Summer Internship Project Report

Submitted for the partial fulfillment of PGDM (2010-12)

CONDUCTED AT Pharma Publication, New Delhi

Ranking of Pharmacy colleges in India

FORE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT, New Delhi

Submitted By:

Acknowledgement .........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 4 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Way Ahead.................................................................................................................................. 7 Objective ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Literature Review............................................................................................................................ 9 Methodology of Study .................................................................................................................. 14 Problem Discovery................................................................................................................ 15 Exploratory Research ............................................................................................................ 15 Problem Definition................................................................................................................ 15 Literature Review.................................................................................................................. 15 Basic research ....................................................................................................................... 15 2

Questionnaire Construction .................................................................................................. 16 Target Population .................................................................................................................. 16 Analysis................................................................................................................................. 16 Data Collection ............................................................................................................................. 17 Questionnaire Designing ........................................................................................................... 17 Sampling ....................................................................................................................................... 17 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 19 Spearman's Correlations ........................................................................................................... 20 Regression ................................................................................................................................. 44 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 49 Findings......................................................................................................................................... 50 Limitations .................................................................................................................................... 51 Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 52 Bibliography / References............................................................................................................. 53 Appendix ....................................................................................................................................... 55 Company Profile ....................................................................................................................... 55 Questionnaire 1 ......................................................................................................................... 57 Questionnaire 2 ......................................................................................................................... 59

Executive Summary

Indias Pharmaceutical sector is growing at a rate of 14 % per year. There is huge demand for competent manpower in this industry. Yearly about 60000 students graduate in pharmaceutical courses in India and approximately 50% give GPAT which is competitive examination for masters course in pharmacy. Despite this huge number of students appearing for competitive examination it hasnt enjoyed such attention from the coaching institutes and publications houses. Last year the course for competition is changed but most of the leading publishers are following old syllabus.

Pharma Publications basically provides the preparatory books for the competitive examinations for post graduation in the field of pharmaceuticals with the name of GPAT success series and NIPER success series. It also provides distance learning education for the same courses. It is now planning to launch a national level pharma magazine with the name of Pharma Post. Pharma Post first issue will include a national level survey on ranking of Pharmacy colleges. This survey is done by designing two questionnaire, one for students and alumni & other for faculty and staff members of AICTE & PCI approved Pharmacy colleges. A sample size of 488 respondents was taken from web based , door to door and mail survey For analysis median of collected sample for each variable was taken. This was done to have linear association with each variable depended on over all rank of the institute. Then on all the dependent variable regression was applied to form a regression model with which score for each college is calculated to predict the rank of the college. Spearman Rank Correlation was used on collected data which was ordinal and it is non parametric test which could be applied on non probability sampling. At the same time it is also used as sample size is also less than 30 for normal distribution curve. After calculating the correlation between the overall institute and other variables, regression model was used to calculate relation between overall institute and other parameters related. This test is used because it can be done on non probability sampling, then it can be done on ordinal data and it can take care of 16 independent variables at the same time. 4

Concluding with the results from the analysis of the questionnaire is that Ranking of Pharmacy colleges depends on student-faculty ratio , quality perceived by student of faculty members, relevant material taught apart from books, demographics, placement ratio, procedure of admission , library , teaching technology , interaction with alumni and laboratories.

Introduction
India's US$ 11.9 billion pharmaceutical industry is growing at the rate of 14 percent per year. It is one of the largest and most advanced among the developing countries. According to one report, in 2010 there are 1087 pharmacy colleges and schools in India producing over 60000 pharmacy graduates yearly. Growth Drivers for Pharmaceutical Industry The growing population of over of a billion Increasing income Demand for quality healthcare service Changing lifestyle has led to change in disease patterns, and increased demand for new medicines to combat lifestyle related diseases Foreign Direct Investment up to 100 per cent is permitted through the automatic route and Automatic approval for Foreign Technology Agreements also is available in the case of all bulk drugs cleared by Drug Controller General (India), all their intermediates and formulations, except those restricted by the Government of India As Indian Pharmaceutical sector is expected to grow at this rapid rate there is a huge requirement of competent workforce to work in this industry. Yearly about 60000 students graduate in pharmaceutical courses in India and approximately 50% give GPAT which is competitive examination for masters course in pharmacy. Despite this huge number of students appearing for competitive examination it hasnt enjoyed such

attention from the coaching institutes, publications. Last year the course for competition is changed but most of the leading publishers are following old syllabus. Seeing this void in the industry , a young entrepreneur from a leading MBA college has come up with a business plan to startup a Publication house Pharma Publications. Pharma Publications is a proprietorship firm owned by Ms. Jyotika Kapoor. The firm started its operation in 2010 and is at present in the business of education. The firm basically provides the preparatory books for the competitive examinations for post graduation in the field of pharmaceuticals which are basically 6

GPAT and NIPER with the name GPAT success series and NIPER success series. It also provides distance learning education for the same courses. It is also pioneer in launch of all-India mock online test series for GPAT and NIPER exams with the name of iGPAT and iNIPER. It is only player in the market which provides solution detailed analysis of the mock examination, which help students to improve their grip on the subject. It is also pioneer in launching books with complete changed syllabus for the exam. In such a short span of time it has moved forward at rapid pace and has made relations with few coaching institutes and colleges, which would recommend its books. Apart from this these relations also help in providing students for all India test series. The list of these clients includes but not limited to VNS Institute of Pharmacy, Bhopal IIMT College of Pharmacy, Greater Noida Pharmula Academy, Hyderabad Essence Academy, Hyderabad

Way Ahead
In the coming year Pharma Publications intent to grow many times. It plans to enter different fields related to pharma. In the coming few months its going to launch a national level pharma magazine on the name of Pharma Post. It is planning to start MBA in pharma at the start of next year for which it is in constant talk with one of the pharmacy college in NCR and deal for the same is at infant stage and expected to mature in coming few months. Afterwards in the coming few years it has also planned to open virtual class rooms for competitive examinations.

