NATIONAL ASSESSMENT AND ACCREDITATION COUNCIL (NAAC)

National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC)

Click Here: NAAC SSR

NAAC Accreditation – Appeal Towards NAAC “A Grade”

NAAC Appeal Documents


Criterion 2

Metrics Parameter Marks Justification
Awarded Req.
2.2.1 Average percentage of students from other States and Countries during the last five years 2 4 1. The HEI response for the percentage of students from other state is calculated and is based on inclusion of 3 programme namely UG and PG Pharmacy and Pharm. D. Though the later two (PG Pharmacy and Pharm.D) programme doesn’t have any provision for admission of outside state students. Hence the HEI is awarded with grade 2.

2. Furthermore, the HEI is not entitled to admit any foreign nationals and the students of others state on its own. The admissions are done centrally (through ACPC) as per the State’s Examination Result / Merit based policy of University hence, institute has no control over the increase in admission of students from other state.

3. In the view of above points, HEI feels that we deserved to be graded at 3 or 4.
Support Document
2.1.2 Average Enrollment percentage 2 4 1.The HEI has revised the admission number against the sanctioned input and is presented as revised Document.

2.The HEI while filling the DVV has wrongly calculated the sanctioned seat and hence the percentage admitted is found to be less than actual. Now based on corrective measure and the revised calculation the average percentage of admissions for all programme is found to be around 74 %, which in our opinion is now quite good to upgrade the grade of 3 or 4.

3.We request the NAAC to consider this document of revised calculation duly attested by HOI.
Support Document
2.1.3 Average percentage of seats filled against seats reserved for various categories as per applicable reservation policy during the last five years 0 4 1.The HEI has admitted the reserved category students in adherence to the norms prescribed by the state government and the university guidelines. The list of the students is submitted along with all the documents including the Category certificates as sample duly signed by HOI. It is Unfortunate that the DVV has not taken this into account and has awarded a grade 0.

2.In Support of the statement above the HEI is now submitting the admission list of university mentioning categories and the letter of state government regarding the reservation policy for the consideration by NAAC.

3.The supporting data indicate that the percentage of Student admitted against the sanction seats are between 35 to 94% which is sufficient to reconsider the score to be granted between 3 and 4.
Support Document
2.3.2 Percentage of teachers using ICT for effective teaching with Learning
Management Systems (LMS), E-learning resources etc.
1 4 1.During the Submission of DVV the HEI has shown only 13 faculties using ICT (Which accounts for 27.65 % only) under the impression that it has to be submitted only for PG Pharmacy programme. This miscalculation has credited the HEI the grade 1 in this sub section. The1.HEI has now correctly revised the ICT users which include the entire Programme and now the overall percentage is improved and revised as 100%.

2.In the View of discussion above the data is submitted in support and the HEI believes that the score can now be improved to 4.
Support Document
2.4.3 Teaching experience per full time teacher in number of years 1 3 1.As per the DVV Clarification the experiences of two faculties are included and the HEI Scored grade 1. The HEI has established in Year 2005 completing its 15 years during the filling of DVV. This is reflected in overall experience of the faculties joined since the inception which is around 5.65 years and will never be more than 15 years for many as per the cadre ratio required by AICTE.

2.The PG Pharmacy and Pharm. D are introduced 10 and 5 years back respectively, hence the overall score of Staff experience of 265.8 Years is quite justified.

3. In The view of the above points the HEI believes that the score should be graded at least between 3 and 4.
Support Document
2.4.4 Percentage of full time teachers who received awards, recognition, fellowships at State, National, International level from Government, recognised bodies during the last five years 0 3 1.During the DVV data filling the HEI has included the awards and recognition which is found non eligible by NAAC and granted a score of grade 0.

2.The HEI accept that some of the data did not qualify the requirement and has therefore suitably removed those and has included the relevant and correct data. It has improved the overall percentage of teacher receiving award from 0 to 7.28%.

