Opinions of Faculty Members Regarding Quality Implementation in the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University

King Saud University has been seeking to achieve excellence and leadership; this is shown through seeking to advance towards the best and to cope with the universities needs by qualifying its employees academically and practically in various fields. Throughout this journey of excellence, King Saud University has adapted the quality system implementation in 2007.This study aims at presenting the opinions and suggestions of faculty members regarding quality implementation mechanisms in the departments of Faculty of Arts at King Saud University. To achieve the goals of the current study, the researchers depend on a questionnaire, which was constructed by both of them to collect data. This tool was constructed based on the standards steps of constructing a questionnaire. The tool has included several focus points which are: social and academic characteristics of the study community that consists of faculty members (n=273), strategies (vision, mission, and goals) which include 8 statements, evaluation which includes 14 statements, and finally communication and engagement which include 5 statements. In light of the results of this study the researchers recommend considering the goals of Quality Units in the departments of Faculty of Arts so that they agree and serve the goals of the development process and the quality in the college and the university, in addition to introducing a clear and announced plan of quality to all employees in the department. In addition, they suggest that Quality Units in the departments of Faculty of Arts should hold training workshops and courses to clarify quality requirements and ensures that they are understood by the employees.


Introduction and Background
Higher education sector is witnessing a greater attention at all levels due to its contribution to the development and the advancement of the community towards excellence.Garret (1996) mentioned that higher education division is a result of realizing the importance of education in economics, social growth, market orientation movement, and the global role of academic research in developing countries.In fact, development of higher education has proved its importance during the time of information technology for its crucial role in developing the community and promoting it towards the better.Freser (2008) described this development as a transition from what was known in the industrial era to the information technology era, as it transitioned local universities from its localized and narrow situation towards a global level.Universities are getting ready for realistic adaptations and competitions through technical development and flexibility to change.Universities get adapted to current changes by modifying their mission and strategies in addition to reconstructing their operations (Freser, 2008).
Higher education institutions in Saudi Arabia face challenges that were created due to factors that played a role in changing educational strategies.The new strategies depend on knowledge advancement and based on high excellence techniques.This change required starting with programs that include quality and development to all sectors of academic institutions in order to solve problems and overcome weaknesses.Consequently; quality management has received a great interest from administrative leaders in Saudi Arabia.Approaching from this point, the importance of quality implementation has appeared as a gate to develop universities, organize the map of the educational process to cope with modern developments, provide programs that seek to achieve a high level of quality education, finding distinguished academic staff members, and boost the level of functionality for university employees.
The concept of quality is considered as one of the modern concepts in education as it based on a philosophy, which believes that quality is a process of development and improvement to the educational progression in addition to being an effective tool to achieve a continuous advancement to all aspects of the educational system.Quality implementation is considered as an extension to the development of the concept of quality within higher academic institutions and an improvement to the qualification of performance and the effectiveness of achievement.The demand of quality implementation in college education resulted from the rising criticism and attacks on the low level of the higher educational institutions.And as (Garret, 1996) pointed out, the primary challenge that faces higher education is regaining its credibility through reforms that allow higher education to achieve the high expectations that results from competition between higher education institutions because of the global tendency towards globalization (Rolly, 2006).It is a reality that there is a spread in global committees of quality assurance in higher education that have identified the standards of quality of higher education and put its strategies.Since the higher education institutions haven't had success with their ability to create a suitable environment that provides communication and cooperation to promote and improve the quality of education.
Because of the eagerness of King Saud University to achieve excellence and establish the culture of quality to become one of basic values of work and behavior within the university, the Quality Administration established in 2007.Then it transitioned into Quality Deanship to supervise the establishment of quality systems, the academic dependency in the universities and its colleges and departments, and to follow up on its procedures to ensure the quality.The goal of this deanship is to improve the performance of all the fields of the university, establishing systems to identify how to perform the work effectively with high quality, evaluating and measuring the performance based on the identified standards.As a result, all of these actions will allow the university to build the knowledge community which will lead to achieving its vision and mission of being a global leadership in higher education (The official website of Quality Deanship at King Saud University).
According to the faculty members' role in achieving quality; The National Committee of Evaluation and Accreditation in Saudi Arabia has put together a group of standards to ensure the quality and accreditation of higher education institutions and programs.One of the most important standards is the expected role of faculty members of achieving quality requirements such as adherence to the mission and goals of the program.Another standard is to implement teaching strategies that are suitable to various learning outcomes even if they share the activities to improve their teaching efficiency.In addition to that, another standard is to participate in evaluating the planning process to provide resources and services to the program.Also, participating in conferences that discuss important social issues (The National Committee of Evaluation and Accreditation, 2009).
The Faculty of Arts at King Saud University continuously seeks to improve and develop its scientific departments and academic programs.The desire is to promote the educational process outcomes in the college.The university realized that quality implementation in the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University will be achieved through executing the quality goals and strategies which depend on improving the abilities of the university's employees in the field of quality implementations, developing a system of exchanging knowledge and information with the experts and the specialists in the field of quality, adding the mechanism of cooperation and coordination with the Quality Units, committees, organizations and centers locally, regionally and internationally.In addition to supporting and encouraging creativity and excellence through arousing competition in the university which will ensure the suitability of the university's outcomes to the needs of labor market and achieve accreditation and a high level of international ranking to gain the trust of the local and global community (Quality Deanship Guide, King Saud University, 2008).