Objective
Pharma Publication which is a budding Publication house for aspiring pharmacy students. Its going to launch a national level pharma magazine with the name of Pharma Post. As of now there is not much information available about top colleges in pharmacy. For this Pharma Publications is doing a national level survey from the existing students, alumni, faculty and staff members of pharmacy colleges approved AICTE and PCI (Pharma Council of India) and come up with a ranking of these colleges in its first issue.

Literature Review
1 Martin Schatz (1), Ranking of business schools has been a controversial subject for a number of years. There are two problems associated with the popular rankings of MBA programs. The first problem is that people foolishly tend to believe that there is significance to the order in which the schools appear. The second problem is that the rankings have a tendency to become self-fulfilling prophecies. Its further explained with example of two rankings : Business Week and U.S. News & World Report. Business Week reportedly bases its rankings on two factors; a survey of recent graduates from the schools being evaluated, and a survey of corporate executives. First flaw in their report was that of some 700 colleges and universities in this country that offer the MBA degree, Business Week pre-selected forty-four schools to be included. But how did they determine which forty-four schools to include in their survey? Anything that they did with the data after that first decision is irrelevant if there is not a valid way of selecting the initial set of schools. Another flaw in its methodology rests on the premise that business executives know anything at all about the quality of business schools. As a matter of fact, the executives do know is from reading earlier issues of Business Week. It is also likely that at best, the executives evaluate the education received by the graduates of these schools on the basis of one or two individual graduates whom they happen to know, rather than on any extensive research. Then third flaw in methodology was that judging the quality of a school on the apparent popularity of the graduates. Its likely that a very large school that is not particularly distinguished will turn out more successful graduates who are visible than a very small school that has higher standards and expectations for its students, but nevertheless has far fewer graduates. In U.S. News & World Report survey methodology of ranking the schools by the people who should know -- the deans of the 270 MBA programs accredited by the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business. The problem with this logic was that these people don't know any more about each other's school. First, based on the very high turnover rate of business school deans, a good many deans are new to the job (approximately ten percent each year) and don't even know very much about their own school. Second, except for a few visits that a given dean may take to other schools for the purpose of evaluating them for continued accreditation, even longstanding deans don't really know much about more than a handful of schools. And finally, there are no criteria. 9

2 Morse, Robert J (2) These rankings are based on data from the Times Higher EducationQS World University Rankings, which were produced in association with QS Quacquarelli Symonds. These ranking are different from other rankings in two ways. First, none of the data from the America's Best Colleges and America's Best Graduate Schools lists is used in the World's Best Colleges and Universities rankings. QS Quacquarelli Symonds does all the data collection and calculations for the World's Best Colleges rankings. Second, the methodology used to compute the World's Best Colleges is different in many key areas. The World's Best Colleges rankings use six criteria: academic peer review, employer review, student/faculty ratio, citations per faculty member, the proportion of international faculty, and the proportion of international students.

3 Cosh Colby (3) The article is based on Macleans magazine survey of Canadian Universities. It point out the flaws in the methodology used by magazine in the survey. The methodology gives high percentage of 11% in overall scores to the students admitted in the university. It is done by seeing the marks in the high school of the students taking admission in the university. Now point to consider in the article is that every high school doesnt have same marking criteria and it is well explained in the article with the example of Alberta high school and with Ontario high school. In the first marks are highly weighted towards performance in province wide departmental exams whereas in later this aspect is missing. So students of Ontario can score 80% or more in exams more easily then students in Alberta. Thus college admitting student from Ontario will get benefit in ranking.

4 Staff, (4) The article is based on community college ranking. The ranking states that ranking could be done by seeing the size of college. In the ranking methodology 200 community colleges were divided into 3 groups based on the number of students inside the college. It was small colleges with fewer than 3000 students, mid-size college with 3000-7000 students and large size colleges with more than 7000 students. And then article states survey was formed separately and questionnaire contained mostly closed ended questions.

10

Editor (5) , The article provides information about the full rankings for national universities and liberal arts colleges. They have also provided a top fifty ranking for three other categories of schools: master's universities, baccalaureate colleges, and community colleges. And in light of surging student demand for service opportunities, they have enhanced our service measures for 2010. In addition to rating colleges on criteria such as the number of students participating in ROTC and the Peace Corps, they factored five new measures, including how many students engage in community service and whether a college provides matching dollars for serviceoriented scholarships like AmeriCorps. An introduction to a series of articles on the best U.S. universities and colleges based on how they are meeting their public obligations in the areas of research, service, and social mobility. They include the University of California-San Diego, Stanford University in California, University of Texas in Austin, Syracuse University in New York, Harvard University in Massachusetts, Morehouse College in Georgia, Bryn Mawr College in Pennsylvania, Berea College in Kentucky, Amherst College in Massachusetts, and Bowdoin College in Maine.

