On this page you will find more information regarding UiS' quality system for education, the different roles in the system, the work with quality, and processes. You will also find minutes and reports from the processes.
PublishedUpdated on
The quality system describes the work with quality at UiS
Quality work is a continous academic development process, where the students' and the Ph.D.-candidates' learning and the employees' teaching, must be in the center.
The quality work is based on academic dialogues between employees and between students, Ph.D.-candidates and employees. The quality system is the support structure for the quality work. It needs to be worked with systematically to ensure quality in all levels; in course-, programme-, and portfolio level. To ensure progress, there are also accompanying reporting levels. The supporting data must always be customised for the different levels, and must build on updated documents, minutes and numbers.
Quality is also about the laws, regulations and standards that needs to be upheld, as well as meeting expectations and requirements. This means that the studies and other tasks at UiS must be completed in accordance with the requirements from monitoring documents (laws, regulations, goals, etc.), but also in accordance with the expectations and requirements from our students and society as a whole.
The overall objective of the work with quality is that the students must obtain the best possible learning results and personal development (learning results), meet relevant educations that give them solid preparation for an active participation in society and for a future career (relevance), as well as completing their education as effectively as possible (completion). The work with quality must also assure and develop the learning environment of the students.
Three levels of reporting
UiS has chosen a three-way division of the quality system for all studies at bachelor-, master- and ph.d.-level, including externally financed continuing and further education.
The division is divided into quality in courses, in study programmes and in the study portfolio. Reports makes important documentation, but the dialogical quality processes where both reports at a parent level for further development of the studies, as well as experiences from the daily work, are just as important. The level of engagement and cooperation from the students are particularly important for the the development of quality.
The learning activities for the students happen in the courses. We must offer courses with updated and relevant course descriptions. The course descriptions must contain learning activities and teaching contributing to the students experiencing a clear coherence between learning outcome descriptions, teaching activities, formative assessment and forms of assessment/exams. Course reporting is particularly important to ensure the students learning environment.
Quality in courses and course-reporting
All courses must have a course coordinator who is responsible for the course report
Course reports for all courses (also courses offered in the further and continuing education portfolio) must be written
Course reports must be written for every completion of a course, with some adjustments for Ph.D.-courses
The course reports are based on the dialogue with student, the digital course evaluation and other data the faculty wishes to use
The course reporting must be completed after evaluation meetings every semester in the study programme council led by the programme coordinator
The reports must also be discussed with students/student representatives/Ph.D.-candidates
The course reports is a part of the foundation for the programme evaluation and programme report
There are separate guidelines for the evaluation of Ph.D.-courses. Vice-dean of research, or who the vice-dean authorises, are responsible for the Ph.D.-programmes'/study's course reports are handled annually in the doctorate committee of the programme
There are separate guidelines for evaluation of supervised professional training-courses. In these, there are evaluations from students, UiS employees, and from the professional training field. There are also separate guidelines for contracts with professional training partners/places
One of the goals of the quality work at UiS is to ensure the students' total learning outcomes at programme level. The programmes must have a course combination and method of learning contributing to the students' experience of the programme being relevant for future careers and for society, as well as being structured in such a way that it can be completed efficiently and according to the programme description.
The programmes must also be based on updated research- and development work, and meet national and international expectations to the education. It must be accommodated for a good, holistic learning environment. The learning environment committee handles an overall report regarding the learning environment at the institution based on what the programme reports uncovers.
a) Annual programme evaluation and programme report
Programme coordinator/Ph.D.-programme coordinator is responsible for the programme evaluation and programme report. In the Ph.D.-educations, vice-dean of research will often be the programme coordinator
Programme reporting must be based on course reports and must be completed annually
programme report at Ph.D.-level will in addition be based on progress reporting and midway assessments regarding the candidate's progress
For programmes with supervised professional training, the evaluation reports from the professional training must be a part of the foundation
The faculty handles annual reports in the study programme council (led by programme coordinator) first, before it is handled in the portfolio committee/doctorate committee (for Ph.D.-programmes), and finally a decision is made in the faculty board. The study programme council is a dialogical organ, whereas the report is approved at faculty level.
b) Periodical programme evaluation with re-accreditation
Every programme must complete a periodical programme evaluation every 5 years that will result in a re-accreditation in the education committee, alternatively result in a discontinuation by the board. Periodical progamme evaluation replaces the annual programme evaluation the years it happens. The faculty board must handle the periodical programme evaluation prior to sending their advice regarding a decision of re-accreditation to the education committee.
c) Establishment and accreditation of new programmes
Application for new programmes must follow separate guidelines with application approval from Rector, accreditation decision from the education committee, and establishment decision from the board.
