Quality Management System for
First and Second-Cycle Education at
Umeå University
Adopted by the
Vice-Chancellor 24/11/2015
Ref. no.: FS 2015/1433
Type of document:
Decided by:
Validity period:
Area:
Office responsible:
Regulation
Vice-Chancellor
01/01/2016 and until further notice
Education
Planning Office
1
Quality Management System for First and Second-Cycle
Education at Umeå University
Aim and objective
The aim of Umeå University's quality management system for education is to create conditions for a goaloriented, systematic and continuous approach to the quality assurance and quality development of courses
and study programmes at Umeå University. The objective is for all education to adhere the university's
visions and documented goals, statutory requirements and students', teachers' and other stakeholders'
expectations of what a good higher education entails. The quality management system is to contribute to
students' learning and support the entire education process by identifying responsibilities as well as revealing
regulations and expected activities for the actors concerned at various levels within the university.
Knowledge development, as well as aspects such as internationalisation, collaboration with the surrounding
community, equal opportunities, gender equality, e-learning, generic skills, etc., are to be reviewed and
evaluated in this system. This is carried out within the scope of the various phases of the education process
and as a part of various activities, even though there is no specific activity for each individual aspect.
A quality management system that supports the education process
The quality management system focuses on educational efforts, the aim being to support the development
of education and ensure its quality. The quality management system emphasises the professional educational
responsibility through four fundamental principles: 1) it has a strong measure of ownership and
accountability from those responsible for courses and study programmes, 2) it is both monitoring and has
a focus on development, 3) it makes it easier to diversify the range of courses and study programmes and
4) it has international legitimacy; these issues are supported by and are also central to the Association of
Swedish Higher Education (SUHF).
The quality management system includes senior management's active involvement, the in-service training
of teachers, conditions for education-based research and development efforts, forums for dialogue between
teachers and students, greater knowledge of the evaluation of courses and study programmes and merit and
reward systems for educational work. The quality management system has to take into account many
different actors' requirements and expectations, provide the prerequisites for professional accountability and
in-service training and last, but not least, highlight both the present situation and a long-term sustainable
development. The system also has to be keenly aware of subject-specific teaching and learning cultures and
conditions.
The quality management system is based on the phases of the education process – prerequisites,
implementation and results – and includes nine quality aspects. Figure 1 illustrates the quality aspects that
are included and interact in the quality management system and how these relate to the education process.
2
The education process' phases and quality aspects
Systematic quality management
(1.1)
Regular external evaluations of
courses and study programmes
(1.9b)
Design and establishment of
courses and study
programmes (1.2)
Continuous evaluation/revision of
courses and study programmes
(1.9a)
Staff expertise/in-service training
(1.5)
Information to the general public
(1.8)
Learning environment, resources
and support for students (1.6)
Collection and use of key
performance indicators (1.7)
Research-based learning for personal development and usability in society (1.3) Admission,
progression and completion (1.4)
Figure 1: The three phases and nine quality aspects of the education process, numbered as per ESG
The figure is based on the European Standards and Guidelines (ESG) that were adopted in May 2015 and
apply generally to all higher education in Europe (see http://www.enqa.eu/wpcontent/uploads/2015/11/ESG_endorsed-with-changed-foreword.pdf), but has been formulated in a way
that ties them to Umeå University's visions and strategies for educational quality. Accordingly, Umeå
University's quality management system adheres to the guidelines advocated by the European Association
for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA). The nine quality aspects are described below on the
basis of the three phases and numbered as per ESG.
In order to ensure good conditions for high-quality courses and study programmes:
Systematic quality management (ESG 1.1)
Umeå University is to conduct a continuous effort to assure and develop the quality of its educational
activities, which is manifested in the quality management system described in this document. Quality
management is to be conducted at various levels and, aside from overarching governance documents, there
are to be documents at all levels that describe the objectives, organisation and responsibilities of quality
management, as well as strategies for the implementation, follow-up and development of courses and study
programmes. Quality management is to be implemented in collaboration between the university's staff and
students. Umeå University's systematic quality management, the quality management system, is evaluated
continually by the Swedish Higher Education Authority (UKÄ)1.
1The
inquiry concerning a new quality management system has not been completed, which is the reason why no decision has
been made about a new model, but we are assuming that UKÄ will be responsible for a review of the university's quality
management system.
3
Establishment, revision or discontinuation of courses and study programmes (ESG 1.2)
Umeå University is to have clear regulations for the establishment, revision, cancellation or discontinuation of courses and
study programmes, as well as for the establishment and discontinuation of main fields of study. In accordance with the
respective faculty's delegation of authority, programme councils or equivalent are responsible for planning and
implementing the follow-up of each course or study programme in line with the set criteria. The results of follow-ups and
evaluations, as well as their consequences, are to be reported for the course or study programme's host faculty2.
