Sejahtera Academic Framework (SAF)

70 69 The results of data analysis showed that less than one-half of the students were in favour of the prevailing UniCORE curriculum practices. For example, only 47% were in agreement that the programme enriched their spiritual engagement while only one-third of the sample disagreed with the proposition that the UniCORE courses meet their objectives. Disagree Neutral Agree Enrich my spiritual engagement? 17.0 36.0 47.1 Have been taught effectively by course instructor? 17.3 35.7 46.9 The load of the courses does not reflect the credit hour? 20.5 33.5 46.0 Have duplicated content with your foundation courses? 20.2 34.8 44.9 Have been efficiently organised? 30.3 35.9 33.8 Do not meet their objectives? 33.6 42.0 24.4 Table 3.4 Percentage Distributions of Perceived Effectiveness of Objectives and Structure The data yielded several noteworthy results. First, at best only around one- third of the sample responded positively to the suggestion that the UniCORE, “enrich their knowledge on Islamic worldview, which signified the degree of the achievement of one of the main objectives of the courses. The results also suggested that only five out of every 10 final year students were in agreement that the UniCORE, (i) useful for [his/her] personal well-being” and (ii) “develop their soft skills such as communication skills.” These two objectives substantively underscored the UniCORE’s raison d’etre. In terms of the students’ evaluation of the structure of UniCORE, the data indicated that less than one-half of the sample responded favorably. In fact, the majority (more than 60%) of the students were of the opinion that class schedule and course contents need to be reviewed and structured. Still at least one-fifths of the sample were non-committal. Their responses implicitly indicated neutrality or not having any view pertaining to the curriculum issues. Perceived Effectiveness of the Teaching and Learning The respondents also evaluated the effectiveness of the curriculum delivery, particularly with respect to various (five) aspects of teaching and learning processes. Specifically, the respondents were asked if they agree that the UniCORE programme enriches their spiritual engagement, has been taught effectively, aligns the course workload and its credit, contains duplication of contents, and has been efficiently organised. In addition, the questionnaire measures the respondents’ evaluation of the overall achievement of the UniCORE objectives. The responses from the sample surveyed are summarised in Table 3.4. In a nutshell, the data suggested that the final year students were having difficulty to endorse the suggestions that the UniCORE courses have achieved their objectives, efficiently structured and organised, and effectively delivered. However, the Graduate Attributes Survey presents a different take on UniCORE. Students in this survey were also asked about the University required courses during their 3 to 5 years of study in IIUM. The figure below summarised the findings. Overall, students were found to be generally satisfied with the courses prescribed under the University required courses. The conflicting findings seemed to indicate that while being a student in IIUM, the UniCORE courses were seen to be irrelevant and unnecessary, perhaps because these courses were not part of their core area of study. But upon graduation and having had to deal with a world that is more than just about their area of study, the graduates found UniCORE courses to be beneficial and contributing to their overall perspective. Very Unsatisfied Unsatisfied Satisfied Very satisfied 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Compulsory o-curriculum courses UNGS courses Compulsory language courses Three main components in the University required courses