Studieporteføljen skal ha høy vitenskapelig kvalitet som fremmer sammenheng mellom utdanning, forskning og The study portfolio must have a high level of academic quality enhancing coherence between education, research and innovation. The system must contribute to a strenghtening of the industry-relevance of the studies and create stronger bonds between the students and culture- society-, and working life both during the studies, as well as after graduating.
Quality in study portfolio and portfolio report
The UiS board are responsible for the overall portfolio of the institution
The portfolio reporting at faculty level must be based on programme reports, as well as the annual case to the board regarding the study portfolio, review and planning of study places. The report from the faculty must be handled by the faculty board
The portfolio reports from the faculties must include all studies of 30 ECTS credits or more; half-year studies, yearly studies, bachelor programmes, master's programmes, Ph.D.-programmes and further educations (of any form of financing)
Pro-rector for education have annual dialogical meetings with the management of the faculties where the portfolio report is reviewed
The UiS board annually handles the case regarding the quality in the institution's overall study portfolio after handling in the education committee
The UiS board annualy handles the case regarding public defences and throughput-rate in the doctorate education at UiS after handling in the research committee
Rector has annual dialogical meetings with the faculties where the quality in education is its own topic
Quality development in the <br>Ph.D.-programmes
Kvalitetssikringen av ph.d.-utdanningene følger de samme overordnede prinsippene for evaluering og rapportering som kvalitetssystemet for første og andre The quality assurance of the Ph.D.-educations follows the same overall principles for evaluations and reporting in the quality system as first and second cycle studies does. To ensure the Ph.D.-educations' particular characteristics, separate guidelines for completion of course evaluations and programme evaluations on Ph.D.-level has been made. Progress reporting and midway evaluations of the individual Ph.D.-candidate are central elements in the work with quality. In addition, anonymous candidate surveys are completed at institutional level. There is an annual case to the board regarding the throughput in the doctorate educations.
Quality development of <br>supervised professional training
The quality development of the supervised professional training happens both at course- and programme level. Supervised professional training is a big part of the students' education. For the education to maintain high quality, it is necessary for the supervised professional training to meet the learning outcome goals set for it. it is therefore important to collect systematic data regarding the quality in the supervised professional training at UiS.
UiS is supposed to be the link between the place of the supervised training and the students, and must accommodate for the best possible completion of supervised training. For this to function, there must be good communication with both students and place of supervised training, and also being conscious of how UiS can contribute into the supervised training field. Supervised training must be an educational co-creating arena for students, supervised training teachers and for UiS' teachers.
Course coordinator or supervised professional training coordindator is responsible for the evaluation of the supervised training period. The evaluation is completed digitally.
Students and employees have a joint responsibility for working with quality. The individual student is expected to actively participate in the evaluations of their studies.
Student representatives
The student representative arrangement at UiS is the section of the quality system describing how student representatives are elected and participate in educations, education governance and learning enviroment work at UiS. As with the rest of the quality system, there are three types of student representatives in the student representative arrangement:
Course representative; student who represent the students for one or more courses.
Programme representative; student representative for a study programme
Representatives in boards, committees and councils at institutional and faculty levels.
The student representative arrangement at UiS describe how StOr and UiS collaborate to carry out elections of student representatives at all levels in all cources and programmes and boards and committees. StOr and UiS also collaborate in the training of the new representatives for their roles as student representatives.
Students and employees have a joint responsibility for the work with quality. The individual candidate is expected to actively participate in the evaluations of their studies.
UiS DC
UiS DC is the organisation protecting the Ph.D.-candidates' interests at UiS. UiS DC are responsible for appointing representatives in committees and boards at institutional and faculty levels.
