Quality System for Education

Quality work applies to all types of studies and includes both degree programmes and shorter studies such as one-year units, continuing education, and individual courses that are not part of a degree programme.

The quality work shall ensure good learning for students, Ph.D. candidates, and staff. This requires clear processes maintained through development work, dialogues, evaluations, and other assessments and reporting at the course, study programme and study portfolio levels. The work processes are continuous, so that results and actions from the work at the course level are included in the work at the study programme level, which in turn is included in the work at the study portfolio level.

The quality work shall also contribute to UiS fulfilling its societal mission by providing environmentally, socially, and economically sustainable education of high international quality. The education programmes shall help meet society's and the labor market's needs for competence and be relevant for the future society and workforce.

Templates for quality work have been developed at the course, study programme, and study portfolio levels.

Students should experience a clear connection between the course’s learning outcomes, work methods, and assessment forms. Student participation in early dialogue and course evaluations are important contributions to the quality work.

The quality work in the courses shall ensure that course plans and learning outcomes are up-to-date and relevant and contribute to a good learning environment for students.

Early dialogue between the course coordinator and the students shall be conducted in all courses. The course coordinator, together with the students, shall evaluate the course as a basis for the course coordinator's reporting. The course coordinator completes the course report in a digital form, based on the early dialogue, student course evaluations, the assessments of the instructor(s) and the course coordinator, and possibly quantitative result data. The course reports form the basis for the annual course revision and are part of the foundation for the study programme evaluation and study programme report.

In several study programmes, especially in professional education, practice courses or other forms of practice are an important part of the learning activities. Evaluation of the practice is conducted by the students, the practice site, and the academic staff at UiS. These evaluations form the basis for dialogue between these parties.

After each fall semester, the study programme council shall conduct a semester evaluation based on the course reports. The evaluation shall particularly focus on the coherence between the courses and the teaching during the semester.

For the Ph.D. programmes, the arrangement is different: it is each subject in the mandatory training part that should be evaluated. The faculties/course coordinators decide themselves which form of evaluation is most appropriate. For certain elective subjects and individual courses, no course report is written; these are reported as part of the annual progress reporting.

The quality work at the study programme level is aimed at the learning outcomes that students take with them from the entire course of study, and how the students acquire this.

The quality work at the study programme level takes place both as annual processes and processes that have longer intervals. The evaluation and revision processes shall ensure that the study programmes are up to date and in continuous development.

Study programme evaluations occur annually and are based on results and quality data collected from each study programme, students, the academic community, and external sources. The evaluation is accounted for in a study programme report. The study programme report should be based on subject reports, evaluation of study abroad experiences, and possibly practice reports. Additionally, the report may address measures from previously conducted periodic study programme evaluations.

The Study Programme Coordinator is responsible for the study programme evaluation and the study programme report. The study programme reports are processed in the faculty’s councils and committees and form the basis for the annual programme revisions.

The quality work in Ph.D. programmes follows the provisions of the quality system regarding evaluation and reporting, but to preserve the unique characteristics of these educations, specific guidelines have been developed for them.

The study programme coordinator for Ph.D. programmes is responsible for the study programme evaluation and the study programme report. In Ph.D. educations, the vice-dean for research will often be the study programme coordinator.

The study programme report at the Ph.D. level should be based on course reports, candidates’ progress reports, mid-term evaluations, and evaluations of study abroad. Read more about quality work at the Ph.D. level.

The faculty processes the study programme reports in the doctoral committee and possibly in other councils and committees. The reports are included in the faculty’s study portfolio report, which is handled by the faculty board.

Every five years, all study programmes must undergo a periodic evaluation. The result of this process is reaccreditation or discontinuation. In the year a study programme undergoes periodic evaluation, an annual study programme evaluation should not be conducted.

The development of new studies is a thorough process that follows its own guidelines. It is the dean who accredits and establishes study offers up to 60 credits. Studies over 60 credits are accredited by the education committee and established by the board.

Accreditation is an official approval from an authorized authority, confirming that a study programme meets the standards and criteria that apply to higher education. The approval should be based on an academic and administrative assessment.

The University of Stavanger’s portfolio is to be developed in accordance with the University’s strategy and societal mission and have high international quality that promotes coherence between education, research, and innovation.

The faculties offer a coherent portfolio through the three degree levels of bachelor’s, master’s, and Ph.D., which should be in line with UiS and the faculty’s strategy as well as political governance signals. The study offerings should meet the students’ and society’s need for competence and reflect the faculties’ academic composition, competence, and distinctiveness. The programmes should provide a good and relevant learning outcome for the students, a good working and learning environment for students and staff and take care of the need for lifelong learning.

The faculties’ study portfolio reports are included in the University Board’s annual processing of UiS’s total study portfolio. The faculties’ study portfolio reports should summarize development and improvement areas that are particularly relevant to the faculties’ study offerings. The study portfolio assessments should contain qualitative assessments of the faculty’s total study portfolio. The assessments should be based on study programme reports, results from relevant student surveys, and quantitative student and education data. The faculties’ study portfolio report is processed in the faculty board.

The Faculty and University management continuously work with the development, composition, and size of the study portfolio. This work forms the basis for the Board’s determination of the framework for admission to studies at UiS for the coming academic year.

The Rector’s strategic dialogue meetings with the faculties cover all elements of business management included in the university’s plans and annual report, including the faculty’s development of the study portfolio, result development, and quality work. The dialogue is part of the basis for the board’s case presentations in matters of business management.

