The activity began with remarks from the Vice Dean I for Academic Affairs, Prof. Saifuddin Zuhri, S.Th.I., M.A., who emphasized the importance of the audit as an instrument for continuous improvement.
“Thank you to Dr. Sumarsono and all auditors who have taken the time. We hope the results of this audit can serve as material for the faculty's development towards betterment. If there are matters that need to be raised as major findings, we are very open to joint improvement,” he said.
The next remarks were delivered by the Dean of FUPI, Prof. Robby Habiba Abror, S.Ag., M.Hum., who expressed appreciation to all auditors and the academic community present. He emphasized that AMI is not merely a routine evaluation, but part of a shared commitment to improving the quality of academic and non-academic governance at the faculty and study program levels.
“Thank you to the assessors and all faculty leaders present. Please let the heads and secretaries of the study programs arrange the technical aspects of the audit according to their respective needs. Hopefully, future findings will not be viewed as shortcomings, but as opportunities for development and quality improvement of the faculty going forward. I hope this process runs smoothly and provides great benefits for us all,” he stated.
Presentation of Official Minutes by the Head of AMI
In the core session, the Head of AMI, Dr. Ir. Sumarsono, S.T., M.Kom., explained several important points regarding the audit process and its follow-up. He conveyed that all auditors were able to attend and were ready to carry out the mandate to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of documents and the implementation of the quality assurance system at the faculty and study program levels.
Several important points conveyed included:
Attendance of the Auditor Team The Head of AMI stated that of the total eight auditors scheduled to attend, all were able to attend in full. This full attendance serves as a form of commitment from the auditors in carrying out the mandate given to them to execute the internal quality audit process thoroughly and objectively.
Status of Standard Determination and Implementation The Head of AMI emphasized that the standard determination process had been completed in the previous stage. Meanwhile, various aspects of standard implementation have also been largely carried out by the related units. Thus, today's activity is focused on the evaluation stage, namely reviewing the conformity between what has been planned, what has been done, and the available evidence.
Checking the Conformity of Answers with Audit Questions The Head of AMI instructed every work unit and study program to re-check the conformity between the questions in the audit instrument and the answers or evidence that have been submitted. This process is important to ensure that all information provided is correct, relevant, on target, and supported by appropriate documents.
Position of Minutes as the Main Quality Control Document The minutes of today's meeting are declared as the "holy book"/main document (primary reference) in the quality control process. These minutes are analogized as the "holy book" of the audit results because all incoming information will become the basis for the auditors' assessment.
What is input by the ladies and gentlemen from the study programs or units will be recorded.
What is recorded by the auditors will also be juxtaposed.
Both components become the basis for compiling control notes in the quality assurance system cycle.
Follow-Up Audit (ATL) The Head of AMI then explained the ATL (Follow-Up Audit) process which will be carried out in the following month.
The ATL is conducted with an "apple to apple" principle, namely directly comparing today's audit documents with the follow-up evidence prepared later.
Today's files or minutes are printed and then juxtaposed with evidence of improvement at the upcoming ATL meeting.
The executor of the ATL is the Faculty's UPPS (Study Program Managing Unit), with the aim of discussing every finding in detail and determining what follow-up actions will be taken by each study program/unit.
In this context, what is established today will become the minutes and reference regarding the action plan that needs to be taken by each study program/unit.
Content Notes Per Study Program The Head of AMI emphasized that every study program will receive specific notes regarding their respective content. Every finding, input, or recommendation is adjusted to the conditions and documents of each study program, not generalized.
Major Findings in the Master's (S2) IAT Study Program and CPL Formulation Issues The Head of AMI conveyed that specifically for the Master's in Qur'anic Science and Exegesis (IAT), there were several major findings. He explained that the core of the problem does not originate from the study program, but from the university level (UIN), because:
Audit techniques related to PKL (field work practice) are largely directed towards CPL (Graduate Learning Outcomes).
However, the CPL at the university level does not yet have an adequate formulation, especially regarding research outcomes, so it is not synchronized with the study program's needs.
In the curriculum structure, CPL is an aggregate of CPMK (Course Learning Outcomes), and CPMK is an aggregate of sub-CPMK. If the formulation at the university level is unclear, then the study program will have difficulty deriving it down to the course level.
Therefore, he emphasized that the main problem lies at the university level, not at the study program level.
Major Findings as Development Opportunities and Material for Drafting the 2026 Work Program The Head of AMI conveyed apologies if there were many major findings presented to be discussed at the control stage.
He emphasized that major findings are not a disgrace, but rather important indicators for the development of the study program and faculty. These findings can also be used as reasons and foundations in drafting the 2026 Work Program (Proker). In compiling the 2026 accreditation form documents, all units are asked to refer to the audit results and quality data collection of 2025. The Head of AMI emphasized that auditors did not come to patronize or provide subjective assessments. Their main goal is to help improve the system, ensure quality standards are met, and build a consistent and sustainable quality culture within the faculty and study programs.
Closing
The Internal Quality Audit activity proceeded smoothly and productively. The faculty leaders and heads of study programs welcomed the various inputs given by the auditors. It is hoped that the results of this audit will encourage the improvement of the quality of education implementation, administrative services, and faculty governance as a whole.
The 2025 AMI serves as a strategic step for FUPI in strengthening the quality culture, improving the academic system, and preparing a more progressive faculty development roadmap in the coming years.