Staff expertise and opportunities for in-service training (ESG 1.5)
Umeå University is to ensure that all affected staff have the qualifications and expertise required for the educational
activities in question. Strategic plans are to be in place for teachers' educational and subject-specific in-service training. For
vocational programmes, it is important that the teacher is also conducted by teachers with professional experience, where
this is warranted. Teachers' educational qualifications are to be assessed and remunerated, which is systematised in Umeå
University's educational qualification model. Information about the time allotted to teachers for research within the scope
of their position, as well as information about their higher education teacher training is to be available. Reviews of teaching
capacity and teaching expertise are to be conducted regularly and skills provision plans are to be in place in order to ensure
access to teaching expertise. Teachers' higher educational in-service training is to be supported by the Centre for
Educational Development.
Learning environment, resources and support for students (ESG 1.6)
Umeå University is to ensure that all teaching is conducted in functional learning environments in which students have
access to suitable premises and good environments for e-learning, libraries with current and international literature and
access to the necessary technical infrastructure. Just as important is good conditions for e-learning. The students are also
to have access to various forms of support such as study guidance, learning support, for example for study and presentation
techniques and writing, counsellors and other advisers or support staff, especially for students with disabilities. Both
learning environments and teaching are to be designed on the basis of gender equality, diversity and accessibility
perspectives. The learning environment and support for campus-based students (Umeå, Ö-vik and Skellefteå), distancelearning students, incoming and outgoing students and students on placements. Data for this is collected via various
evaluations, via the Student Barometer and in dialogue with the student unions, making particular use of the Student Union
Communication.
In order to ensure the implementation of high-quality courses and study programmes:
Research-based learning for personal development and usability in society (ESG 1.3)
Umeå University's courses and study programmes are to stimulate the student's curiosity, reflection, searching attitude and
independence. The courses and study programmes are to be implemented in collaborations that cross subject boundaries,
closely linked to research and in conjunction with other societal actors. The courses and study programmes are to meet
the needs of both society and the individual for knowledge, skills, education and broader perspectives and thus contribute
to both personal development and life-long learning, as well as usefulness in society and preparation for working life. When
appropriate, the courses and study programmes are to integrate campus and online teaching through flexible forms of
teaching.
Admission, progression and completion (ESG 1.4)
Umeå University's regulations, method and criteria for admission, assessment and examination are to be clearly formulated
and accessible to students. Assessment is to take place on the basis of the goals in the examination ordinance, locally
formulated goals and set course objectives, as well as encompassing progression over the course of the study programme.
The examination is designed so that it both makes it possible to check knowledge and becomes an opportunity for learning
and development.
2 When
using the term faculties, this also includes Umeå School of Education.
In order to ensure good results , transparency and foundation for development
Collection and use of key performance indicators and other information (ESG 1.7)
Those responsible at the central level are to systematically collect key performance indicators and other relevant
4
information about operations so that this can be used and analyses based on the needs of the university's various levels.
Key performance indicators based on formulated visions and prioritised quality indicators3 can form the basis of
reallocation of resources for first-cycle education4. This information is to forms the basis on which educational activities
are planned. The list of relevant key performance indicators is regularly updated by the Vice-Chancellor.
Information to the general public (ESG 1.8)
Umeå University is to regularly compile and publish information about the courses and study programmes it offers. This
information is to contain up-to-date details of the content of courses and study programmes, as well as other information
of significance to students' choice of course or study programme (e.g. the results of evaluations and reviews). The
information is to be transparent, impartial, accurate and easily available.
Continuous evaluation and revision of courses and study programmes (ESG 1.9a)
Information about students' and teachers' educational experience is to be continuously collected. All courses and study
programmes at Umeå University have to be evaluated. Course and programme evaluations are to form the basis of the
programme boards', or equivalent (in line with each faculty's delegation of authority), the departments' and the faculties'
operational planning. In the annual report each year, departments and study programmes are to describe the quality
management work they have implemented and a development plan for the coming year. All study programmes are to
regularly undergo evaluation through collegial review. The aim of these reviews is to continually develop the quality of the
study programmes in relation to the rest of the world and to current research within both individual subjects and teaching
and learning in higher education.
Regular external evaluations of courses and study programmes (ESG 1.9b)
All courses and study programmes at Umeå University are to be regularly evaluated by external assessors. The aim of these
evaluations is to ensure the quality of the courses and study programmes in relation to statutory requirements and national
quality criteria. The results from these evaluations is to form the basis of dialogue at all levels and potential action plans.
