TITLE:
A Multi-Domain Framework for Auditing Examination Quality Assurance in Higher Education: Evidence from Teacher Education in The Gambia
AUTHORS:
Sheriff Ceesay, Lamin L. Kanteh, Omar Ceesay
KEYWORDS:
Examination Quality Assurance, Moderation, Assessment Quality, Teacher Education, Higher Education, Institutional Assessment, The Gambia
JOURNAL NAME:
Open Journal of Social Sciences,
Vol.14 No.9,
September
24,
2026
ABSTRACT: This paper evaluates key quality-assurance dimensions: validity, reliability, examination quality control, item quality control, administrative security, and moderation feedback at the University of Education, The Gambia School of Education (UEG-SoE). Using two institutionally developed instruments, the Exam Committee Questionnaire (ECQ; N = 29; α = 0.87) and the Staff Assessment Practices Questionnaire (SAPQ; N = 68; α = 0.85), the study found strong perceived face and content alignment (composite means = 4.0138 and 4.0483), moderate perceived construct alignment (3.1517), and generally positive perceptions of marking-related consistency (3.8103) anchored in marking-guide practices. Examination quality control was found to be generally robust (3.7356), though difficulty-level consistency across departments was weak (2.8621). Item quality control was positive (3.5733), with strong review for clarity (4.3103) and clear intent (4.1724), but question repetition remains a concern (2.3793). Sound administrative quality control was manifested (3.6802), with strong secure storage and access controls (≈4.17), but a critical training gap on confidentiality/security (2.3448). Moderation compliance was high (98.5% submitted), yet feedback was inconsistent, with 53% reporting rarely/never receiving feedback; where provided, feedback was rated useful/very useful by 83.8%, most often via one-on-one consultations (36.7%), although staff preferred email (32.4%) and written comments (19.1%). The study recommends standardised difficulty calibration, formalised and documented feedback protocols, item banking with exposure tracking, cognitive blueprints, and targeted training to close gaps and align with competency-based policy. Beyond the institutional case, the study proposes a practical multi-domain framework for auditing examination quality assurance in higher education, spanning alignment, marking consistency, examination and item quality control, administrative security, and moderation feedback. The findings highlight implementation tensions likely to extend beyond the case institution, particularly the gap between procedural compliance and developmental feedback, the challenge of achieving cross-department comparability in examination difficulty, and the need to align assessment security systems with staff training and access logging. These insights may inform assessment reform in comparable teacher education and resource-constrained higher education settings.