6 Baumann, Robert W, Chu, David K. W. & Anderton, Charles (6), In the article a study is shown of various colleges and it is compared from the data it contained earlier since the debut of the U.S. News & World Report College Guide in 1983, the U.S. News & World Report College Guide has become the premier 'consumer report' of higher education. It was found that peer assessment, which has been the largest component of the U.S. News & World Report ranking function, contained a penalty for religiously affiliated schools that were independent of the other U.S. News & World Report variables and several proxies for quality. Possible explanations of the religious penalty included taste-based discrimination, perceived differences in the quality of the curriculum, and strategic voting by college administrators.

7 Poyer, David (7), This paper assesses the Black Enterprise Magazine (BE) ranking of the top 50 colleges for African Americans, which it publishes biennially. Its principal objective is to evaluate the statistical consistency in the ranking over the distribution of institutions that compose it. The paper attempts to address two-related questions. Does the BE report provide an unbiased and consistent assessment of the educational value associated with the institutions included in their listing? Is the ranking method internally consistent? Two experiments were used to evaluate the consistency of the BE ranking.

11

First, structural difference in the model used to rank the institutions in the upper and lower half of the distribution is tested. Second, structural difference in the model used to rank HBCU and non-HBCU institutions included in the BE listed ranking is tested. In both cases the null hypothesis of the same structure is rejected.

8 Jones, D. Yvonne (8), This paper assesses about the recent ACRL guidelines and standards urge academic librarians to compare selected input and output measures with peer institutions for assessment. This paper provides an example of such a comparison, using a freely available statistical tool from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Applying the NCES data tool to liberal arts colleges chosen by U.S. News and World Report (USN&WR) as the Best Liberal Arts Colleges provides one strategy for choosing financial benchmarks to target, as well as staffing and output measures for comparison. Using liberal arts colleges ranked in the top third by USN&WR, about $2,000/FTE would be the 2004 reported amount that the best colleges spent on library resources.

9 Credle, Sid Howard, Maheshwari, Sharad & Davenport, Janelle Pridgen (9) , This paper is written for an African-American, choosing the best college or university is important since the choice of college includes the complex decision of whether to attend one of the nation's 89, 4-year Historically Black Colleges or Universities (HBCU) or a Traditionally White Institution (TWI). Numerous periodicals publish annual rankings of the nation's "best colleges. " Black Enterprise magazine (BE) focuses on the best colleges for African-Americans. Recently, BE's rankings were criticized by the editors of the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (JBHE 2005)for "stacking the deck" in favor of HBCUs by applying a low weight to important factors such as retention and graduation rates. This study uses a variation of the College-Football Success Model (Walker, Keogh, & Civils, 2006), to determine the rankings of the best universities for African Americans. With this model we also answer the question; what type of institution, the HBCU or the TWI, is the "best" college choice for African-Americans? The results collected on 411 of the most influential African-Americans in the country, indicate that HBCUs with approximately 32 percent of undergraduate degrees conferred nationally produced 156 of the 411 (or 38%) most influential African-Americans in 2005. It was also found that although HBCUs represent only 4 percent of the nation's approximately 1,800 four year colleges, 52 (or 26%) of the 202 undergraduate 12

schools attended by these individuals were HBCUs. The study also indicates that there is no difference between HBCUs and TWIs in the movement of graduates into "top-quality" graduate schools. 10 Hartley, James E. & Robinson, Michael D (10),The economic research done at national liberal arts colleges, although valuable in and of itself, would be more valuable if, as McCaughey argues, it was connected to the teaching effectiveness of the college. Measures of teaching effectiveness are notoriously hard to compute. One readily available measure of teaching quality is the number of students from a liberal arts college who go on to graduate work. With generated measure of research aptitude, the number of scholarly publications, it is straightforward to examine the relationship of faculty research to student achievements. Data were collected on the number of Ph.D.'s in economics granted between 1989 and 1994 to the graduates of the liberal arts colleges in our sample.(n7) We estimated a linear regression of the number of Ph.D.'s received by the graduates of a liberal arts college on the total number of publications of the faculty of that college. We controlled department size (assuming bigger departments with more mayors should send a larger number of students to graduate school) and the quality of the institution as measured by the 1995 U.S. News & World Report ranking

13

Methodology of Study
The project was desired to follow the below process

14

Problem Discovery: When I joined Pharma Publications it has already planned to launch a magazine named Pharma Post but it was unable to do so because it promised its subscribers that it will be doing first pharma college ranking. But it was unable to do research project as a result the launch of magazine was delayed because it wanted to launch with ranking. So project for me was decided to be all India ranking of Pharma Publications. Exploratory Research: Pilot study of the project was carried out and in it two things were done and time period for this was scheduled to be 0.5 week (3-4 days). Expert Interview: Experts from pharma education sector (Mr. Varindra Kumar, Mr. Divanshu Kapoor, Ms Jotika Kapoor) and research (Mohit Rawal) were contacted. Mr. Varindra Kumar & Mr. Divanshu Kapoor told about the important parts of a to know about feasibility of the research project and also know all the parameters which are important in a pharma college. At the same time Mr Mohit Rawal was contacted to know deadlines more accurately and know the various sampling techniques which could be applied to collect data. At the same time he made point that sampling for All-India level would take much more time and project could not be completed in 6 weeks. So he advised to conduct the survey for colleges in Delhi/NCR region only. FGD: Focus group discussion was carried out between Varindra Kumar, Sunil Kumar, Divanshu Kapoor, Mohit Rawal, Ms. Jotika Kapoor and Ashok Kumar. During the discussion points came in forward were factors on which ranking would depend and it was also suggested that ranking should be done only for colleges in Delhi-NCR region.