An important foundation for the external evaluations is on the one hand the annual report/operational plan drawn up by
the programme annually, and on the other the collegial evaluations that are conducted every three years.
Organisation, responsibility processes for quality in education
Rules of procedure with respect to the organisation at Umeå University, Ref. no. 100-912-11, describes roles and responsibilities at
different levels. The bulk of the work to assure and develop the quality of Umeå University's courses and study programmes
is to be implemented in proximity to educational activities.
The university's board sets the budget. The Vice-Chancellor has the overall responsibility for Umeå University's courses
and study programmes and for the development of their quality. The Vice-Chancellor is responsible for appointing the
chair of the Education Strategy Council, for ensuring that the quality management system is followed up and updated and
that necessary university-wide decisions are made in order to ensure high educational quality. The Educational Strategy
Council (Utbildningsstrategiska rådet, USSR) is the Vice-Chancellor's forum for strategic discussions and for drafting
positions ahead of decisions concerning educational matters. The Pedagogical Qualification Board is responsible for the
production of the particulars for advertisements and instructions for both applicants and experts in educational
qualifications, for compliance with the assessment processes and for recommending the faculties' decisions concerning the
appointment of excellent and qualified teachers.
The dean and faculty board are responsible for faculty-wide educational quality development. The dean is also responsible
for the faculty's follow-up and measures resulting from the Student Union Communication and for the reporting of action
plans based on implemented faculty audits. The responsible individuals' reporting of quality management, together with
3 Research
basis, second-cycle level, internationalisation and collaboration are currently used as a basis for the reallocation of resources for
first-cycle education.
4 Currently used as key performance indicators: proportion of PhDs in teaching, proportion of second-cycle education, proportion of incoming
international students and proportion of degree projects in collaboration with the surrounding community. These can be revised or replaced with
others following a decision by the Vice-Chancellor.
5
dialogues quality management, together with dialogues and various educational foundations, is to create the
conditions for overall planning and development of the range of courses and study programmes at the
faculty level. This reporting is also to form the basis of quality initiatives and faculty-wide educational
support. Heads of department or programme councils, in accordance with the respective faculty's delegation
of authority, are responsible for the overall quality development of first and second-cycle courses and study
programmes. The head of department is also responsible for the organisation of educational matters and
for ensuring there is educational development at the departmental level.
University Level
The student
unions
• The University Board
• The Vice-Chancellor
• The Education Strategy Council
• The Pedagogical Qualification Board
Faculty Level
• Faculty board
• Dean
• Education committee or equivalent
• Programme council or equivalent
Department Level
• Head of department
• Education council or equivalent
• Director of studies/Pedagogical leader
• Course coordinators and students
Figure 2 Organisation for quality development at Umeå
University
To support quality management there are to be a number of university-wide support organisations with
qualified knowledge in various areas, for example the University Library of which the Academic Resource
Centre is a part, the Centre for Educational Development, the External Relations Office, Student Services,
the International Office and the Student Health Service. Support organisations are to work together with
the university management, faculties, programme councils, departments and the student unions in quality
management. They are also to initiate, support and implement activities that contribute to developing the
quality of education at Umeå University.
6
Systematic quality development organised by activity
The quality management system is based on three different quality cycles (1, 3 and 6-year cycles) and
eleven activities.
1-year cycle
At overall university level
Activity 1: New Student Survey or Student Barometer at first-cycle level (cycles annually)
Coordinator
The Education Strategy Council in conjunction with faculties/Umeå School of
Education.
Aim
To gather information about educational experiences from new students and
students who are about half way through their study programme. This
information is to form the basis of activities and/or decisions.
Read more
See Appendix 1
At overall university level
Activity 2: Thematic seminars for quality development
Coordinator
Vice-Chancellor, the Educational Strategy Council, the Planning Office
Aim
The aim is to share experiences across faculty boundaries and to collect
lessons learned by other higher education institutions and by experts on
teaching and learning higher education and experts in various fields.
The thematic seminars are one way to share good internal and external
examples, learn from each other and together develop the quality of
education and first and second-cycle level.
Read more
See Appendix 2
At overall university level and faculty level
Activity 3: Pedagogical qualification – appearance of qualified and excellent teachers
Coordinator
Vice-Chancellor, Deans, the Pedagogical Qualification Board
Aim
To contribute to the continual improvement of educational quality by
recognising and rewarding high levels of educational expertise among our
teachers and departments' educational development efforts.