Ph.D.-candidates must be represented in the following boards, committees and councils:
The doctorate committees at the faculties
The education committee
The learning environment committee
The research committee
The research ethics committee
Roles at institutional level
Rector has the overall responsibility for all the quality work at UiS. The rectorate keeps dialogues with the different academic departments regarding the continuous work with quality through their set management forums and in the annual dialogue meetings with the faculties. Rector is the secretary for the board and is responsible for the cases regarding the work with quality being brought to the board for handling.
Pro-rector for education has the academic responsibility for the work with quality in the educations at UiS and must contribute to develop the academic educational competency at UiS. Pro-rector gives advice to rector and the faculties in questions regarding education, and contributes to the further development of the university's overall portfolio, in line with the needs in society regarding knowledge and competency. Pro-rector must further develop the systematic work with quality, stimulate internal culture for quality and in cooperation with other central contributors from industry, contribute to high quality and relevance in the educations.
Pro-rector for education leads the education committee, and is a part of the learning environment committee. Pro-rector arranges annual dialogical meetings with the management of the faculties where the portfolio report from the faculty is reviewed.
Pro-rector for research contributes to ensure that UiS has research that is critical and independent, and is of high international quality, and contributes to further develop the university's overall research portfolio. Pro-rector for research is responsible for the work with development and -quality in the doctorate educations, in dialogue with pro-rector for education.
Pro-rector for research leads the research committee, and works strengthen the coherence between education, innovation and public contact, and stimulate a culture of quality.
Prorektor for innovasjon og samfunnskontakt skal styrke sammenheng mellom utdanning, forskning, innovasjon og saPro-rector for innovation and public relations is supposed to strengthen the coherence between education, research, innovation and public relations, and promote interdiciplinary collaboration between the faculties. The pro-rector must also develop and follow-up on a systematic work with quality within the areas of responsibility.
Roles at faculty level
The dean is responsible for the academic and the administrative results for the total activities of the faculty, including the entire portfolio of the faculty, the learning environment and the work with quality. This includes courses, half-year studies, yearly studies, bachelor-, master's- and Ph.D.-programmes and further educations. The dean must accomodate for, and stimulate, high quality in the educations, high level of research environments and academic development. The dean must ensure all studies has sound management and that they are included in a study programme council. Faculties organised without heads of departments (institutes), must describe how the responsibilities and tasks of the head of department is handled at the faculty.
The dean has the authority to accredit studies up to 60 ECTS credits in regards to the general criteria for accreditation. The dean is responsible for the annual course- and programme revision, and must develop guidelines for these processes.
The dean is the secretary of the faculty board.
Vice-dean of education must, in collaboration with the dean and the heads of department, contribute to teaching- and learning activities of high quality. The vice-deans leads the faculties' study portfolio committees (for the faculties chosing to have one of these). Vice-dean of education have tasks ans responsibilities related to:
The portfolio of the faculties, including the programmes' relevance and structure
The work with quality for teaching and learning environment at the faculty
Collaborations and use of resources in and between the programmes
Vice-dean of education can be asked to be a representative in central committees
Vice-dean of research must contribute to the planning, development and strategic work within research, support and function as an advisor to research groups. Vice-dean for research leads the doctorate committe and has some responsibility for the quality in the Ph.D.-educations of the faculty. Vice-dean for research is responsible for (with the possibility to delegate) the programme reports for the Ph.D.-programmes.
The head of department (institute) leads the work with quality within the programmes to comply with the university's quality system. The head of department has the academic and administrative responsibility for the follow-up of the department's (institute) total activities. The heads of department are therefore overall responsible for the completion, development, quality and relevance in the programmes at the department (institute). The head of department is responsible for the development of courses and programmes and to accomodate that the work with quality is discussed in dialogical arenas. For studies up to and including master's level, the head of department makes comments and actions for the report from the periodical programme evaluation, and for the report from the expert committee in regards to establisment of new master's degree programmes. The head of department leads the department council.
Faculties organised without departments (institutes) must describe how the responsibilities and tasks of the head of department is ensured at the faculty.