In both it was also decided two separate questionnaire would be constructed. One for faculty and other staff members and other for the students and alumni of the college. Problem Definition: In the exploratory research it was confirmed that ranking could be done for only colleges in Delhi-NCR region and the problem was defined to be calculate ranking for PHARMA colleges in the region which are approved by AICTE and PCI. Literature Review: Since problem was finalized, now literature review was done on college ranking formats and also it was done to know parameters which should be considered and parameters which should not be considered. And flaws in ranking by other magazines were also studied, so that research could be error less. Time period for the same was decided to be 1 week. Basic research: It was decided that research could be done by primary research in which questionnaire would be filled and secondary research was done on ranking done by other firms on the colleges. 15

Primary research was done by data collection in the form of survey with the help of questionnaires. Questionnaires were chosen with close end questions, so that analysis could be done on the them. The secondary research was important because we could know regression was to be applied and we require assigning certain weights to components and taking weighted average while calculating the rank. Questionnaire Construction: Scale used in the questionnaires was nominal, ordinal and interval scale. And in the grid likert scale was used and it used a series of statements with which respondents indicated their agreement or disagreement about a particular topic. While calculating mean was taken from interval data and percentage and median was used from ordinal data. Then index measurement was done to measure the rank depending upon different composite measures like faculty student ratio, average faculty experience, their mode qualification and others parameters collected in survey Target Population: the target population for the survey is all the students, alumni and the staff members of institutes under study. Sample Frame: the sample frame can be drawn from Students of colleges joined groups on social websites Students who attended seminars from Pharma Publication in past Students who enquired about the Pharma Publications Faculty members who were present on social websites Directors or principal of the institutes

Analysis: on the collected data spearman correlation test is done to find the correlation between dependent and independent variables and then regression is done on all the variables which are correlated

16

Data Collection
Questionnaire Designing:
The questionnaires were designed in a such a way that it contained mostly fixed alternative questions. This was done because it requires lesser time to analyze the responses then it would be required to analyze open ended questions. At the same time all the potential options were examined and chosen in the exploratory research stage in personal interview. So it was beneficial to choose close end questions. At the same time while framing questions it was taken care that all the questions asked have certain relevancy with the topic. To make sure this questionnaire was cross checked by supervisor in the industry as well as faculty member(Ms. Sumeet Kaur) also rechecked the questionnaire to make sure all are relevant questions and questionnaire is free from errors like double barreled questions or it doesnt have any assumptions made or tested the memory of the respondents. It was also taken care that questionnaire is not having any leading or loading questions. And it used simple language and it doesnt made assumptions. To make sure of accuracy few pitfall questions were also kept and few questions were repeated in grid in different form. So if the respondent was trying to give invalid answer would fall in one of this and all those questionnaire could be rejected as it would not give true picture of the respondents.

Sampling: As colleges which were to be ranked were in entire NCR, so various sampling
techniques were decided which could be used to collect the data. The techniques used for sampling were: Convenience Sampling o Mail Sampling o Internet Sampling o Personal Interview

Convenience sampling techniques were chosen for personal interviews in the few colleges which decided to participate in survey in Delhi/ NCR region. So with sampling questionnaires were filled by students by personally interacting with them and explaining them meaning of each and every question.

17

In internet sampling technique mails were floated to all the data base present with the pharma publications and apart from this all college groups on social networking sites like face book, orkut were also targeted and links for the surveyed were mailed in the groups also. In mail sampling principals and directors of all the colleges were send postal mails for the surveys and they were requested to submit it back by post or address of links were also given in letters if they wanted to submit it online. Door to door sampling technique was used for colleges for which database was not sufficient or respondents didnt filled the survey. In this way we were able to collect at least 20 entries per college to conduct surveys.

18

Data Analysis
In total 488 respondents filled the survey forms and so sample size was of 488. Out of which total replies from the students were 448 and only 40 replies were collected from the faculty and other staff members of the institute. Out of the above collected samples 62 samples of students were rejected as it contained errors while filling the survey. And on the rest statistics testing was done. For further analysis median of collected sample for each variable was taken. This was done to have linear association with each variable depended on over all rank of the institute. Then on all the dependent variable regression was applied to form a regression model with which score for each college could be calculated to predict the rank of the college. Spearman Rank Correlation was used collected data was ordinal and it is non parametric test which could be applied on non probability sampling. At the same time it is also used as sample size is also less than 30 for normal distribution curve. After calculating the correlation between the overall institute and other variables regression model was used to calculate relation between overall institute and other parameters related. This test is used because it can be done non probability sampling, then it can be done on ordinal data and it can take care of 16 independent variables at the same time. In significant rank correlation following formulas are used

19

Spearman's Correlations
Test 1 To test correlation between overall institute and student faculty ratio H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 -.939** .000 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N student faculty ratio Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

student faculty ratio -.939** .000 22 1.000 . 22

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon student faculty ratio

20

Test 2 To test correlation between overall institute and number of relevant material H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Number of relevant material apart from books taught in the class rooms .602** .003 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Number of relevant Correlation material apart from Coefficient books taught in the class Sig. (2-tailed) rooms N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .602** .003 22

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon number of relevant material

21

Test 3

To test correlation between overall institute and number of times teachers are late in the calss H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .086 .702 22 Number of times teachers are late in class .086 .702 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Number of times Correlation teachers are late in class Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N

NONPAR CORR /VARIABLES=UntitledQuestionOverallinstitute We fail to reject null hypothesis of correlation, so we cannot be sure about any relationship between overall institute and number of times teacher is late in the class. So we will not take it in regression testing