Read more
See Appendix 3
7
At the faculty level, programme and departmental level
Activity 4: Ensuring qualitative targets
Coordinator
Programme coordinator or equivalent (for vocational
programmes) and head of department (general degrees), further
information is available in the administrative regulations for each
faculty.
Aim
The model aims to reinforce internal quality assurance with
respect to how the university achieves the national qualitative
targets in our study programmes.
Read more See Appendix 4
At the programme level
Activity 5: Evaluation of study programmes
Coordinator
Programme coordinator or equivalent, in accordance with the
respective faculty's/Umeå School of Education's delegation of
authority.
Aim
To utilise students' and teachers' experiences in order to achieve the
educational goals and develop the study programme, as well as to ensure that
progression and generic skills are achieved and that issues relating to
internationalisation and collaboration with the surrounding community are
covered. The reporting is to form the basis of annual reports and operational
plans for study programmes.
Read more See Appendix 5
At the programme level
Activity 6: Annual reports and operational plans for study programmes
Coordinator
Programme coordinator or equivalent, in accordance with the
respective faculty's/Umeå School of Education's delegation of
authority.
Aim
Follow-up and continued development of the quality of study programmes at
first and second-cycle level. The reporting is to form the basis of “Programme
evaluation with peer review” and “External evaluation of vocational
programmes and general degrees at first and second-cycle level”.
Read more See Appendix 6
At the departmental level
Activity 7: Evaluation of courses
Coordinator Head of department
Aim
To ensure and develop educational quality through continual course
evaluation in which students and course coordinators, as well as other
10
teachers, participate in quality management efforts.
Read more See Appendix 7
3-year cycle
At overall university level and faculty level
Activity 8: Follow-up of the Student Union Communication
Coordinator
Vice-Chancellor, the Planning Office, deans (in conjunction with the
student unions)
Aim
Choose, in consultation with the student unions, a number of areas from
the Student Union Communication to work on more at both the
university-wide level and the faculty level in order to develop the quality
of education and to follow-up action plans from previous student union
communications.
Read more See Appendix 8a and 8b
At the programme level
Activity 9: Programme evaluation implemented with peer review
Coordinator
Programme coordinator or equivalent, in accordance with the
administrative regulations of the respective faculty.
Aim
To implement a programme evaluation that includes a peer review of the
students' and potentially other stakeholders' opinions from the programme
evaluations in relation to the educational plan and the study programme's
annual report/operational plan. The aim of this is to ensure that the study
programme's quality criteria (including internationalisation and collaboration
with the surrounding community), provide support to the development and
follow-up of change initiatives.
Read more See Appendix 9
6-year cycle
At overall university level and faculty level
Activity 10: Faculty audits
Coordinator
Vice-Chancellor, the Educational Strategy Council
Aim
The audit is implemented in order to both ensure the organisation of the
study programme and to develop support at the faculty level for education
at first and second-cycle levels.
Read more See Appendix 10
10
At departmental and programme level
Activity 11: External evaluation of vocational programmes and general degrees at first
and second-cycle level
Coordinator
Programme coordinator (for vocational programmes) and head of
department (for general degrees), further information is available in the
administrative regulations for each faculty.
Aim
To ensure the study programmes' goals, progression, quality and topicality in
relation to statutory requirements and national quality criteria. Is to contain a
review of the study programmes' usefulness in society.
Read more
See Appendix 11
10
Education Strategy Council
Appendix 1
1-year cycle
At overall university level
Activity: New Student Survey or Student Barometer at first-cycle level (cycles annually)
Coordinator
The Education Strategy Council in conjunction with faculties/Umeå
School of Education.
Aim
To gather information about educational experiences from new students
and students who are about half way through their study programme.
This information is to form the basis of activities and/or decisions.
Implementation process New Student Survey:
-USSR appoints a temporary working group consisting of people from
faculties/Umeå School of Education and the Communications Office
handles the planning and implementation of the New Student Survey.
-In September, following admissions, the survey questionnaires are
distributed to students.
-The questionnaires are processed by ICT Services and System
Development (ITS).
-The results then go to the central resource person who analyses them
based on an overall perspective.
-Each faculty/Umeå School of Education is responsible for further
processing of collected data and onward communication to departments
and programmes.
Student Barometer:
-USSR appoints a temporary working group consisting of people
from faculties/Umeå School of Education that handles the
planning and implementation of the Student Barometer.
-In October/November the survey questionnaires are handed out to
programme students in semester five, in exceptional cases to students
in semester 3 and 4. The questionnaires are distributed to the students.
-The questionnaires are processed by ITS.
-The results then go to the central resource person who analyses the total
results for all courses and study programmes at Umeå University based
on an overall perspective.
Documentation
-Each faculty/Umeå School of Education is responsible for onward
A report with a summary, analysis and discussion of the results from
communication to departments and programmes.
each survey and proposals for development initiatives.
1
1 Education Strategy Council
Dialogue
Appendix 1
The New Student Survey: The reporting is to form the basis of a dialogue
with faculty management and the study programmes/departments, but
also between university management and faculty management.
The Student Barometer: The reporting is to form the basis of a
dialogue with faculty management and the study
programmes/departments, but also between university
management and faculty management. The results are also
communicated to the Working Environment Committee/Office
for Human Resources, the Student Health Service and the
student unions.
Timetable New Student Survey: September every other year. Report within two
months.
The Student Barometer: October every other year. Report within three
months.
Resources The New Student Survey:
Each faculty/Umeå School of Education pays for its portion of the
New Student Survey. Central funds are available for distribution of the
questionnaires and resources for central processing.
The Student Barometer:
Each faculty/Umeå School of Education pays for its portion of the
Student Barometer. Central funds are available for distribution of the
questionnaires and resources for central processing.
1
2 Appendix 2
Education Strategy Council
1-year cycle
At overall university level
Activity: Thematic seminars for quality development
Coordinator
Vice-Chancellor, the Educational Strategy Council, the Planning Office
Aim
The aim is to share experiences across faculty boundaries and to collect
lessons learned by other higher education institutions and by experts on
teaching and learning higher education and experts in various fields.
The thematic seminars are one way to share good internal and external
examples, learn from each other and together develop the quality of
education and first and second-cycle level.
Implementation process
Two open faculty-wide seminars are held each year, dealing with
some aspect of quality management at the university.
The Educational Strategy Council is responsible for the date and theme
of the seminars. Administrators in the council are responsible for
drawing up invitations and for other administration concerning these
occasions.
Documentation
A summary of each seminar is to be drawn up and distributed to the
organisation in order to communicate further and provide more
information about the quality management taking place at Umeå
University.
Timetable
There is one seminar in the spring semester and one in the autumn
semester.
Resources
Participants are present at the seminars within the scope of their
employment. An administrative resource is available at the Planning
Office. The cost of premises, any lecturer and refreshments is paid for
out of university funds. Budget: SEK 20,000 per year
1 Appendix 3
Education Strategy Council
1-year cycle
At overall university level and faculty level
Activity: Pedagogical qualification – appearance of qualified and excellent teachers
Coordinator
Vice-Chancellor, deans, the Pedagogical Qualification Board
Aim
To contribute to the continual improvement of educational quality by recognising
and rewarding high levels of educational expertise among our teachers and
departments' educational development efforts.
Implementation
process
Documentation
See the qualification model for pedagogical qualification, ref. no.: FS1.2.2-986-14
Dialogue
Dialogues are conducted at faculty level with qualified and excellent teachers
in the event of educationally related preparation and development initiatives
in order to utilise their expertise.
Timetable
Annually
Resources
Takes place within existing frameworks. A fee is paid to the pedagogical experts.
The fee is common to all faculties and set annually by the Vice-Chancellor in a
special instruction. The faculties pay the fee to pedagogical experts and they also
pay for the extra administrative costs implied by decisions concerning
qualification. The costs for the board's administrative support and operational
budget are reimbursed centrally by the university (Office of Human Resources).
Read more
See the model for pedagogical qualification, ref. no.: FS1.2.2-986-14 Link:
https://www.aurora.umu.se/Anstallning/kompetensutveckling/Pedagogiskmeritering/
A list of the university's qualified and excellent teachers is compiled regularly.
1 Appendix 4
Education Strategy Council
1-year cycle
At the faculty level, programme and departmental level
Activity: Ensuring qualitative targets
Coordinator
Programme coordinator (for vocational programmes) and head of
department (general degrees), further information is available in the
administrative regulations for each faculty.
Aim
The model aims to reinforce internal quality assurance with
respect to how the university achieves the national qualitative
targets in our study programmes.
Implementation process
Each faculty/Umeå School of Education can work out and set its own
procedures on the basis of the stipulated administrative regulations for
ensuring national qualitative targets (ref. no. 100-818-13).
An overall matrix is to be drawn up and is to contain the national qualitative
targets on one axis and courses on the other. Each square is to indicate
which course objective(s) it is thought will help to achieve the national
qualitative targets. Course objectives are numbered on the basis of the
curriculum in question.
The faculties/Umeå School of Education provide support in the work to
draw up the matrices and follow up on the matrix being used at programme
level and departmental level. A more detailed matrix is recommended as a
complement to the general matrix.