Problem of the Study
King Saud University has been seeking to achieve excellence and leadership; this is shown through seeking to advance towards the best and to cope with the universities needs by qualifying its employees academically and practically in various fields.Throughout this journey of excellence, King Saud University has adapted the quality system implementation in 2007.Because quality is one of the desirable concepts, the university ensured correct planning and strategies through applying and executing the quality requirements necessary to improve the level of education.
Due to the importance of quality to improve productivity and competition, it is expected and hoped that quality would create a noticeable change when applied to work; and thus create the same kind of change on the outcomes as well.Part of the quality strategies is to improve the abilities of the universities' employees including faculty members in the field of quality implementation.Therefore, the faculty members' opinion is a mean to ensure applying quality.
Henceforward, the problem of the study is determined by identifying the opinions of faculty members regarding quality implementation in the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University, since they are part of the most important factors that come together to improve the educational process to achieve excellence and quality outcomes.

Importance of the Study
Lack of the Arabic studies that include the opinions of faculty members regarding quality implementation encourages the researchers to conduct this research trail which will focus on studying the opinions of the faculty members regarding quality implementation in the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University.It is expected that the results in opinions and suggestions will benefit decision makers and the authorities in modifying their process and improving the mechanism of quality implementation in the Faculty of Arts.In addition; the importance of this study comes through its practical side since it shows the background of faculty members experience in applying the requirements quality.

Aims of the Study
This study aims at presenting the opinions of faculty members regarding quality implementation mechanism in the departments of the Faculty of Arts.In addition, it tried to find out some suggestions of faculty members regarding the improvement mechanism of quality implementation in the departments of the Faculty of Arts.Finally, it is an attempt to feature the differences in opinions among faculty members regarding quality implementation in the Faculty of Arts when taking into consideration certain factors.

Questions of the Study
The current study attempted to answer the following questions: 1-What are the opinions of faculty members in the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University regarding the mechanism of quality implementation?
2-What are the suggestions of faculty members to improve the performance of the Quality Unit in the Faculty of Arts?
3-Are there differences in the opinions of faculty members regarding the mechanism of quality implementation in the Faculty of Arts when taking into consideration certain factors?

Terms of the Study
Quality: a wide and dynamic concept that has several and different definitions.Therefore, it is hard to find a simple definition that fully describes this concept.Thus, quality means the unique characteristic and the level of something compared to another (Pearsall, 1999).It also refers to "appropriation of purpose", which is the characteristics, values, and standards agreed upon by similar programs and institutions, which makes the program able to achieve the requirements.
Quality is also defined as the extent of conformity with the requirements (Quality, 2006).It also means the degree of excellence and superiority provided by a product or a service (Blackmur, 2004).In addition to that, quality could also mean "efforts to best utilize available resources and providing the service at the right time and with the best manner which will attain the costumers' satisfaction regarding this service" (Al-Anzari, 2005).
Al-Najjar (1999) defines quality management as a comprehensive method that can be applied to all educational branches and levels to provide opportunities for employees and work groups to fulfill the needs of students and beneficiaries of the educational process.Or it is the effectiveness of achieving the best educational research or advisory service with the most effective methods, most cost effective and highest quality possible (Al-Najjar, 1999).And it is also a comprehensive method aims to achieve the beneficiaries' satisfaction and expectations where all employees, beneficiaries and suppliers cooperate to improve the quality of the process and the outcomes (Series of Quality Culture).
It is also defined as the art of managing everyone to achieve superiority and excellence.It is a philosophy and a group of advisory values that represent the main pillars of organized and continuous improvement, and provide the qualitative methods and human resources in order to improve all processes in the organization (Blackmur).
Rohodes (1997) has defined quality as the administrative process that focuses on several values and information through which the talents and the abilities of faculty members are employed in various fields to achieve a continuous improvement to the universities' goals.On the other hand, the comprehensive quality in the educational field refers to a group of standards and procedures with the goal of continuous improvement to the educational outcome.It also refers to the expected characteristics and specifications in the educational product and in the processes and activities that achieve these specifications and the comprehensive quality (Taylor & Bogdan, 1997).
Procedurally, the researchers of the current study define quality as an intellectual, cultural, administrative, and organized gate that is applied in the university to achieve completeness, development and continuous improvement in the performance of faculty members in the university to meet and achieve the goals wanted by the university administration.

Implementation
Implementation is to execute the theoretical action and apply it to become actual and physical after knowing it theoretically.It also means the ability to use or apply the information, theories, values and laws in a new situation.Quality implementation in higher academic institutions requires preparing faculty members to accept the mentality associated with quality and then seek effectively to achieve it.Implementation requires reconstructing the culture of the academic institution through education and practice to perform the methods and tools of the new concept.In addition to that it requires the use of experiences, encouragement, motivation, supervision and following up (Series of Quality Culture).

Previous Studies
There are many studies that focused on quality such as (Al Subaie, 2014).The goal of the study was to identify the extent of regulatory and supportive environment that ensures quality at Majmaah University in Saudi Arabia from the perspective of the faculty members.All the data has been gathered through a questionnaire that was applied on a sample of (235) faculty members from the colleges of the university representing 46%of them.The results have shown that the current regulatory environment supports quality assurance generally, and the regulatory environment characteristics are provided at a medium level in the university.The results have also shown that there are differences in the sample's answers when it comes to gender, academic degree and the number of courses taken on the quality field.
Al-Addadi (2012) conducted a study which aims to identify the obstacles that prevent implementing comprehensive quality management in higher education institutions.The questionnaire has been applied on (204) faculty members in the theoretical colleges at King Khaled University.The main results show that the most prominent obstacles that face quality management in higher education institution from the perspective of the members are: the lack of understanding of the concept of lifelong education, the lack of support for academic research and libraries and the increase of teaching burdens.There is also a difference among groups based on their specialty.
Al-Mutayri (2010) conducted a study which aims to identify the concept of quality and its importance in higher education and the requirements of regulatory quality implementation in higher education.The study also aims to detect the role of faculty members in implementing quality and academic accreditation, and their stance on certain university in Saudi Arabia participating in quality implementation and academic accreditation and the feasibility of its implementation.The results show a need to identify the provisions of administrative and academic regulations at the universities of Saudi Arabia and the desire to participate and activate the mechanisms of quality implementation systems.The study has also concluded that the majority of the buildings, facilities, fields, and labs in the university are not enough, and the lecture halls don't commensurate with the numbers of students and don't have enough ventilation or lighting.Also, some of the important results are the lack of connection between academic courses and the university's mission and goals, the lack of convenience of academic programs when it comes to the needs of the labor market and the community, and the lack of convenience of the academic courses regarding the requirements of professional licensing.
Abu Al Rub & Qudadah ( 2008) implemented a study that aims to provide a model framework to evaluate the performance of faculty members in higher education institutions from a teaching, academic research and community service point of view.The evaluation process depends on self-evaluations as well as peer-evaluations and the opinion of the department head, the dean and the students.The results indicate the necessity to pay attention to the process of faculty evaluation in higher education institutions and the need to link its outcomes to the annual incentives provided for them, and to use the necessary plans to rehabilitate faculty members both academically and professionally.
Dandre and Hawk ( 2007) study aims to identify the reality of applying primary procedures to evaluate and ensure quality in Saudi colleges and universities as seen by the quality officials in Saudi colleges and universities.
It also aims to recognize the obstacles of implementation and priorities that are needed to perform quality assurance operations in order to build on the advantages of this experience when putting together quality assurance system and public education accreditation.Some of the important results are the differences between university's levels regarding performing the necessary quality and academic accreditation activities and evaluation tools.It was clear that some institutions implement all of the primary activities while others barely implement any of them.The study also shows that the important implementation obstacles are the lack of knowledge and training in the field of detailed planning which is necessary to achieve quality.Also, most higher education institutions in Saudi don't have enough organization, human resources, nor enough financial ability to do all the evaluations or the accreditations required.
Al-Warthan ( 2007) study aims to find out the extent of teachers' acceptance of the comprehensive quality standards in education in Al-Ihsa' province.In addition, it aims at finding out the factors that motivate them to accept the comprehensive quality standards in education and the obstacles that prevent them from accepting these standards and suggestions.The study came up with the following results: All of the comprehensive quality standards in education that are related to teachers who have received a very high acceptance by teachers who work at the department of education in Al-Ihsa' providence.Providing a suitable educational environment and maintaining it also received a very high level of acceptance with respect to the rest of the comprehensive quality standards in education.Another result was the lack of effectiveness of the rewards and incentives' systems and their fairness with respect to the high numbers of students present in a classroom.
The study of (Al-Arifah & Quran, 2007) seeks to find out the challenges of implementing comprehensive quality in public education.The study has used the descriptive and the analytical technique on a sample that consisted of the director of education and his assistants, head of departments, educational supervisors and school principals within the study region.The results showed that many challenges are related to the educational administration, school's environment, school courses, school's administration and its relationship to the local community.Some of the important recommendations are training the leaders to use quality concepts and methods and staying away from centralized educational decision-making.Aybkwi (2006) study aims to evaluate the vision of the admission staff and faculty members in regards to using comprehensive quality management to achieve the effectiveness of the academic program in the business departments in universities that included a higher population of African Americans throughout history.The goal is to evaluate the awareness and the performance of faculty members and to appreciate the use of comprehensive quality management to achieve the effectiveness of the academic program and the outcomes of student learning in business departments in the United States.One of the important results is the existence of high level of awareness and appreciation for the comprehensive quality management throughout history.The results have also shown that there aren't noticeable differences between the deans and faculty members since the positive percentage is high.The sample highly agreed also on the level of tangible benefit of implementing comprehensive quality management initiations, and show appreciation to their success and vitality in improving the academic programs' activities and the outcomes of students' learning.
Al-Mhanna ( 2003) has also fulfilled a study that aims to pinpoint the extent to which the principles of comprehensive quality management is applied in the department of education in Riyadh region and the factors that affect the effectiveness of quality implementation.Results indicated that implementing quality principles varies significantly and ranges between average and low, more than two-thirds of the sample tends to agree that the effectiveness of quality management principles in the department of education in Riyadh region is considered moderately effective.Results also show that there are three factors, which are positively related, and they are statistically significant in regards to the effectiveness of quality management principles in the department of education.The factors are in order of their importance: continuous improvement, prevention instead of inspection, and making decisions based on the facts.The other factors are: focusing on the customer, group work and full participation of individuals.The study has shown that these other factors don't have a statistically significant relationship to the effectiveness of quality management in the department of education in Riyadh region.
Al-Yhayawi's ( 2002) study aims to identify the importance of comprehensive quality management implementation and the extent to which it's possible to provide its requirements.The study also aims to find the challenges of comprehensive quality management implementation in public education schools in Saudi Arabia.
The study uses the descriptive and analytical methods.Results highlighted the importance of comprehensive quality management implementation in a high degree through focusing on the costumer.However; the least important is the rank of the regulatory system.The sample of the study agreed on the importance of the availability of comprehensive quality management principles, which is headed by respecting the worker's humanity before providing capabilities.Also, the sample highly agrees that quality implementation faces a lot of challenges such as bureaucracy, centralization, and change resistance.The study recommends the need to start a comprehensive quality management, prioritize, and the importance of cooperation between competent authorities in the ministry to overcome the challenges and the obstacles.
Some of the previous studies refer to availability of the regulatory environment to implement Quality in a medium level in the university as in (Al Subaie, 2014) study.Quality implementation needs to redevelop the administrative and the academic provisions, and activate the mechanisms of quality implementation systems as in (Al-Mutayri, 2010) study.Also, most of higher education institutions in Saudi Arabia don't have a high enough regulatory level or financial or human capabilities to achieve all of evaluation and accreditation processes as referred to in (Dandre & Hawk, 2007) study.There is evidence to the awareness of faculty members and deans.They appreciate the comprehensive Quality management and its success in improving academic programs and outcomes as mentioned in (Aybkwi, 2006) study.
The current study is similar to previous studies in browsing the topic of Quality since it takes into consideration the opinions of faculty members regarding the mechanism of Quality implementation in one of Saudi's universities.However, it is different in applying this research on faculty members of the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University in order to identify their suggestions in regards to improving the mechanism of Quality implementation.The researchers benefited from the previous studies as they were able to identify the problem of the study, preparing the study tool and discussing the results of this study.

Method
This study is a descriptive one since it describes the real implementation of Quality in the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University through a questionnaire which was distributed among faculty members of the college.Moreover, the study will present different suggestions from the Faculty of Arts to improve the implementation of Quality in their college.

Methodology
The study depends on the method of comprehensive social survey, and this method is considered to be the most suitable for this study since it helps studying reality.

Population
Population of the study consists of all faculty members (females only) in the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University.There are (273) members, 201 of which were on the job, the rest was either on a scholarship, secondment, or a break.

Sample
The results of the study showed that the age group between 22 to less than 42 makes up to 71%, and the age group between 42 and less than 52 makes up to 15.6%, while the age group between 52 to 62 makes up to 7.5%.Finally, the age group between 62 and older makes up to 2.7%.In regards to nationality distribution among faculty members, the study has shown that 83.9% are Saudi, 6.5% are Egyptians, 0.5% are Sudanese, and 0.5% are Syrian.According to the academic qualifications, 47.8% of faculty members carry a master's degree, 36.6% carries a PhD and 15.1% of the sample has a bachelor degree.Regarding job tiles, 41.9% of the faculties are instructors, 22.6% are lectures, 21.5% are teaching assistants, 8.6% are associate professors, and 3.2% are teachers.
Regarding the academic section, 24.2% are from Social Studies Department, 20.4% are from the history department, 18.8% from the Arabic Language Department, and 15.1% from the English Language Department, while 7.5% from Geography Department.
Table 1.Shows the characteristics of the sample throughout the data collection process Concerning the University of the last degree, the results show that 74.2% graduated from Saudi universities, 12.9% graduated from foreign universities and 11.8% from Arab universities.According to years of experience, 38.2% of the sample has less than five years of experience, 34.4% has five to fifteen years, and 14% has twenty five years or more of experience.
In addition, the study sample showed that most of faculty members have an average knowledge of Quality requirements with a percentage of 51.6%, 26.9% of faculty members are very knowledgeable of Quality requirements which shows that there is knowledge amongst faculty members in the Faculty of Arts, 14.5% of faculty members have low knowledge about Quality requirements, finally 1.1% of faculty members don't have any knowledge regarding Quality requirements.
Finally, the study sample has shown that 51.1% are satisfied about Quality implementation, 29.6% is somewhat satisfied, 9.1% of faculty members are strongly satisfied while 7.5% are unsatisfied, finally; 1.6% are strongly unsatisfied.

Tools
To achieve the goals of the current study, the researchers depend on a questionnaire, which was constructed by both of them to collect data.This tool was constructed based on the standards steps of constructing a questionnaire.The tool has also included several focus points which are: social and academic characteristics of the study community that consists of faculty members, strategies (vision, mission, and goals) which includes 8 statements, evaluation which includes 14 statements, and finally communication and engagement which include 5 statements, See Appendix 1.The researchers took into consideration the questionnaire virtual reliability by presenting it to faculty members in the Department of Social Studies in both fields of social science and community service.The questionnaire was edited based on the judgments and the suggestions of faculty members.Validity of the questionnaire is measured using Cronbach's alpha validity coefficient.The value of the validity coefficient is (0.906), which is statistically acceptable in human studies.And regarding the validity of the main points of the questionnaire it is as follows: the value of alpha is (0.906) for strategies and goals, the value of alpha is (0.894) for performance, and the value of alpha is (0.884) for active communication.These values are acceptable when applying this current study.

Analysis Method
To achieve the goals of this study, SPSS program was used to find out Modes, Percentages, Average, Standard Deviation, Pearson Correlation Coefficient and One-Way ANOVA of the collected data.