22

Test 4

To test correlation between overall institute and demographics of the batch H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .891** .000 22 Demographics of batch mainly consists of students from .891** .000 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Demographics of batch Correlation mainly consists of Coefficient students from Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon demographics of the batch

23

Test 5 To test correlation between overall institute and placement ratio H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .831** .000 22 What is the placement ratio of the institute .831** .000 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N What is the placement Correlation ratio of the institute Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon placement ratio

24

25

Test 6 To test correlation between overall institute and how many clubs or committees are there in institute for extra/co-curricular activities H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both Correlations How many clubs or committees are there in institute for extra /cocurricular activities .381 .081 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N How many clubs or Correlation committees are there in Coefficient institute for extra /co- Sig. (2-tailed) curricular activities N

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .381 .081 22

NONPAR CORR /VARIABLES=UntitledQuestionOverallinstitute We fail to reject null hypothesis of correlation, so we cannot be sure about any relationship between overall institute and number of committees/clubs in the institute. So we will not take it in regression testing

26

Test 7 To test correlation between overall institute and number of seminars conducted in the institute H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .778** .000 22 Number of seminars conducted in the premises of the institute .778** .000 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Number of seminars Correlation conducted in the Coefficient premises of the institute Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon number of seminars conducted in the institute

27

Test 8

To test correlation between overall institute and procedure of admission of the students in the institute H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .777** .000 22 What procedure admission students college .777** .000 22 1.000 . 22 is of of in

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N What is procedure of Correlation admission of students in Coefficient college Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon admission procedure in the institute

28

Test 9

To test correlation between overall institute and quality of faculty H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [quality faculty teaching program] .585** .004 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [quality of faculty Coefficient teaching the program] Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .585** .004 22

of the

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon quality of faculty teaching

29

Test 10

To test correlation between overall institute and curriculum followed by the institute H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [curriculum followed by the institute/unive rsity] .549** .008 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [curriculum followed by Coefficient the institute/university] Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .549** .008 22

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon curriculum followed by the institute

30

Test 11

To test correlation between overall institute and firmness in time table H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [firmness in timetable followed by the institute ] .378 .082 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [firmness in timetable Coefficient followed by the institute Sig. (2-tailed) ] N

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .378 .082 22

NONPAR CORR /VARIABLES=UntitledQuestionOverallinstitute

We fail to reject null hypothesis of correlation, so we cannot be sure about any relationship between overall institute and firmness in time table followed by institute. So we will not take it in regression testing

31

Test 12

To test correlation between overall institute and sternness about attendance H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [institutes sternness about attendance] -.246 .270 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [institutes sternness Coefficient about attendance] Sig. (2-tailed) N

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 -.246 .270 22

NONPAR CORR /VARIABLES=UntitledQuestionOverallinstitute

We fail to reject null hypothesis of correlation, so we cannot be sure about any relationship between overall institute and institutes sternness about attendance. So we will not take it in regression testing

32

Test 13

To test correlation between overall institute and institutes existing infrastructure

H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .457* .032 22 Untitled Question [institutes existing infrastructure] .457* .032 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [institutes existing Coefficient infrastructure] Sig. (2-tailed) N *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon institutes infrastructure

33

Test 14 To test correlation between overall institute and library of the institutes H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .883** .000 22 Untitled Question [library of the institute] .883** .000 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [library of the institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon library of the institute

34

Test 15

To test correlation between overall institute and advancement in teaching technology

H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [institutes advancement in teaching technology that is use of multimedia in classrooms] .434* .049 21 1.000 . 21

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [institutes advancement Coefficient in teaching technology Sig. (2-tailed) that is use of multimedia N in classrooms] *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .434* .049 21

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon advancement in teaching technology

35

Test 16

To test correlation between overall institute and placement ratio as compare to other institutes

H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [final placement of the institute as compare to other pharma colleges] .617** .002 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question [final Correlation placement of the Coefficient institute as compare to Sig. (2-tailed) other pharma colleges] N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .617** .002 22

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon final placement of the institute as compare to others

36

Test 17

To test correlation between overall institute and interaction with alumini H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .536* .010 22 Untitled Question [Interaction with Alumini ] .536* .010 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [Interaction with Coefficient Alumini ] Sig. (2-tailed) N *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon interaction with alumni

37

Test 18 To test correlation between overall institute and institutes laboratories

H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .846** .000 22 Untitled Question [institutes laboratories] .846** .000 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [institutes laboratories] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon institute laboratories

38

Test 19

To test correlation between overall institute and opportunities provided in extra-curricular activities H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [opportunities provided in extracurricular activities] .459* .031 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [opportunities provided Coefficient in extra-curricular Sig. (2-tailed) activities] N *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .459* .031 22

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon opportunities provided in extra-curricular activities

39

Test 20

To test correlation between overall institute and opportunities provided in co-curricular activities. H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [opportunities provided in co-curricular activities] .533* .011 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [opportunities provided Coefficient in co-curricular Sig. (2-tailed) activities] N *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .533* .011 22

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon opportunities provided in co-curricular activities

40

Test 21

To test correlation between overall institute and computer labs in the latest software

H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both Correlations Untitled Question [Computer Lab in terms of latest software] -.213 .342 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Untitled Question Correlation [Computer Lab in terms Coefficient of latest softwares] Sig. (2-tailed) N

Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 -.213 .342 22

We fail to reject null hypothesis of correlation, so we cannot be sure about any relationship between overall institute and latest software used in the computer lab. So we will not take it in regression testing

41

Test 22

To test correlation between overall institute and average experience of faculty H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .821** .000 22 average experience of faulty member .821** .000 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N average experience of Correlation faulty member Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon average experience of faculty member