The programme coordinator is responsible (in collaboration with the head of department) for the continuous coordination and work with quality in the programme. The programme coordinator is also responsible for the establishment of necessary arenas for exchange of knowledge and continuous work with quality in the academic environment of the programme. The programme coordinator brings knowledge from meetings such as this into their further dialogues. The programme coordinator leads the study programme council, and is responsible for the programme evaluation and the programme report.
In the Ph.D.-educations the vice-dean for research will often also be considered the programme coordniator.
Course coordinators are academic staff with responsibility for the individual courses. They shall contribute to the development of the course in accordance with the criteria in the quality system. Course coordinators must, in dialogue with the students, ensure further development of the teaching and accommodate the students learning environment and -work. Course coordinator is responsible for the semester evaluation (including the courses for supervised professional training) and course report after every completion of a course, they also participate in the programme evaluations.
The supervisor is responsible for following up the academic development of the Ph.D.-candidate. The supervisor must report on the progress of the Ph.D.-candidate through the annual progress report. Vice-dean of research is responsible for the handling of the progress reports in the doctorate committee of the faculty who are responsible for the Ph.D.-programme, or by the organ the faculty decides, where potential follow-up actions are made.
Administrative roles and other functions
The director of academic affairs reports to the pro-rector for education, and is the head of the division of academic affairs. The director of academic affairs has the administrative responsibility for the quality system, is the secretary for the education committee, the learning environment committee, the appeals committee and the suitability committee.
The director of academic affairs suggest the continuous follow-up and revision of the quality system, and is responsible to ensure quality in study-administrative decisions.
The research director reports to the pro-rector for research. The research director is responsible for the guidelines and politics for research ethics, handles cases related to research ethics and is the secretary for the research committee and for the research ethics committee.
The research committee must contribute to the quality assurance of reseach and the researcher's educations through developing administrative systems of high quality.
The innovation director reports to pro-rector for innovation and public affairs. The innovation director is responsible for the administrative services and tools to promote the goals of the university regarding research based innovation, commercialisation of research results ans development of education offers for entrepreneurship.
The innovation director is responsible for developing collaboration opportunities between UiS ans regional and national actors.
EVU-direktøren leder UiSs sentrale etter- og videreutdannings-enhet (EVU). EVU tilbyr videreutdanning på bachelor- The director of the furhter and continuing education leads the further and continuing education unit (EVU). EVU offers continuing educations at bachelor- and master's level within several subject areas, in addition to further educations. The offerings span from small courses to full master's degree programmes. The target group is people who are a part of the work force and the courses are custom built to be combined with a full-time job. Further and continuing educations are developed by the different academic environments in collaboration with the EVU-unit. The EVU-unit have the main responsibility for administration and marketing.
Head of UniPed is the academic leader of the unit for university pedagogy. The tasks of UniPed is to further develop the quality of teaching at the University of Stavanger, and contribute to ensure that employees can be offered high quality academic support-stuctures to promote the work with quality in teaching.
The head of UniPed is, among other things, responsible for the merit scheme of the institution.
The faculty directors are responsible for the quality assurance and development of study administratie services at the faculty, including making sure the faculty has the necessary competency to support the academic leaders.
The faculty director is, together with UiS DC, responsible for appointing one candidate representative per Ph.D.-programme, and potentially also one per specialisation, who will represent the Ph.D.-candidates in the doctorate committee and any other relevante committees at the faculty. The faculty director, together with StOr, is responsible for the election of student representatives for all levels in all study programmes.
The faculty director, together with StOr, is responsible for the training of the student representatives for their role in the quality system.
Quality coordinators and study coordinators have different tasks in the work with quality.
Ph.D.-coordinator is the study coordinator at Ph.D.-level, as well as secretary for the doctorate committee. This includes participation towards quality assurance and development of the researchers education associated with the faculty, from admissions to public defence.
The supervised professional training coordinators work with accommodating for supervised professional training in the programmes where this is relevant, and participates in the evaluation of the supervised professional training.
External actors from the university and higher education sector contributes in connection with the accreditation of bachelor-, master's-, and Ph.D.-programmes, as well as in connection with the periodical evaluation of the programmes at the university.
External actors from industry and society contributes among other things in connection with periodical evaluation, and during completion and evaluation of supervised professional training, as well as with other study-relations to industry/work-life.