Limitations
The results of this study are not generalized since the subject of the study is limited to the opinions of faculty members regarding the mechanism of Quality implementation in the departments of the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University.Moreover, the study sample is limited to the faculty members in the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.Finally, this study was conducted during four months in the year 2015.

Results Related to the First question: What Are the Opinions of Faculty Members in the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University regarding the Mechanism of Quality Implementation?
There are three variables that determine the answer to this question (strategy, performance and communication, and engagement) as follows: 1-Regarding faculty members' answers in the Faculty of Arts towards quality implementation in the department (strategy).Table 2 shows the distribution of faculty members based on their answers to the mechanism of quality implementation in the department (strategy).The strategic plan is announced to all faculty members 2.

.74554 1.6848
There is an announced plan for quality 3.

.71494 1.8962
The standards of the quality process are clear to the faculty members 4.

.73101 1.7814
The Quality Unit in the department is characterized by being effective in regards to developing the learning process .5

.74909 1.8626
The Quality Unit follows up on developing the programs it provides 6.

.71439 1.7473
The role of the Quality Unit in the accreditation field is clear 7.

.63444 1.5519
The goals of the Quality Unit in the department serve the goals of the college and the university 8.
The results of the study presented in Table 2 shows that the statement "the strategic plan is announced to all faculty members" comes in first place with an average of 1.9838.In second place is the statement "the Quality Unit in the department strengths the loyalty towards the academic institution" with an average of 1.9620.And in third place with an average of 1.8962 comes the statement "the standards of the quality process are clear to the faculty members".In fourth place is "the Quality Unit follows up on developing the programs it provides" with an average of 1.8626.In fifth place is the statement "the Quality Unit in the department is characterized by being effective in regards to developing the learning process" with an average of 1.7814.The statement "the role of the Quality Unit in the accreditation field is clear" comes in sixth place with an average of 1.7473.In seventh place is the statement "there is an announced plan for quality" with an average of 1.6848.All of these statements are within the category "somewhat agree" since they fall into (2.33-1.67).Finally the statement "the goals of the Quality Unit in the department serve the goals of the college and the university" comes in eighth place with an average of 1.5519 with an acceptable range that falls in the "disagree" range (1.66-1).This shows that the faculty members don't agree that the goals of the Quality Unit in the department serve the goals of the college and the university which shows the importance of redefining the goals of the Quality Units in the departments.
2-Opinions of the faculty members in the Faculty of Arts at King Saud University regarding the quality performance.The results of the study provided by Table 3 show that the statement "quality provides the proper environment that enhances innovation in the education field" comes in first place with an average of 2.1694.In second place is the statement "the quality management in the college is concerned about the moral support of the excellent performance of faculty members" with an average of 2.1648.The statement "the paper forms that are required by the unit are useful to ensure quality in the department" is third in ranking with an average of 2.1189.Fourth comes the statement "the statements of the students' evaluations of faculty members are fair" with an average of 2.0549.The statement "the policy of decision making in the Quality Unit is characterized by transparency" comes in fifth place with an average of 1.9348.In sixth place is the statement "the Quality Unit accepts and highly takes into consideration faculty members' complains" with an average of 1.8715.The statement "the distribution of course coordination of material is suitable to the specific major" comes in seventh place with an average of 1.8251.In eighth place is the statement "the distribution of course coordination of material is suitable to the specific major" with an average of 1.7705.In ninth place is "the Quality Unit provides training opportunities regarding using modern technology" with an average of 1.6919.All of these statements are at the "somewhat agree" level because they fall into the range (2.33-1.67).However, the statements that are ranked eleventh and further fall under "disagree" because they are within the range (1-1.66).The statement "the forms of course declarations are clear to faculty members" comes in eleventh place with an average of 1.6497.After The data provided by Figure 1 shows the distribution of the sample in regards to the mechanism of Quality implementation in the Faculty of Arts as follows: The average of faculty members' answers to the mechanism of Quality implementation in the Faculty of Arts for the vision and mission is 2.21, the average for the performance and evaluation is 2.23, and the least average of 1.82 goes to the communication and engagement; all these averages\mean "somewhat agree".The data also show that faculty members "somewhat agree" with quality implementation dimensions in general with a total average of 2.22.This may be related to the lack of quality understanding by the employees of the college.

