Peer Review Report Notes Please return the completed report by email within 21 days; All comments should be made in this review report and not on the manuscript About HRPUB Horizon Research Publishing, USA (HRPUB) is a worldwide open access publisher serving the academic research and scientific communities by launching peer-reviewed journals covering a wide range of academic disciplines As an international academic organization for researchers & scientists, we aim to provide researchers, writers, academic professors and students the most advanced research achievements in a broad range of areas, and to facilitate the academic exchange between them Manuscript Information Manuscript ID: 19508915 Manuscript Title: Quality Assurance Models for Higher Education Institution: A Qualitative Analysis Evaluation Report General Comments Through lessons on trends and models in international quality assurance and quality accreditation in higher education not to propose a single solution or suggest a development direction from the first first to the last model The author believes that there are interesting trends, promising developments, and good practices in each of the models presented In particular, from the perspective of an international quality Horizon Research Publishing, USA http://www.hrpub.org/ assurance and accreditation environment that can have legal effects on trade in higher education services, some developments deserve special attention and can be further stimulated Advantage & Disadvantage Advantages • Ensuring the quality of higher education is one of the issues that have been of the greatest concern by countries, NGOs, regional and international organizations and networks in recent decades • In the analysis, the author showed the main characteristics of first quality assurance, quality assurance that focuses on the process, thereby asserting to both those inside and outside the school that the school has processes in place to produce production the output is of high quality; second, quality assurance focuses on accountability and quality improvement functions; Third, quality assurance is an ongoing and consistent process based on evaluation criteria and feedback • In the conclusion, the authors help the reader to understand deeper that testing, evaluation and auditing are the three most commonly used quality assurance approaches in higher education systems in the world today These models all focus on quality consolidation and improvement Disadvantages • There are some typos in one of my publications but these mistakes affect the concept or change the meaning / conclusions of the paper a little bit • In the references section, some explanations have a font error and the link to the examples for the explanation has the wrong address and also needs an access password • It can be seen that the most common mistakes in the article are using too many passive sentences The most common sentence structures are: Subject-Verb-Object is affected, passive sentences are usually longer than active ones and use passive verbs such as "pass, yes", which makes the sentence lifeless How to improve Please raise one more research question about the advantages and disadvantages of the Quality Assurance Models for Higher Education Institution A good analysis should be simple, clear and concise You don't get points for having to use up to 50 words to express something that only needs 20 words, or using polyphonic words when a simple word is using the correct word for interpretation or analysis to help Readers have a better understanding of the essential issue being addressed Need to give more comparisons and examples Comments to the author Although the authors give the assumptions and evidence quite a lot and specifically, but still need more comparison and reasonableness when applying the above methods in the present combined with the strong development of the time modernization and modernization like today Please rate the following: (1 = Excellent) (2 = Good) (3 = Fair) (4 = Poor) Originality: Contribution Field: to the Technical Quality: Clarity Presentation : Depth of Research: 2 of 2 Recommendation Kindly mark with a ■ □ Accept As It Is Horizon Research Publishing, USA http://www.hrpub.org/ □ Requires Minor Revision □ Requires Major Revision □ Reject Return Date: