Abstract:
1.1 Mandate
In exercise of its mandate stipulated in the Universities Act 1985 and Universities Rules 1989 the Commission inspected Scott Theological College in August 2005.
Rule 19(1) (b) requires institutions to submit to supervision by CHE including inspection and visitation at such intervals as may be determined by the Commission.
1.2 Purpose of Inspection
The main objectives of the re-inspection were:
i) To assess the extent to which Scott had developed and maintained high standards since the award of Charter.
ii) To assess the extent to which Scott had adhered to the provisions of its Charter.
iii) To assess the extent to which Scott had implemented recommendations of the Commission at the award of Charter,
The inspection comprised of assessment of a Self-Evaluation Report and an onsite inspection of the College.
1.3 Self Evaluation Report
In preparation for the inspection Scott had in July 2004 submitted a Self-Evaluation Report to the Commission. The report was prepared following a format prepared by the Commission. The format required the College to address specific issues in the following areas:
i) Performance in relation to goals and objectives of the College.
ii) Governance
iii) Physical facilities
iv) Master plan
v) Library services
vi) Research
vii) Staff and Staff Development
viii) Financial resources
ix) Curriculum development and assessment.
The Self-Evaluation Report provided the Commission with information and data that was used for the onsite inspection.
1.4 On Site Inspection
Onsite inspection was carried out on 11th and 12th August 2005. It involved a physical inspection of the College and holding separate meeting with the following groups:
Management Board
Senate
Governing Council
Student leaders
Alumni
Prior to the inspection a team of resource persons had visited the institution and prepared reports on the physical facilities and library services.
Conclusion
Though Scott has made efforts to maintain high academic standards, it is constrained by inadequacy of financial resources.
The institution has attempted to adhere to the provisions of its Charter but it has not fully implemented all the recommendations of the Commission at the award of Charter
