The Ministry of Higher Education in Afghanistan utilises a quality assurance checklist as a fundamental tool for accrediting higher education institutions. While this framework plays a crucial role in maintaining academic standards, its effectiveness is significantly compromised by two persistent issues: inadequate measurability of criteria and problematic mark distribution. This study provides a critical examination of these challenges, with particular focus on the difficulties in establishing clear, actionable, and objectively measurable indicators within the current accreditation framework. Through systematic analysis, the research reveals how ambiguous evaluation criteria result in subjective assessments and inconsistent application of standards across institutions. The study further investigates the mark allocation system, revealing substantial imbalances in scoring weights that inadvertently prioritise certain institutional aspects over others, thereby affecting the overall fairness and comprehensiveness of the accreditation process. By employing a combination of document analysis, expert consultations, and comparative benchmarking with international quality assurance models, this research offers concrete, evidence-based recommendations for checklist improvement. The proposed enhancements aim to increase the instrument's precision in evaluation, ensure a more equitable distribution of marks, and strengthen the credibility of Afghanistan's accreditation system. Ultimately, these improvements seek to align the national quality assurance process with globally recognised best practices while maintaining relevance to Afghanistan's specific higher education context. Keywords: Accreditation Checklist, Evaluation Criteria, Higher Education, Marks Distribution, Measurability, Ministry of Higher Education (Afghanistan), Quality Assurance
Riaz Ahmad Ziar (Mon,) studied this question.