42

Test 23

To test correlation between overall institute and Average qualification of faculty members H0: there is no correlation between both H1: there is significant correlation between the both

Correlations Untitled Question [Overall institute] 1.000 . 22 .881** .000 22 Average qualification of faculty members .881** .000 22 1.000 . 22

Spearman's rho Untitled Question Correlation [Overall institute] Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Average qualification of Correlation faculty members Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is dependent upon average qualification of faculty members

43

Regression
Variables Entered/Removed Variables Model 1 Variables Entered Removed Method Enter

average experience of faulty member, Untitled Question [opportunities . provided in extra-curricular activities], Untitled Question [institutes

advancement in teaching technology that is use of multimedia in classrooms], Untitled Question [institutes existing infrastructure], Untitled Question [curriculum followed by the institute/university], Untitled Question [opportunities provided in co-curricular activities], Untitled Question

[Interaction with Alumini ], Untitled Question [quality of faculty teaching the program], Untitled Question [library of the institute], student faculty ratio, What is the placement ratio of the institute, Number of relevant material apart from books taught in the class rooms, What is procedure of admission of students in college, Untitled
a

Question

[institutes

laboratories],

Demographics of batch mainly consists of students from, Average qualification of faculty members a. All requested variables entered.

Model Summary Adjusted Model 1 R .927

a

R Std. Error of the Estimate .3787

R Square .859

Square .819

44

Model Summary Adjusted Model 1 R .927

a

R Std. Error of the Estimate .3787

R Square .859

Square .819

a. Predictors: (Constant), average experience of faulty member, Untitled Question [opportunities provided in extra-curricular activities], Untitled Question [institutes advancement in teaching technology that is use of multimedia in classrooms], Untitled Question [institutes existing infrastructure], Untitled Question [curriculum followed by the

institute/university], Untitled Question [opportunities provided in cocurricular activities], Untitled Question [Interaction with Alumini ], Untitled Question [quality of faculty teaching the program], Untitled Question [library of the institute], student faculty ratio, What is the placement ratio of the institute, Number of relevant material apart from books taught in the class rooms, What is procedure of admission of students in college, Untitled Question [institutes laboratories],

Demographics of batch mainly consists of students from, Average qualification of faculty members

ANOVA Model 1

Sum of Squares Df Regression Residual Total 21.458 .209 21.667 16 4 20

Mean Square 1.341 .052

F 25.647

Sig. .003
a

a. Predictors: (Constant), average experience of faulty member, Untitled Question [opportunities provided in extra-curricular activities], Untitled Question [institutes advancement in teaching technology that is use of multimedia in classrooms], Untitled Question [institutes existing infrastructure], Untitled Question [curriculum followed by the institute/university], Untitled Question [opportunities provided in co-curricular activities], Untitled Question [Interaction with Alumini ], Untitled Question [quality of faculty teaching the program], Untitled Question [library of the institute], student faculty ratio, What is the placement ratio of the institute, Number of relevant material apart from books taught in the class rooms, What is procedure of admission of students in college, Untitled Question [institutes laboratories], Demographics of batch mainly consists of students from, Average qualification of faculty members b. Dependent Variable: Untitled Question [Overall institute]

45

Coefficients

Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Model 1 (Constant) student faculty ratio B 4.816 -.347 Std. Error 1.498 .115 .268 -.597 .342 Coefficients Beta t 3.215 -3.010 -1.169 Sig. .032 .040 .307

Average qualification of faculty -.314 members Number of relevant material .898

.289

.467

3.109

.036

apart from books taught in the class rooms Demographics of batch mainly .095 consists of students from What is the placement ratio of .656 the institute What is procedure of admission -.017 of students in college Untitled Question [quality of .099 .148 .089 .673 .538 .138 .020 -.123 .908 .206 .556 3.188 .033 .245 .188 .390 .717

faculty teaching the program] Untitled followed Question by [curriculum -.396 the .182 .392 -2.179 .095

institute/university] Untitled Question [institutes .302 .179 .169 1.686 .167

existing infrastructure] Untitled Question [library of the .282 institute] Untitled Question in that is [institutes .443 teaching use of .157 .257 2.813 .048 .146 .339 1.938 .125

advancement technology

multimedia in classrooms] Untitled Question [Interaction -.308 .154 -.287 -1.996 .117

with Alumini ]

46

Untitled

Question

[institutes .130

.166

.133

.783

.477

laboratories] Untitled Question [opportunities -.630 provided activities] Untitled Question [opportunities -.226 provided activities] average experience of faulty -.066 member a. Dependent Variable: Untitled Question [Overall institute] .187 -.078 -.352 .743 in co-curricular .129 -.166 -1.747 .155 in extra-curricular .188 -.429 -3.359 .028

So the regression equation will be Overall institute = -.597 X student faculty ratio + 0.342 X Average qualification of faculty + 0.467 X No. of relevant material + .188 X Demographics + .556 X Placement ratio + .02 X procedure of admission - .392 X curriclum followed - .169 X infrastructure + .339 X library + .257 X advancement in teaching + .287 X alumini + .133 laboratorie - .429 X extracurricular .166 X co curricular - .078 X exp of faculty + 4.816 On applying the above formula anks were calculated for the institutes

I am calculating regression based on 16 variables and if we give equal weight age to each parameter than each parameter would get approximately 6% weightage in the ranking equation. However while doing literature review, I noticed that ranking is more dependent on few of the parameters. E.g. Faculty plays a major role in the ranking of the college. Hence low studentfaculty ratio is considered good for ranking. As there are three questions pertaining to faculty hence the overall weightage taken for faculty is high. Demographics also takes high weightage as a good college must have students from different part of country. Placements also impacts the ranking though its weighted contribution should be ideally lower than demographics and faculty ratio. Similarly based on these factors weights are given to different parameters and rank is calculated.