Results
Related to the Second Question: What Are the Suggestions of Faculty Members to Improve the Performance of the Quality Unit in the Faculty of Arts?
Table 5 shows the suggestions and the opinions of faculty members in regards to improving the performance of the Quality Unit in the departments.The percentages were calculated in the light of the total suggestions.
Reading Table 5, we can infer that most of suggestions that are provided by faculty members in regards to improve the performance of Quality Units in the departments of the Faculty of Arts, are ranked as follows: "providing workshops for faculty members within the departments to explain the working mechanism of the quality requirement" with a percentage of 11.5% of the total suggestions."Introducing the quality requirements in the beginning of every semester in the form of a weekly schedule" comes in second with 10.6%."Hosting all those with experience in the field of quality to benefit from their expertise" comes after with 9.4%, then "continuing to publish the mission and the goals of quality for faculty members and students in different ways (posters, emails)" with 8.9%.Following this suggestion is "encouraging the faculty members that are engaged with quality through testimonials and connecting it with promotions" with 8.4% and "taking into consideration faculty members in a way where there is a clear mechanism that allows them to present their opinions with transparency" with 7.8%.The suggestion "dependency on the electronic archive and reducing paper use" comes after with 7.3% and then "establishing clear standers to choosing the faculty who will participate in the quality; these standards should be announce upon choosing members" with 6.8%.Following that is "providing the necessary materials for quality requirements such as cameras and others" with 5.7% and then with 5.3% is both "giving feedback after reviewing the reports submitted by faculty members" and "office duties should be given to quality employees to ease up the burden on faculty members"."There should be permanent forms for quality instead of the continuously changing ones" comes after with 4.2% and then both "training and preparing a self-research group so they are able to perform the tasks required" and "coordination with other administrations to avoid duplication" with 3.1%.Finally, the suggestion "course's coordinators should continue working for enough periods of time" with a percentage of 2.6%.Table 6 shows the relationship between a group of variables and the mechanism of quality implementation in the Faculty of Arts.The results of the field study as presented in the table above show the relationship between the correlated groups using the correlation coefficient to find the relationship between the variable groups.We can see that the relationship between the job title (teaching assistant, lecturer, assistant professor, visiting professor, and professor) and the strategy is an inverse relationship with a factor of 0.17 and a function that indicates it at 0.05.This means that as we move down the job titles, the more knowledge the person possesses.However the results didn't show any correlation between "performance and evaluation" or "communication and engagement" and the job title.The results have also shown that there is also an inverse relationship between the strategy and the academic qualification with a factor of 0.145 and a function that indicates it at 0.05.However, the results have shown no correlation between the mechanism of quality implementation and the age variable and also the years of experience.There is also an inverse correlation between the strategy and the years of experience with a value of 0.155 which is weak with a function that indicates it at 0.05.This means that the more years of experience a person has the weaker their opinions regarding the strategy statement.Table 7 shows the One Way ANOVA test which shows the difference between faculty members when applying quality mechanism.members in the Faculty of Arts in regards to their level of satisfaction with the Quality Unit in the department.Table 9 shows the differences among faculty members with regards to their knowledge of the quality requirements.Data in Table 9 has shown that there are no real differences with statistical significance among the opinions of faculty members looking at their knowledge of quality requirements in relation to the academic department and years of experience.However, the data has shown that there are differences in regards to the age with a function that indicates it at 0.05, academic qualification at 0.01, job title at 0.01.This confirms that there are differences among faculty members in regards to knowledge of quality requirements in relation to age, academic qualification, and job title.

