With outset in the overall objective of quality assurance processes, all degree programmes at Aarhus University are subject to an annual status review, either individually or in groups of related degree programmes.
The annual status review is structured in three elements:
Qualitative and quantitative data constitute the starting point for the review of degree programme quality. A data package is developed in Power BI for the relevant degree programme(s) with a status review of the joint indicators. The indicators cover the following:
For each indicator, fixed threshold values determine when the indicator is green, yellow or red:
The indicators are supplemented by staffing plans which specify the connection between teaching and the researcher's field of study. These indicators can be supplemented by additional key figures and other relevant data, such as academic regulations or supplementary studies. Vocational and professional as well as development-based programmes are also supplemented by an overview of knowledge activities in the academic environment. Finally, the action plan for the degree programme from the last status review is also included.
Involvement: Director of studies or similar and the degree programme administration
The status review of the degree programme(s) are discussed at a status review meeting with point of departure in the collected data material.
The status review meeting will involve relevant managers, employees and students before, during and after the meeting. This is to ensure anchoring in both management and boards of studies, so there is a connection with both day-to-day quality assurance and managerial priorities.
Based on the sub-policies, specific themes may be selected for discussion at the status review meeting, and last year's action plan will also be followed up.
All four sub-policies must be discussed at the meeting, supported by a question guide. The meeting must also include a follow up on former development efforts, including the previous status review or evaluation.
Critical indicators ("red and yellow flags") must be addressed. As a minimum, the outcome of the discussion of the "red flags" must be documented. It is also important to build on the well-functioning elements as well as address the numerical development of the indicators, even if they do not "change colour."
Involvement: Vice-dean for education, head of department or administrative officer, director of studies or similar, the board of studies or similar, the degree programme administration
On the basis of data and dialogue, an action plan for relevant actions following up on the annual status review is drawn up. Action plans must include a clear indication of what actions need to be taken, how to act, who should act and within which time frame. The action plans thereby form the basis of the follow-up processes at degree programme level. The person responsible for an element in the action plan is also responsible for including relevant parties and bodies in order to reach a joint understanding and implementation of the agreed action and development initiatives.
The dialogue at the status review meeting must be written down in a document which can be used in connection with the subsequent follow-up.
The faculties follow up on the annual status review of degree programmes across the faculty’s degree programmes and draw up an annual education report with associated action plans. Finally, an annual education report is drawn up based on the faculties' education reports, with associated action plans at university level.
Using the university's joint guidelines, the faculties implement the principles and the framework for the annual status review locally in the form of specific procedure descriptions that support the common objective.
Involvement: The board of studies or similar, the faculty management team, the Education Committee, the senior management team and the board