Documentation
The faculties have administrative regulations that show how
programmes/degrees have to update their matrices each year in order to
ensure that national qualitative targets are achieved and where these matrices
are to be reported and made available.
Dialogue
Programme coordinators/heads of department conduct a
dialogue about goal fulfilment with the dean/faculty
management.
Timetable
Annual review of the matrices is one aspect of the faculties'/Umeå
School of Education's internal quality management.
Resources
Takes place within existing allocated faculty/Umeå School of Education budgets.
Read more
See administrative regulations for ensuring national qualitative
targets, ref. no. 100-818-13. Link:
http://www.umu.se/regelverk/utbildning-pa- grund--ochavancerad-niva
1 Appendix 5
Education Strategy Council
1-year cycle
At the programme level
Activity: Evaluation of study programmes
Coordinator
Programme coordinator or equivalent, in accordance with the
respective faculty's/Umeå School of Education's administrative
regulations
Aim
To utilise students' and teachers' experiences in order to achieve the
educational goals and develop the study programme, as well as to ensure
that progression and generic skills are achieved and that issues relating to
internationalisation and collaboration with the surrounding community are
covered. The reporting is to form the basis of annual reports and
operational plans for study programmes.
Implementation process See the administrative regulations for Course evaluations – implementation
and responsibility (Ref. no.: 500-10-22-13) and the respective
faculty's/Umeå School of Education's administrative regulations.
Documentation
Reporting is structured in accordance with the Vice-Chancellor's decision
and the faculties'/Umeå School of Education's administrative regulations.
Dialogue
Dialogue is conducted with the dean who is responsible for education
and the faculty's education committee or equivalent. The results are also
fed back to the relevant programme council and students for the study
programme in question.
Timetable
During their period of study, all students are to be given the opportunity
to present their experiences and views on the programme as a whole. For a
timetable, see the respective faculty's/Umeå School of Education's
administrative regulations.
Resources
Takes place within existing faculty/Umeå School of Education frameworks.
Read more
See the administrative regulations for Course evaluations – implementation
and responsibility (Ref. no.: 500-10-22-13), Rules for student influence at
Umeå University (Ref. no.: 500-1020-13) and the respective faculty's/Umeå
School of Education's administrative regulations. Link:
http://www.umu.se/regelverk/utbildning-pa-grund--och-avancerad-niva
1 Appendix 6
Education Strategy Council
1-year cycle
At the programme level
Activity: Annual reports and operational plans for study programmes
Coordinator
Programme coordinator or equivalent, in accordance with the
respective faculty's/Umeå School of Education's delegation of
authority.
Aim
Follow-up and continued development of the quality of study
programmes at first and second-cycle level. The reporting is to form the
basis of “Programme evaluation with peer review” and “External
evaluation of vocational programmes and general degrees at first and
second-cycle level”.
Implementation process
The faculties draw up administrative regulations for procedures with
respect to the scope and content of annual reports/operational plans
for programmes. Internationalisation and collaboration with the
surrounding community are to be specifically covered in annual
reports/operational plans.
Documentation
Reporting is structured in accordance with the
faculties'/Umeå School of Education's administrative
regulations.
Dialogue
The reporting is to form the basis of a dialogue with the dean with
responsibility for education and the faculty's/Umeå School of Education's
education committee or equivalent.
Timetable
The activity takes place annually in accordance with the
faculties'/Umeå School of Education's administrative
regulations.
Resources
Takes place within existing frameworks.
1 Appendix 7
Education Strategy Council
1-year cycle
At the departmental level
Activity: Evaluation of courses
Coordinator
Head of Department
Aim
To ensure and develop educational quality through continual course
evaluation in which students and course coordinators, as well as
other teachers, participate in quality management efforts.
Implementation process See the administrative regulations for Course evaluations – implementation
and responsibility (Ref. no.: 500-10-22-13) and the respective
faculty's/Umeå School of Education's administrative regulations.
Documentation
Reporting is structured in accordance with the Vice-Chancellor's decision
and the faculties'/Umeå School of Education's administrative regulations.
Dialogue
The reporting is to form the basis of the department's annual report and
operational plan for dialogues within study programmes and faculty
management. Feedback on the results of course evaluations is also to be
provided to those students who have carried out the evaluation and those
students who are to study the course next time.
Timetable
Continually throughout the year.
Resources
Takes place within existing departmental frameworks.
Read more
See the administrative regulations for Course evaluations – implementation
and responsibility (Ref. no.: 500-10-22-13), Rules for student influence at
Umeå University (Ref. no.: 500-1020-13) and the respective faculty's/Umeå
School of Education's administrative regulations.