Work with quality and processes
Quality work at course level
The students and the academic environment's learning- and teaching activities happens in the courses. The quality work at course level must contribute to the improvement of the function and learning outcomes of the course. On the right you will find the quality processes at course level:
The purpose of the quality work at programme level is to ensure and develop the learning outcomes the students takes with them from their whole course of study. The quality work must also ensure that the programmes meet the accreditation critera decided in national regulations. The work is based on different results- and quality data collected from the individual study programme, the students, the academic environment, and other external sources. To ensure the continuous development of the programmes, and that they are current, evaluation- and revision processes are completed annually. The quality work at programme level entails quality assurance and -development in the bachelor- and master's degree programmes, executive master's degree programmes, Ph.D.-programmes, shorter studies, and further educations. On the left you can find the quality processes at programme level:
Quality work at portfolio level
The purpose of reviewing the total study portfolio of the university is to ensure that it keeps a high academic quality enhancing the coherence between education, research and innovation. The review should also contribute to strengthen the relevance of the studies, and make sure the university has a portfolio meeting the competency needs of society as a whole. The faculties and the board must have an annual review of the dimensioning of the programmes to make sure the use of resources is optimal. On the right you can find the quality processes at portfolio level:
Text in italics represents processes at faculty level
Boards, committees, councils and dialogical arenas
Boards, committees, councils and dialogical arenas at institutional level
Styret er øverste organ ved universitetet, og har etter Universitet- og høyskoleloven ansvaret for at den faglige virksThe UiS board is the supreme body of the university, and according to the Universities and University colleges Act, is responsible for ensuring the academic activity, and under this meaning that the educations maintains their high quality
The board decides the organisation of the business in all levels, and is suppoed to assure a structure that ensures the students and employees to be heard. The board shall decide the quality system, approve changes in the quality system, and propose changes themselves when necessary. The board will, through the case Quality in the portfolio get annual updates of the work with quality. The board will assess and approve the annual action plans, and put more action points in place of their own initiative when they see the need for this.
The board must also make sure the work with quality is included as a part of the strategic work of the institution, ans that the organisation executes its work with quality alligned with the current laws, regulations and decisions.
The education committee handles cases regarding the work with quality with authority from the board. The education committee is responsible for accreditation of bachelor-, master's-, and Ph.D.-programmes. The committee must approve periodical programme evaluations and re-accredit programmes.
The education committee handles and advices the boards in an annual case regarding quality in the portfolio
The learning environment committee are particularly responsivle for the quality in the environment where the studies are offered within. The learning environment committee works with the physical, psycho-social, organisational, digital ans pegagogical learning environment. The committee must, in their annual report lay a foundation for the university's systematic work with the learning environment, and take part in the planning of action points for development of the learning environment. The work is closely related to the work done by the education committee.
The reseach committee advices the board and the university management regarding research strategies and new research investments. The committee manages overall regulations, joint guidelines and routines for the Ph.D.-eduations. Further, the committee coordinates the work with the Ph.D.-educations, and contributes to the work with quality in the Ph.D.-programmes at the institution. The reseach committee suggests the distribution of the publicly financed Ph.D.-positions.
In addition to being an advisory organ, the reseach ethics committee must contribute to the research and the researcher educations at UiS happens in compliance with the current laws and regulations
The development dialogue i completed annualy by pro-rector for education, director of academic affairs and the faculty managements. The purpose is to accommodate for unified assessments of the development of the programme portfolio of the faculty, their plans for dimensioning of study places and plans for establishments and discontinuations of programmes. The dialogue is based on strategic assessments ans quality assessments in the portfolio reports of the faculties. It follows up the commissioning from the board to the faculties regarding the programme portfolio in march, and is a part of the foundation for the handling of the portfolio in the education committee and the board in September/October.
In addition, 3-4 meetings per year between pro-rector for education and dean/vice-dean for education is planned, where quality enhancing action points for the whole organisation is in focus.