3. In the view of this change the HEI now expect the up gradation of grade at least between 2 or 3.
Support Document

Criterion 3

3.3.3 Number of Ph.D.s awarded per teacher during the last five years 0 3 1.Due to error in file selection by our technical person wrong file has been attached. Now we are attaching correct file.
2.As per DVV suggestions, HEI includes the letters of Ph.D guideship /Ph.D. Award certificate and attached.
3.HEI requests to DVV to consider the present file for evaluation and award the grade point accordingly.
4.The HEI appeals to NAAC to evaluate data for this metrics.
Support Document
3.3.4 Number of research papers per teacher in the Journals notified on UGC website during the last fiveyears 0 4 1.As per the bibliometric, our institute is having H index 16. Our institute is having number of publications in Scopus indexed journals. The revised UGC care list is omitted few journals but still institute having high citation score. Please reconsider the issue as our institute cannot have citation score without publications.
2.As per DVV suggestions, HEI includes link to the UGC care listed journals. The HEI requests the earlier data to be reevaluated.
3.The HEI appeals to NAAC that verify the publication details through Scopus or web of science databases.
Support Document
3.3.5 Number of books and chapters in edited volumes/books published and papers innational/international conference proceedings per teacher during the last five years 0 4 1.As per required format list of books published with ISBN number was submitted. Faculty members have published book/chapter in CBS publisher, springer, Elsevier, Nirali etc.
2.HEI requests for reevaluation of earlier data metric 3.3.5.
Support Document
3.4.3 Number of extension and outreach Programs conducted in collaboration with Industry, Community and Non- Government Organizations through NSS/ NCC/ Red Cross/ YRC etc., during the last five years 2 4 1.Under GTU, NSS department HEI enrolled with username info@sdpc.co.in and actively working.
2.After DVV suggestion HEI changed data considered only NSS activities like Bharat ke Veer Fund, Swachhata Pakhwada, Tree Plantation etc. HEI deserve score 4 grading under this matric.
Support Document
3.5.1 Number of linkages for faculty exchange, student exchange, internship, field trip, on-the-job training, research, etc during the last five years 0 4 1.The HEI has uploaded relevant information for this metric at the time of DVV clarification. HEI requests the earlier data to be reevaluated.
2. HEI affiliated to GTU, through university Department of International Relations under International Experience Program (IEP), three students completed 3 months training at various Canada universities.
3.During Master degree under student exchange program, two students Mr. Chirag Gohil and Ms. Kirtiben Patel travelled to University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa to do research work and to get hands-on training “hyphenated analytical techniques”.
4.The HEI signed MoUs with various international and national universities, under these MoUs HEI did many research activities and outcome of these MoUs resulted into many research articles as well as collaborative research projects.
5.All proofs for student exchange and collaborative research activities are attached.
Support Document
3.5.2 Number of functional MoUs with institutions of National/ International importance, Other Institutions, Industries, Corporate houses etc., during the last five years (only functional MoUs with ongoing activities to be considered) 2 4 1.As per DVV clarification HEI changed the count but looking at the MoUs signed by HEI, 50 % MoUs with international organization.
2.HEI not only signed MoUs but resulted in a number of positive outcomes, which are highlighted with this document as well as it was shared earlier. Getting positive outcomes is actually tremendous afford by HEI at rural area.
3.In the view of the above points the HEI believes that the score should be graded at least 4.
Support Document

Criterion 5

5.1.1 Average percentage of students benefited by scholarships and freeships provided by the Government during the last five years 2 4 As per DVV suggestions, HEI has changed the number of beneficiaries for all five academic year, we got only 2 grade. The scholarship fee amount directly goes to beneficiaries account. HEI not having consolidated account statement. kindly increase the grade to 4.
Support Document
5.1.2 Average percentage of students benefited by scholarships, freeships, etc. provided by the institution besides government schemes during the last five years 2 4 DVV has considered data provided by the HEI for all the 5 academic years. But grade awarded is less. HEI is requesting to increase the grade to 4.
Support Document
5.1.3 Number of capability enhancement and development schemes –
1. For competitive examinations
2. Career counselling
3. Soft skill development
4. Remedial coaching
5. Language lab
6. Bridge courses
7. Yoga and meditation
8. Personal Counselling
2 4 When uploading the document, technical person uploaded the wrong file. Our college is affiliated to Gujarat Technological University. GTU included Remedial mathematics and Remedial biology subjects for B.PharmIst semester and Pharm.D I year students. We are regularly conducting the classes for the same. As a proof we are attaching
1. GTU syllabus of B.Pharm and Pharm.D courses
2. College Time table
3. Regular class attendance
4. GTU result sheet of students.
By considering above data, kindly enhance the grade from 2 to 4.
Support Document
5.3.1 Number of awards/medals for outstanding performance in sports/cultural activities at national / international level (award for a team event should be counted as one) during the last five years. 1 3 Our College started in 2005 and in 2009 first batch has come out. M.Pharm started in 2013 and Pharm.D started in 2016. It is hardly 15-year-old college and that to locate in remote village. Within this period, it achieved 03 international award and 2 national awards in five academic years. Kindly consider this mile stone and increase the grade to 3.
Support Document
5.4.2 Alumni contribution during the last five years(INR in Lakhs) 2 4 Our 1st batch of alumni has come out in 2009 with 60 intake. The number of alumni contributors are less, still we are able to collect 4 lakhs. While awarding the grade, kindly considering the age of the institute and award the as expected by HEI to 4.
Support Document

