Qualis R3I-D by TransitionScience.ai — Demo Institutional Diagnostic

Welcome

Thank you for agreeing to review the Qualis Readiness, Resilience, and Reimagining (R3I) diagnostic survey tool for higher education institutions by TransitionScience.ai. Please enter the code you were provided to proceed or request a code here: qualis@transitionscience.ai.

After entering your responses, you will be asked to answer a few questions about your experience with the survey. We estimate that the entire process should take 15-30 minutes.

All invited reviewers will receive a complementary custom R3I report for their institution or faculty, normally within two business days.

Begin the R3I Diagnostic

Report an Issue

Respondent and Institution

Your name *

Your email address *

Institution name *

Section D: Assessment Governance and Decision-Making

Questions in this section are designed to evaluate your level of flexibility in assessment design and re-design across international accreditation and regulatory contexts. Future country-specific versions of the assessment may omit some questions for ease of response.

Which of the following bodies establish mandatory requirements regarding the structural composition of your assessments (e.g., grading weights, exam formats, or competency mapping)? Select all that apply. regulatory_assessment_requirements National Education Ministry or Baseline Regulator (e.g., MOET, CHED) Statutory National Quality Assurance/Accreditation Agency (e.g., MQA, BAN-PT, TEQSA) Professional Statutory/Licensing Boards (e.g., Engineering Councils, Medical Boards) Voluntary, International, or Discipline-Specific Accreditors (e.g., AACSB, ABET, FIBAA, AUN-QA) The Institution's Internal Governing Body (e.g., Academic Senate, University Board)

Which of the following structural requirements are formally mandated for your courses, and by whom? assessment_constraints

Select all that apply in any combination across rows.

No structural assessment requirements are mandated by any body — all parameters are at faculty discretion

Assessment parameter	Mandated by Government / National QA Body	Mandated by Professional Boards or Voluntary Accreditors	Mandated by Internal University Policy	Not Mandated / Faculty Discretion
Minimum/maximum number of assessment items per course
Maximum mathematical weight allowed for any single assessment (e.g., capping a final exam at 50%)
A mandatory invigilated/supervised final exam
A mandatory formative or continuous assessment ratio
Compulsory assessment of specific, external competencies
Formal blueprinting or mapping of individual questions to course learning outcomes (CLOs)
Specific mandates regarding AI permissibility or prohibition in assessment design (e.g., “Two-Lane” approaches, mandatory AI-free components, or strict disclosure requirements)

How quickly can your institution's internal governance structures (e.g., an institution-wide assessment office, academic committee, or other decision-maker) approve and enact a significant change to assessment policy? governance_tempo Within weeks — expedited pathways exist for rapid policy adaptation Within one semester / academic term Within one full academic year Longer than one year Varies significantly by College/Faculty Unsure

Within your institution, at what level is the primary authority held for the day-to-day design and approval of individual course assessments? (Assuming all external regulatory baselines are met) assessment_design_authority Centralized — institution-wide assessment office or central academic committee Faculty/College Level — college or faculty-level office/committee Department Level — Department or program committee Guided Autonomy — Individual instructor, but bound by strict institutional, college, or departmental guidelines Full Autonomy — Individual instructor with full autonomy over their syllabus Mixed — Varies significantly by College/Faculty or department Unsure

How is policy regarding AI use in student assessment currently structured and guided within your institution? ai_assessment_guidance Centralized & Differentiated — a single, institution-wide framework that outlines different assessment conditions and AI permissibility tiers Decentralized but Structured — colleges/faculties/Departments set their own distinct frameworks for AI permissibility (no single university-wide rule) Fragmented — some colleges/faculties have adopted frameworks, but other units across the institution vary or have none General Rule — an institution-wide rule is applied universally to all assessments (no differentiated tiers) Full Instructor Discretion — individual instructors make their own rules without any common frameworks or guidelines Under Development — a framework is currently being drafted but is not yet active Unsure

R3I-D Institutional Diagnostic

Detailed analysis of your diagnostic with areas of strategic focus

Questions or report issues? Contact us.

Qualis R3I-D

Welcome

Begin the R3I Diagnostic

Respondent and Institution

Section A: Institutional Profile and Scale

Section B: Accreditation and Regulatory Context

Section C: AI Policy and Governance

Section D: Assessment Governance and Decision-Making

Section E: Technology Infrastructure

Section F: Faculty Capacity and Support

Section G: Preparing for the Future

Feedback

R3I-D Institutional Diagnostic