47

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Name of college Shri Vishnu College of Pharmacy Vishnupur, Andhra Pradesh ,Andhra Pradesh University Sri Venkateswara College of Pharmacy ,Andhra Pradesh , Osmania University jamia hamdard, hamdard university A R College & G H Patel Institute of Pharmacy , Gujarat , Sardar Patel University Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences Guru Jambheswar University, Haryana Al-Ameen College of Pharmacy, Bangalore, Rajiv Gandhi University mgm institue of health sciences Acharya Institutes ,Bangalore, Bangalore University Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES Guru Nanak Institute Of Pharmaceutical Science & Technology IIMT college of pharmacy St. Mary's college of Pharmacy Innovative College of Pharmacy Shree Ganpati Institute of Technology College of Pharmacy, Ram-Eesh Institute of Vocational & Technical Education Gangami College of Pharmacy School of Pharmacy Chouksey Engineering College Kiet School of Pharmacy Dehat Vikas College Of Pharmacy himalayan Pharmacy institute B.S. Anangpuria Institute Of Pharmacy

Score 3.36 3.34 3.13 2.74 2.61 2.45 2.20 2.19 2.05 2.01 1.98 1.92 1.84 1.73 1.64 1.53 1.49 1.39 1.37 0.91 0.72 0.32

48

Conclusion
On the basis of regression analysis we could see that Shri Vishnu College of Pharmacy Vishnupur topped the ranking from the colleges which participated in the survey as it had low student faculty ratio and scored high on all other parameters. And colleges like himalayan Pharmacy institute, Dehat Vikas College Of Pharmacy and B.S. Anangpuria Institute Of Pharmacy scored high on the variables which were having inverse relation as a result their rank came out to be lowest and their overall score is too low.

49

Findings
Some of the interesting findings which came in front of the regression test were Curriculum followed by institute/university had negative relation, this meant that students and faculty members of institutes which were having lower rank felt that their syllabus is better than other peer institutes. Infrastructure of the institutes has negative relation with rank. Extra-curricular activities also had negative relation with rank. Co-curricular activities also had negative relation with rank. Strangely quality of faculty had a positive relation with rank but experience of faculty had negative relation with rank. And when test with each other I found there is no correlation between experience and quality of faculty

50

Limitations
1. There were three methods followed to conduct the survey i.e. self-administered survey , web based survey and mail based survey. So, there is a chance of respondent error in the other two methods followed. 2. There were lesser response from respondents from far of colleges like college from South than colleges from NCR region. 3. Responses from faculty was lesser than expected. 4. As convenience sampling is used hence there is sampling bias and that the sample is not representative of the entire population.

51

Recommendations
Advertising focus more on online advertising , social advertising by creating profile of Pharma Publication and joining all the groups of target colleges (Graduate pharmacy colleges). Students database should be enhanced by conducting regular surveys and seminars with students Partnership with Pharma colleges so as to publish articles about their college in Pharma Post or publishing interviews of chairman or director of the colleges. Sales promotions should be done in colleges by tying up with the graduate pharmacy college authorities for example by putting up canopies in front of these colleges and also by placing cloth banner in front of them. Work Force : Full time experienced and competent marketing employee should be hired. Distribution : Proper distribution network should be built to increase its penetration with target students. Increase the product portfolio : By introducing books for graduate and post graduate Pharma courses. Tie-ups: Company should make some tie up with the colleges and coaching institutes in the region. These places are frequently visited by the target consumer base.

52

Bibliography / References
1. Martin Schatz, Ph.D. (1993). What's Wrong With MBA Ranking Surveys, Management Research News 16(7), 15-18 2. Morse, Robert J.(2008). Our First Rankings of the World's Best Colleges. U.S. News & World Report; 12/1/2008, Vol. 145 Issue 12, p73-73 3. Cosh Colby, (2003). Why college ranking fails, The reporter January 6, 2003, 40-41 4. Staff, (2007). TC3 ties for first in digital community college ranking, The Central New York Business Journal April 13, 2007, 20 5. Editor, (2010). INTRODUCTION: A DIFFERENT KIND OF COLLEGE RANKING, Washington Monthly; Sep/Oct2010, Vol. 42 Issue 9/10, p15-18 6. Baumann, Robert W, Chu, David K. W. & Anderton, Charles (2009). Religious penalty in the U.S. News & World Report college rankings. Education Economics; Dec2009, Vol. 17 Issue 4, p491-504 7. Poyer, David(2008). The Black Enterprise Magazine Ranking of Colleges for African Americans: A Structural Analysis. Review of Black Political Economy; Spring2008, Vol. 35 Issue 1, p19-29 8. Jones, D. Yvonne(2007). How Much Do the "Best" Colleges Spend on Libraries? Using College Rankings to Provide Library Financial Benchmarks. College & Research Libraries; Jul2007, Vol. 68 Issue 4, p343-351 9. Credle, Sid Howard, Maheshwari, Sharad & Davenport, Janelle Pridgen(2008). AN ALTERNATIVE RANKING METHODOLOGY OF THE BEST COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES FOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS. Global Journal of Business Research (GJBR); 2008, Vol. 2 Issue 2, p49-66 10. Hartley, James E. & Robinson, Michael D (1997). Economic Research at National Liberal Arts Colleges: School Rankings. Journal of Economic Education; Fall97, Vol. 28 Issue 4, p337-349 11. College and University Ranking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_and_university_rankings) 12. Ranking Methodology (http://www.arwu.org/ARWUMethodology2009.jsp) 13. College Ranking Reformed (http://www.educationsector.org/sites/default/files/publications/CollegeRankingsReforme d.pdf) 14. Statistics for Business and Economics by Anderson , Sweeney and Williams.