Criterion 6

6.2.3 Implementation of e-governance in areas of operation
1. Planning and Development
2. Administration
3. Finance and Accounts
4. Student Admission and Support
5. Examination
0 4 1. The HEI has uploaded relevant information at the time of DVV clarification but HEI is awarded with grade 0.
2. The Screenshot of E-governance applied in various operations are provided here as well as earlier. Screenshot of e-governance interfaces like finance and accounts, Student admission and support, library management, has been attached.
3. In the view of above points, HEI feels that we deserved to be graded at 4.
Support Document
6.3.3 Average number of professional development /administrative training programs organized by the institution for teaching and non teaching staff during the last five years 1 4 1. The HEI has uploaded relevant information for this metric at the time of DVV clarification but the HEI is awarded with grade 1.
2. HEI organized plentynumbers of professional development / administrative training programs and proof for the same has been share.
3. In the view of above points, HEI feels that we deserved to be graded at 3 or 4.
Support Document
6.5.3 Average number of quality initiatives by IQAC for promoting quality culture per year 0 4 1. The HEI has uploaded relevant information for this metric at the time of DVV clarification.
2. Provided Proof of some initiatives taken by IQAC to maintain quality though out the campus. Few success stories we would like to highlight here NIRF ranking, UG course accredited by NBA, SIRO-DSIR approval, ARIIA ranking, Clean & Smart Campus Award participation, six international conferences and MoUs, More than 40 guest lectures, Research grants, Consultancy projects.
3. In the view of above points, HEI feels that we deserved to be graded at 4.
Support Document

Criterion 7

7.1.10 Number of Specific initiatives to address locational advantages and disadvantages during the last five years 1 4 1. The HEI has uploaded relevant information for this metric at the time of DVV clarification. HEI request the earlier data is to be reevaluated.
2. 2. Proofs of 2014-15 programs of some initiative taken to engage with local community are attached and added in provided document.

Support Document
7.1.13 Display of core values in the institution and on its website 0 4 1. The HEI has uploaded relevant information for this metric at the time of DVV clarification. HEI request the earlier data is to be reevaluated.
2. We have uploaded core values on the institute website as per the suggestions. Web link is provided herewith
BulletinBoardpdf

Support Document
Metrics Parameter Marks Justification
Awarded Req.
3.1 Number of students year-wise during the last five years 0 4 1.The students year wise detail was uploaded on college website due to the large file size but the NAAC has not considered this data during the DVV evaluation. Therefore, the HEI has received the score zero. In the view of this discrepancy the HEI humbly request to visit the link BulletinBoardpdf for verification.
2.In the view of above justification HEI believe that a good number of students are admitted (more than 70%) in all the programme offered and hence the up gradation of grade to 3 or 4 is anticipated.
Support Document
3.2 Number of seats earmarked for reserved category as per GOI/State Govt rule year-wise during the last five years 0 4 1.The HEI has submitted the required documents of state and central government policy regarding the seats of reserved category. During the DVV Evaluation it has not be considered and the score of zero is granted.
2.In this appeal HEI requests the NAAC to reconsider the submitted data again and all the proofs attached here with in the support of our claim and do the needful.
3. The HEI follows all the norms of government regarding the reserved category and therefore expect the full score of 4 in this section.
Support Document