The Swedish Higher Education Authority (UKÄ) and Swedish HEIs have a shared responsibility for quality assurance in higher education.
Since 2017, the UKÄ reviews of HEI’s quality assurance processes are ongoing. There are six assessment areas and 19 subordinate assessment criteria. Today, UKÄ published the results of its review of the quality assurance processes of University of Gävle. The overall final assessment for the University’s quality assurance processes was “approved with reservations.”
Quality assurance processes approved with reservations
“The UKÄ review provides valuable help when we continue our efforts to develop our quality assurance processes at the University. We are constantly developing our quality assurance system and our quality assurance processes, and this review tells us that we need to continue doing so,” says Gunilla Mårtensson, deputy vice-chancellor for quality and sustainability at University of Gävle
Three assessment areas were approved as satisfactory: Preconditions, Student and doctoral student perspective, and Working life and collaboration. These assessment areas include ensuring that university teachers have relevant skills, that students and doctoral students are given good opportunities to complete their study programme within the planned period of study and that they can exercise their influence on their programme. Moreover, the study programme should ensure that students and doctoral students are prepared to meet changes in the working life.
Two years to improve assessement areas
The quality assurance processes in three assessment areas were declared as “not satisfactory”: Governance and organisation; Design, implementation and outcomes, and Gender equality.
“Thus, we have areas we need to improve. For example, we need to clarify responsibilities and tasks that different roles and bodies have in our quality assurance processes. We also need to include the students’ study environment in the quality system and improve the communication of results from quality assurance processes to relevant target groups internally and externally,” Gunilla Mårtensson says.
The University now has two years to take measures to improve the quality of the assessment areas that were viewed to be unsatisfactory.
“I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has participated in the HEI review, who has contributed with texts to the self-evaluation and in-depth material and, not least, shared their experiences when participating in interviews,” Gunilla Mårtensson says.