Rektor gjennomgår årlig strategiske dialogmøter med fakultetene. Dialogene er en strukturert utveksling av informasjon, innspill og styringssignaler med tanke på langsiktig oppfølging av resultater og tiltak. Formålet med styringsdialogen er en gjennomgang av alle elementer i virksomhetsstyringen som inngår i universitetets planer og Rector has annual strategic dialogue meetings with the faculties. The dialogue is a structured exchange of information, inputs and managing signals regarding long-term follow-up of results and action points. The purpose of the management dialogue is a review of all elements in the business management included in the plans and yearly report of the university, such as the development of the portfolio of the faculty, as well as results development and quality work. The dialogue is included in the foundation for the case to the board regarding business management, particularly the work with the portfolio and study quality.
Boards, committees, councils and dialogical arenas at faculty level
The faculty boards decides the strategic plan for the faculty, and shall be a consultative body for strategic plans and other cases relevant for the faculty. The faculty board is also the supreme body of the faculty, with responsibility for the work with quality, learning environment and the portfolio. The board must therefor plan for, and oversee the work with quality at the faculty. This includes the further and continuing educations associated with the faculty. Faculties organised without institutes, must as a part of the faculty's plan for quality work describe how the responsibilities of the head of department (institute) is ensured and taken care of at the faculty. The faculty board can authorise the study portfolio committee to do tasks for them.
The faculty board suggests proposals for establishment/accreditation and discontinuances to the university management for handling in the education committee and the board. The faculty board also handles cases regarding the portfolio and work with quality at the faculty. The faculty board must also decide the study offers of the faculty up to and including 60 ECTS credits.
The study portfolio committee functions on authority delegation from the faculty board, and there will be one study portfolio committee at each faculty. The committee is led by vice-dean of education, and consists of the programme coordinators as well as student representatives. The study portfolio committee is an advisory organ for the dean. The study portfolio committees works with quality in the portfolio and the portfolio's development in regards to the focus areas of the university and coherence and synergies between programmes.
The dean, by vice-dean for education completes dialogues with all institutes/departments regarding the quality work. The basis for the dialogues is the programme reports. This makes the foundation for the annual work with the portfolio of the faculty and the portfolio report. The challenges ahead, action points and evaluations of these must particularly be in focus.
The department (institute) council advises the head of department (institute) on cases regarding the strategic plans for the department's (institute) subject area, study offerings, and the quality in these.
All programmes must have a study programme council, and all non-degree giving studies must be included in a study programme council. The study programme council is led by the programme coordinator and is an advisory organ composed of the programme's course coordinators, or representatives for these and student representatives.
The council completes a semester evaluation based on the course reports every semester, and is focused on the coherence between the taught courses and the teaching for the semester. After the academic year is completed, the council completes a programme evaluation as the basis for the programme report. The council is a dialogical arena for the programme coordinator when working on the semester report in the autumn semester, and programme report after every academic year.
The dialogue with students is completed as an early dialogue in all courses between course coordinator, student representatives and students. The purpose is feedback from the students for changes and adjustments in the course for the current semester. Minutes from the dialogue is included in the foundation for the semester evaluation and course report. It is important that the students are able to take part in the actions decided, and then also evaluate the consequences of these.
Every time the course is taught, the dialogue with students is completed early in the semester.
The dialogue must be completed between course coordinator and the students. The dialogue must be early enough in the semester for it to be possible to make changes and adjustments based on the students feedback, but far enough into the semester for the students to have relevant feedback. The early dialogue should focus on the students' expectations for the course, as well as their feedback so far.
On the basis of early dialogues, course evaluations and selected data. dialogues between the programme coordinators, course coordinators and students in study programme council is completed. The semester evaluation is documented in minutes from the study programme council and is included in the foundation for the programme evaluation and programme report, as well as the annual course- and programme revision.
Doktorgradsutvalgene handler delvis på delegasjon, delvis som rådgiver for dekan. Doktorgradsutvalget skal blant The doctorate comittees acts partly on delegation, and partly as advisory for the dean. The doctorate committee must oversee, ensure the quality and report from the faculty's researchers education, administer admissions of Ph.D.-candidates, approve supervisors, project plans and programmes, follow-up on progress for the Ph.D.-candidates, assess applications for the degree dr.philos and appoint a review board for Ph.D.- and dr.philos dissertations.
