Report 2009:30 R

Review of Quality Assurance Procedures at Six Universities, 2009

This evaluation report presents the results of the review of quality assurance procedures at Göteborgs universitet (University of Gothenburg), Linköpings universitet (Linköping University), Lunds universitet (Lund University), Stockholms universitet (Stockholm University), Umeå universitet (Umeå University) and Uppsala universitet (Uppsala University).

The assessment panel finds that the results of 2009's review of quality assurance procedures at these six large universities have been overwhelmingly positive. All universities have fulfilled the requirements for approved quality assurance procedures. Two universities, Gothenburg and Linköping, achieved the highest possible level, A, which means that they have good quality assurance procedures. Uppsala University, Lund University, Stockholm University and Umeå University have achieved the second highest level, B, which means that these universities have acceptable quality assurance procedures, though some areas should be improved. Thus, no university has been assessed at the fail level of C. All six universities have received recommendations about how they can improve and continue to develop their quality assurance procedures.
 
With the assessment panel's report as a basis, Högskolverket (Swedish National Agency for Higher Education) has made its decision entirely in accordance with the assessment panel's proposal.
 
The evaluation has highlighted many examples of good quality assurance procedures. The University of Gothenburg carries out internal evaluations of quality assurance procedures on a faculty basis, known as faculty audits; Linköping University describes its quality assurance procedures graphically, in the form of a strategy map; Lund University has well-designed governing documents that describe its approach and quality criteria during validations; Umeå University performs status updates for ongoing projects every four months; Uppsala University has continuous alumni surveys.
 
The assessment panel states that good work is being carried out everywhere, with good will, but that systematisation, support from the organisation and follow-ups are areas of development that need to be strengthened. The National Agency for Higher Education agrees with the assessment panel's conclusions that the lasting impression is that the higher education institutions work actively with quality assurance procedures and development, due to the institution's management and employees' insight into the significance of this work. The Agency regards this development as extremely positive.