53

54

Appendix

Company Profile
Pharma Publications is a proprietorship firm owned by Ms. Jyotika Kapoor. The firm started its operation in 2010 and is at present in the business of education. The firm basically provides the preparatory books for the competitive examinations for post graduation in the field of pharmaceuticals which are basically GPAT and NIPER with the name GPAT success series and NIPER success series. It also provides distance learning education for the same courses. It is also pioneer in launch of all-India mock online test series for GPAT and NIPER exams with the name of iGPAT and iNIPER. It is only player in the market which provides solution detailed analysis of the mock examination, which help students to improve their grip on the subject. It is also pioneer in launching books with complete changed syllabus for the exam. In such a short span of time it has moved forward at rapid pace and has made relations with few coaching institutes and colleges, which would recommend its books. Apart from this these relations also help in providing students for all India test series. The list of these clients includes but not limited to VNS Institute of Pharmacy, Bhopal IIMT College of Pharmacy, Greater Noida Pharmula Academy, Hyderabad Essence Academy, Hyderabad

55

56

Questionnaire 1
For Faculty/ Staff members Name _______________________ Name of college_________________ Location ______________________ Q1 No of students in a batch __________ Q3 Mode qualification of faculty members A) Graduate or equivalent B) Post Graduate or equivalent C) PHD or equivalent Q4 Average experience of faculty members A) Nil B) Having some experience but less than 2 years C) Greater or equal to 2 but less than 5 years D) 5 years to 8 years E) Greater than 8 years Q5 Average number of papers published by each faculty member in a year A) Nil B) 1-2 C) Greater than 2 Q6) Demographics of batch mainly consists of students from A) Region in which institute is located B) Students in the zone take admission C) Students from 2 zones take admission D) Students from all the Zones take admission E) International students also take places Q7) What is procedure of admission of students in college A) Direct admission on first cum first serve bases B) Based on 10+2 percentage C) State Level entrance test conducted by institute or university D) National level entrance test conducted by institute or university E) Combined national entrance test (like AIEEE, IIT JEE etc.) Q8) Number of national level seminars conducted in the premises of the institute 57 Contact No _____________________ email id ________________________ Q2 No of full time faculty members ____________

A) Never B) Once a year C) More than once a year Q9) Number of international level seminars conducted in the premises of the institute A) Never B) Once a year C) More than once a year Q10) What is the placement ratio of the institute (total number of students placed / total number of students passing out in the batch) A) 0-30% B) 30-70% C) 70-90% D) 90-100% E) 100%

Q11) What is your perception about? 1 being the worse scenario

and

being

the

best

quality of students admitted in the program curriculum followed by the institute/university as per requirement of the corporate world firmness in timetable followed by the institute that is classes held as on scheduled time institutes sternness about attendance institutes existing infrastructure average annual expenditure on library of the institute institutes advancement in teaching technology that is use of multimedia in classrooms final placement of the institute as compare to other pharma colleges Alumini network of the institute about positions held by the alumnus of the institute institutes laboratories opportunities provided to students in extra-curricular activities opportunities provided to students in co-curricular activities

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

58

Questionnaire 2
For Students Name:_______________________ Name of college_________________ Location ______________________ Q1 No of students in a batch ______________ Q2 Mode qualification of faculty members D) Graduate or equivalent E) Post Graduate or equivalent F) PHD or equivalent Q3 Number of relevant material apart from books distributed in the class rooms A) None B) One or two in entire year C) Few more but only in one subject D) One or two in entire year in each subject E) Many in each subject Q4 No of times teachers are not in time in classrooms A) Never B) Once in a fourth night C) One teacher is mostly late D) Few teachers are mostly late E) Rarely teachers are on time in class Q5) Demographics of batch mainly consists of students from F) Region in which institute is located G) Students in the zone take admission H) Students from 2 zones take admission I) Students from all the Zones take admission J) International students also take places Q6) Process of admission of students in college F) Direct admission on first cum first serve bases G) Based on 10+2 percentage H) State Level entrance test conducted by institute or university I) National level entrance test conducted by institute or university J) Combined national entrance test (like AIEEE, IIT JEE etc.) 59 Contact No _____________________ email id ________________________

Q7) Placement ratio of the institute (total number of students placed / total number of students passing out in the batch) F) 0-30% G) 30-70% H) 70-90% I) 90-100% J) 100% Q8) Number of committees are there in institute A) 0-2 B) 3-5 C) 6 or above Q9) Number of seminars/workshops conducted in the premises of the institute A) Never B) Once or twice a year C) More than two in a year Indicate your perception about the following:

60

being

the

worse

and

being

the

best

Overall institute

quality of faculty teaching the program curriculum followed by the institute/university firmness in timetable followed by the institute institutes sternness about attendance institutes existing infrastructure library of the institute institutes advancement in teaching technology that is use of multimedia in classrooms final placement of the institute as compare to other pharma colleges Interaction with Alumini institutes laboratories opportunities provided in extra-curricular activities opportunities provided in co-curricular activities scenario Computer Lab in terms of latest softwares

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5

3 4 5 3 4 5 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5

61