Evaluation strengthens the quality of both the University’s education and internal processes
During spring, another eight of the University’s education programmes were evaluated within the framework of the University’s system for quality assurance and evaluation. The purpose is to develop both the programmes and the system itself. Of this year’s evaluated programmes, three were assessed to be of approved quality, two programmes to be of approved quality with reservations and two programmes to have been of quality under review.
“The students’ commitment and wise input as well as our external assessors are invaluable with their insightful thoughts and outside view. They really help us to develop our education so that they are of the highest quality and are properly rooted in society.”
Eva-Carin Lindgren, Chair of the Research and Education Board
As part of the University’s quality work, a number of education programmes are evaluated each year according to a six-year cycle. The assessment levels used by the University are the same as those used by the Swedish Higher Education Authority (UKÄ) in its reviews. The evaluations are a support in the University's internal quality work and the structure helps to identify what efforts and what reinforcement is needed to make the University's education even better.
Reviews in the 2023 evaluation
- Mechatronics Engineer
- Conservation Diversity
- Psychology – Sport and Exercise
Approved quality subject to reservation
- Construction and Real Estate Business Programme
- Master’s Programme in Accounting and Bank Management
Quality under review
- Business Administration and Economics Programme
- Master’s Programme in Strategic Entrepreneurship for International Growth
“This year’s evaluation is the penultimate in this six-year cycle and it showed that three out of seven programmes were assessed as approved quality, where the external experts emphasised that they did not see any shortcomings that needed to be addressed in the programmes, but believe that the programmes are of good quality with good goal fulfilment,” says Eva-Carin Lindgren, Chair of the Research and Education Board, FUN.
Development work started
After the evaluation, development work has been initiated at the academies based on the assessment for each evaluated programme. For all courses, regardless of assessment, development areas are handled within the framework of an annual follow-up. For courses that were rated approved quality with reservations, feedback on how deficiencies have been handled must be made to FUN no later than at the board’s first meeting in 2025. For programmes that were assessed as quality under review, the School concerned must within three months, i.e. no later than October 24 of this year, have analysed and submitted proposals on whether the programme should be developed or phased out.
“All lessons learned from both this, and previous evaluations will be utilised in our development work for next year’s evaluation, which will be the last in this six-year cycle. For example, this year we have seen the importance of writing a clear programme description, that the progression between courses needs to be clarified and that the shortcomings are primarily linked to constructive linking, says Eva-Carin Lindgren, and extends a big thank you to everyone who has been involved in the evaluations:
“Not least, I want to highlight the students’ commitment and wise input. Our external assessors are also invaluable with their insightful thoughts and outside view. They really help us to develop our education so that they are of the highest quality and are properly rooted in society.
Text: Lena Lundén
Translation: Linnéa Andersson
Picture: Dan Bergmark
How the evaluations are made
Each education has been evaluated by an internal committee, one for each programme, which has assessed the education on the basis of an assessment matrix and a report from external experts attached to the committees, two per committee.
The external experts have specific knowledge of the respective field and type of training that was evaluated by the committee to which they were attached. The experts have a special assignment to assess the area of knowledge, goal fulfillment and research connection and they have made digital on site visits and talked to students in the programme, teachers and working life representatives.
Each committee was chaired by a member of the Research and Education Board. The Schools have nominated members to the committees, one per programme from the School in question, and all committees have also consisted of a student representative, an administrator and two external experts.
The programme evaluations that have now been carried out are part of the University’s quality system. Every six years, education is evaluated according to an evaluation cycle and agreed guidelines.