
4. 審查過程中有必要(會去)了解申請者的目的?
5. 您認為送審課程能獲得通過的主要原因？
6. 在審核的過程中，您的審查重點為何?如何判定通過與不通過的標準? 怎麼確定資
料是否符合?
7. 主要有遇到何種情況會要求補件?
8. 您認為影響審查結果的主要因素有那些? (規定、過程、學員成果、委員因素?)
9. 您對審查件採取寬鬆或嚴格的主要原因或考量為何?
10. 要符合直接通過或有條件通過的判定標準為何?
11. 給後續申請者的建議為何?
12. 對 iCAP 後續改善的建議?
70
71
APPENDIX F: PILOT INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR REVIEWERS
1. Please list at least 5 main critical factors of implementing the accreditation.
2. How do you judge the cases if it pass or not?
3. What are the regulations and requirements of competency-based accreditation?
4. What is the main purpose of setting competency-based accreditation?
4. What is the main purpose of setting competency-based accreditation?