Discussion and Results' Interpretations
The study of quality implementation mechanism that is related to the strategy announced to all faculty members with an average of 1.98, has shown that the Quality Unit in the department helps develop a sense of loyalty with an average of 1.96, and the clarity of process standards to the Quality Unit members with an average of 1.89.The results agree with the results of Al Subaie's (2014) study since the organized environments in the university achieved a medium level.
Results of quality implementation that are related to the performance have also concluded that the Quality Unit in the departments provides the proper environment that enhances innovation in teaching with an average of 2.16.The quality management in the college is also concerned about the moral appreciation to the excellent performance of faculty members and the forms that are required by the unit are beneficial to ensure quality in the department with an average of 2.11.Moreover, the results have shown that faculty members who think that the student-evaluation statements of faculty members are fair have an average of 2.05, which agrees with the results of Al-Mhanna's (2003) study which shows that more than two-thirds of the sample thinks that the standards of quality management is effective with a satisfactory level.
Results related to communication and engagement of the employees of quality with faculty members to serve the educational process have shown that faculty members somewhat agree that the employees of the Quality Unit understand the individual cases of faculty members with an average of 1.66.In addition, the results have shown that the faculty disagrees with the fact that the employees of the Quality Unit have enough skills to provide services with an average of 1.63.The employees also treat everyone evenly with an average of 1.44.The results agree with Al-Arifah and Quran (2007) study, which suggested training the leaders to become aware of quality methods and strategies.
Results of the study from the perspective of the employees of the Faculty of Arts from the academic committee have shown that the average of quality implementation is "somewhat" with an average of 2.22.This result agrees with the results referred to in the study of Al-Mutayri (2010) with regards to the need to update the administrative and the academic statements in the Saudi Universities, and the desire to activate the mechanisms of quality implementation systems.The study also agrees with Dandre and Hawk's (2007) results which showed differences between universities in regards to implementing the activities and the strengthening tools necessary for quality and academic accreditation.However, this result disagrees with what was presented in Lawrence Aybkwi's (2006) study which confirmed that there are no tangible differences between the deans and faculty members in regards to the awareness of the complete quality management.
Results of the study in regards to the differences in the opinions of faculty members towards the quality implementation mechanism, have shown there is a relationship between the job title (instructor, lecturer, teaching assistant, associate professor and teacher) and the mechanism of implementing the strategy; the less the job title is, the more knowledge the person acquires.And as the years of experience increase the weaker the opinion of faculty members regarding the strategy statements.The new faculty members might also be more knowledgeable and have done more research on all that is related to the available information.These results agree with Al Subaie's (2014) study, that is there are differences in the answers based on academic qualification.
Results of the study confirmed that the opinions of faculty members in regards to the satisfaction with the Quality Unit are indifferent regardless of (age, academic department, academic qualification, years of experience, or job title).The results have also shown that there are no differences in the opinions of faculty members in regards to their knowledge of the quality requirements based on the department and their years of experience in relation to (age, academic department, academic qualification, or job title).
The results of the study have also shown faculty members' suggestions to improve the Quality Unit in the Faculty of Arts in the following order: Providing workshops for faculty members within the departments.This agrees with the results of Drendra and Tahir (2007) study which showed that the most important obstacle to implementation is the lack of training and physical and human resources to perform all the required work regarding the process of evaluation and accreditation of quality.Other suggestions are: defining quality requirements at the beginning of each semester in the form of a weekly schedule, hosting the experts in the field of quality to benefit from their experiences, continuing to announce the mission and goals of quality to faculty members and students, and encouraging the faculty members that are engaged with quality through testimonials and connecting it with promotions.This last suggestion agrees with the results of Abu Al Rub & Qudadah (2008) which confirms the need to take into serious consideration the faculty members' evaluation and relate its results to the annual promotions and use the plans to rehabilitate the faculty academically and professionally.

Recommendations
In light of the results of the current study, the researchers recommended the following: 1. Considering the goals of Quality Units in the departments of Faculty of Arts so that they agree and serve the goals of the development process and the quality in the college and the university, in addition to introducing a clear and announced plan of quality to all employees in the department.
2. The Quality Units in the departments of Faculty of Arts should hold training workshops and courses to clarify quality requirements and ensures that they are understood by the employees.
3. Specifying alternatives to means of communication with the employees of the Quality Unit, improving the educational process by receiving suggestions from faculty members.
Figure 1.A Question: Are There Differences in the Opinions of Faculty Members Regarding the Mechanism of Quality Implementation in the Faculty of Arts When Taking into Consideration Certain Factors?

Table 2 .
The distribution of faculty members based on their answers to the mechanism of quality implementation in the department (strategy)

Table 3 .
Sample distribution based on faculty members' answers to the mechanism of quality implementation in the department (performance)

Table 5 .
Suggestions and opinions of faculty members in regards to improving the performance of the quality unit in the departments

Table 6 .
The relationship between a group of variables and the mechanism of quality implementation in the faculty of arts

Table 9 .
The differences among faculty members with regards to their knowledge of the quality requirements