Link: http://www.umu.se/regelverk/utbildning-pa-grund--och-avanceradniva
1 Appendix 8a
Education Strategy Council
3-year cycle
At overall university level and faculty level
Activity: Follow-up of the Student Union Communication
Coordinator
Vice-Chancellor, the Planning Office, deans (in conjunction
with the student unions)
Aim
To choose, in consultation with the student unions, a number
of areas from the Student Union Communication to work on
more at both the university-wide level and the faculty level in
order to develop the quality of education and to follow-up
action plans from previous student union communications.
Implementation process The student unions implement the communication, which is
provided to the university's highest decision-making body. On the basis of the communication, USSR prioritises
some areas to develop collectively for the whole of
Umeå University.
On the basis of the communication, each faculty/Umeå
School of Education also prioritises some areas to develop
further, in conjunction with the student union in question.
Documentation
A report that is to contain measures and development initiatives
based on prioritised areas in the student union
communication at an overall level (Vice-Chancellor)
and faculty level (deans).
Dialogue
The faculty managements implement the work in dialogue
with the student unions and reporting takes place to the
Educational Strategy Council and the University Board.
Timetable
The student union communication is implemented every three
years
Resources Takes place within existing frameworks
1 The student unions at Umeå University
Description
08/05/2015
Page 1 (1)
Description of the forms of the Student Union Communication
Background
Every three years, the student unions at Umeå University have written something that has been called the Student
Case Communication, but which will be called the Student Union Communication in future. The last
communication was handed over to the University Board on 19/06/2013 (Ref. no.: UmU 500-1180-13). The aim
of this description is to clarify the future intentions of the communication's forms. This clarification creates longterm planning conditions with regard to how and when the communication will be written and handed over in the
future and in which body the communication will be processed and appraised.
The communication's name
The student unions have decided, following consideration, that a change of name from the Student Case
Communication to the Student Union Communication is more consistent with the revision of the aim as the
communication will in future also highlight issues that the student unions, independent of the number of student
cases received, regard as vital to draw attention to.
Aim
The Student Union Communication aims to draw attention to recurring university-wide problems that students at
Umeå University turn to the student unions for help with, as well as challenges and questions that the student
unions also regard as vital to draw attention to. In addition, the communication aims to create the conditions for
taking action in accordance with the above-named problems and issues.
The issues the communication intends to cover encompass educational issues with regard to both students' legal
rights and educational quality, as well as issues concerning students' situation, encompassing working environment
and equal opportunities issues.
Time interval
Since 2010, the student unions have written and handed over the communication every three years. The aim of
this interval is to allow a reasonable amount of time to work with the communication, implement the actions
proposed and to the greatest possible extent overcome the problems that were addressed.
The student unions believe that the three-year interval is appropriate and the next communication, from today's
date, is intended to be complete before the end of June 2016.
The communication's processing
The intention is for the communication to be provided to the university's highest decision-making body, the
University Board. However, the student unions look favourably on the Board tasking responsible post-holders
with processing the communication and the proposals it contains, in suitable bodies. In the view of the student
unions, such bodies should be those whose area of responsibility overlaps with the problem areas addressed in the
communication. They encompass, but are not limited to, those bodies that are responsible at a university-wide
level for issues of quality, legal rights, working environment and equal opportunities.
Furthermore, the student unions also look favourably on the communication being processed at the faculty level
(also includes Umeå School of Education), in spite of the communication, thanks to its design and proposals, being
university-wide. Processing at the faculty level is judged to have greater operational proximity, in the opinion of
the student unions, and thus creates conditions for overcoming the problems addressed in the communication to
a greater extent.
UMEÅ STUDENT UNION OF SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY
MIT-huset, S-901 87 Umeå
www.ntk.umu.se
UMEÅ STUDENT UNION
Biblioteksgränd 6, 907 36 Umeå
www.umeastudentkar.se
UMEÅ MEDICAL AND HEALTH
SCIENCES STUDENT UNION
Klintv. 55, S-907 37 Umeå
www.medicinska.se
Appendix 9
Education Strategy Council
3-year cycle
At the programme level
Activity: Programme evaluation implemented with peer review
Coordinator
Programme coordinator or equivalent, in accordance with the
respective faculty's/Umeå School of Education's
administrative regulations.
Aim
To implement a programme evaluation that includes a peer
review of the students' and potentially other stakeholders'
opinions from the programme evaluations in relation to the
educational plan and the study programme's annual
report/operational plan. The aim of this is to ensure that the
study programme's quality criteria (including
internationalisation and collaboration with the surrounding
community), provide support to the development and followup of change initiatives.
Implementation process Each faculty/Umeå School of Education is responsible for
appointing a peer
reviewer. An administrator is appointed by each
faculty/Umeå School of Education. The reviewer is
chosen from other programme coordinators or equivalent
from Umeå University or another higher education
institution.
The reviewer studies previous programme evaluations for the
programme concerned, educational plan, the previous year's
annual report/operational plan and any further documentation
following dialogue with the reviewer.
A dialogue with the programme coordinator/programme
council or equivalent takes place once the review is complete.
The peer reviewer issues a short report containing analysis
and recommendations for action that are sent to the
programme coordinator/programme council or equivalent,
who is tasked with drawing up a development plan based
on the recommendations in the report. Vocational
programmes do not need to conduct peer review in the
same year external review takes place.
Documentation
A report that is to contain an overall analysis, discussion and
conclusions of the review. The report is to contain
recommendations and proposed actions. A development
plan is formulated on the basis of this report by the
programme coordinator.
Dialogue
The documentation is to constitute the basis of a
dialogue with the faculty management.
Timetable
Every study programme is to be evaluated every three years.
Resources
Colleagues within the university who are participating in peer
review receive 20 hours of staffing that is paid for by the
programme or its host department/faculty. If the faculty
wishes to take on an external reviewer, their fee is paid by the
respective programme/host department.
1 Appendix 10
Education Strategy Council
6-year cycle
At overall university level and faculty level
Activity: Faculty audits (a faculty, or Umeå School of Education/the University Administration,
incl. the Centre for Teaching and Learning, per year)
Coordinator
Vice-Chancellor, the Educational Strategy Council
Aim
The audit is implemented in order to both ensure the organisation of
the study programme and to develop support at the faculty level for
education at first and second-cycle levels.
Implementation process
An audit group is appointed by the Educational Strategy Council for each
audit in November of the year prior to the implementation process.
Normally, the group is to consist of representatives from faculties and
Umeå School of Education and the following functions are to be
included: a pro/vice dean with educational responsibility, head of the
dean's office, an excellent teacher, director of studies, educational
supervisor, a student representative and an administrative administrator
from the Planning Office. A representative from the Centre for Teaching
and Learning is also to be included.
Proposals for recurring themes for all audits are:
-The organisation and content of educational support
-The faculty's (equivalent) quality management for education
Further themes are determined in consultation with faculty management
or equivalent at a preliminary meeting ahead of the evaluation. It is
decided at the preliminary meeting what data are to be included in the
audit and each faculty/Umeå School of Education is responsible for
these being available to the audit group. Specific self-evaluations are not
to be written prior to the audit process.
On the day of the audit, the group meets representatives in various
constellations. It is vital that the conversations on the day of the audit are
structured as a reflective dialogue and not as an interrogation.
Following the day of the audit, a report is drawn up and submitted to
the management of the evaluated faculty or equivalent. The report is to
contain a summary of the evaluation, a reflective section and is to be
concluded with recommendations within each of the evaluated themes.
Before the report is made public, the management is given the
opportunity to submit its points of view. The final report is
communicated to the management during a discussion with
representatives from the audit group. The management is then tasked with
drawing up an action plan based on the recommendations in the report.
Documentation
report and results
the action
arethat
presented
to thethe reviews' results
The evaluation
in a plan
report
is to contain
Educational
and
proposedStrategy
actionsCouncil.
and development initiatives.
1 Education Strategy Council
Appendix 10
Dialogue
Follow-up of completed audit and presentation of the action plan takes
place in conjunction with faculties' (Umeå School of Education's/the
University Administration's) dialogues with the university management by
December of the audit year, at the latest.
Timetable
An audit is implemented annually in accordance with a rolling schedule.
Resources
Representatives in the audit group carry out their work within the
scope of their positions, with the exception of the excellent teacher,
show is compensated with 40 working hours from university funds.
Administrators from the Planning Office carry out their work within
the scope of their positions.
2 Education Strategy Council
Appendix 11
6-year cycle
At departmental and programme level
Activity: External evaluation of vocational programmes and general degrees at first and
second-cycle level
Coordinator
Programme coordinator (for vocational programmes) and head of
department (for general degrees). Further information in the
administrative regulations of the respective faculty/Umeå School of
Education.
Aim
To ensure the study programmes' goals, progression, quality and topicality
in relation to statutory requirements and national quality criteria. Is to
contain a review of the study programmes' usefulness in society.
Implementation process
Is developed following a decision for the national quality assurance system.