The Pro-Rector for Education conducts annual development dialogues with the faculties. The purpose is to facilitate agreed assessments of the development of the faculty’s study portfolio, plans for the sizing of study places, and plans for new establishments and discontinuation of study programmes. The dialogue is based on strategic and economic assessments as well as the quality assessments in the faculties’ study portfolio reports. The dialogue is part of the basis for the education committee’s and the board’s processing of the study portfolio in September/October.

Students and Ph.D. candidates contribute to the quality work in various ways and through different channels, including providing feedback through various student surveys such as course evaluations, the Study Barometer, candidate surveys, SHoT, and others. All councils and committees working to develop the studies have student representation organized through the student organization StOr. Ph.D. candidates have their own representatives in councils and committees working with Ph.D. educations.

Quality work at the course level involves students, Ph.D. candidates, elected representatives, course coordinators, and lecturers. 

Students participate in an early dialogue with the course coordinator and fellow students about the particular course. Here, the focus is on the students’ expectations for teaching and learning. At a minimum, every third time the course is conducted, students participate in digital course evaluation, the students’ course evaluation.

Ph.D. candidates play a similar role in the quality work in courses in the training part. Course evaluation is conducted in compulsory Ph.D. courses. 

Being a course representative is an important task. The course representative is the representative and closest contact person for fellow students in the course. One can be a course representative for several courses.

The course coordinator is responsible for the implementation and follow-up of teaching and learning activities that contribute to the students and Ph.D. candidates achieving the learning outcomes for the course. Good cooperation and dialogue between students/Ph.D. candidates and the course coordinator are central to the quality of education and the learning environment.

The course coordinator is responsible for the course being evaluated and reported on.

It is the study coordinator/consultant who ensures the quality of the work and follows up on course revision. The study coordinator’s role as a quality assurer means that they are a driver for quality in and development of the study offerings.

The quality work at the study programme level involves students, Ph.D. candidates, programme and course representatives, course coordinators, study programme coordinators, and the academic community of the study programme. The study programme council is advisory to the study programme coordinator, while the department head is responsible for the systematic quality work in all study programmes at the department.

Students contribute to the development of the study programme, among other things, by participating in surveys that address quality in education (the Study Barometer, candidate surveys, SHoT, and others), through study programme elected representatives, or by participating in student democracy themselves. See also: The Student Representative arrangement and the Student Representatives' Guide.

The study programme representative has a permanent place in the study programme council and represents all the study directions included in the study programme. By actively contributing to the study programme evaluations and study programme reporting, students can help influence the development of the study programme. Elected representatives in the course and study programme have overlapping roles, and often a course elected representative will also be a study programme elected representative.

The study programme coordinator is to contribute to the development of the learning environment and academic and pedagogical quality in the study programme and is responsible for the annual study programme report. The study programme coordinator’s function is exercised in close dialogue and cooperation with the dean, department head, course coordinators, lecturers, and student elected representatives.

All study programmes at the bachelor’s and master’s levels must have a study programme council. Where appropriate, several study programmes can have one joint study programme council. The council may consist of course coordinators, other scientific staff, student representatives, and technical-administrative staff. Faculty and department management have the right to meet and speak in the study programme council.

In Ph.D. programmes, the vice-dean for research is responsible for evaluation, reporting, and processing in the Ph.D. programme’s doctoral committee. In these educations, the doctoral committees have a function similar to the study programme councils. Read more about quality work at the Ph.D. level.

The department head is responsible for the systematic quality work in all study programmes at the department as well as for the management and follow-up of the department’s study programme coordinators. This also involves responsibility for follow-up when quality failures are uncovered.

The study coordinator and quality coordinator are responsible for the coordination and implementation of study programme reports in collaboration with the study programme coordinator. The study coordinator is the secretary of the study programme council.

The quality work at the study portfolio level involves study portfolio trustees, study portfolio committees, faculty boards, the Education Committee, and the Board, as well as faculty and university management.

The study portfolio representative represents all students at a faculty or university, either as a student representative on department councils, study portfolio committees, faculty boards, in central councils, committees, or on the board. The study portfolio trustee’s tasks thus vary depending on which council, committee, or board they sit on. The tasks associated with each individual council, committee, and board are accounted for in the Student Representatives' Guide

UiS DC is the interest organization for Ph.D. candidates and post-docs. UiS DC is responsible for appointing representatives to faculty and central committees.

The Faculty Director is responsible for quality assurance and development of study administrative services at the faculty, and for the faculty having the necessary administrative support for the quality work in the faculty’s study programme and portfolio. The Quality Coordinator is central to the coordination and work with the faculty’s study portfolio evaluation and report.

The Pro-Dean for Education is the dean’s closest advisor on educational matters and coordinates academic activities in this area.

The Dean shall facilitate and stimulate high quality in education, good research environments, and academic development. The dean is responsible for all studies having appropriate management and that all study programmes are included in a study programme council.

The Faculty Board is the faculty’s supreme body responsible for quality work, the learning environment, and the study portfolio. The Board shall plan and oversee the faculty’s quality work, handle cases of accreditation, establishment, and discontinuation of studies, and other matters concerning the faculty’s study portfolio.

The Faculty Board may establish a study portfolio committee to assist the Board and the Dean in the development of the faculty’s study portfolio. The committee is led by the Pro-Dean for Education and consists of study programme coordinators as well as student representatives.

The Director of Education is administratively responsible for the quality system and oversees the ongoing monitoring and revision of the quality system.

The Pro-Rector for Education has the academic responsibility for the quality work in the educations and shall contribute to developing good educational competence at UiS. The Pro-Rector is to advise the Rector and the faculties on educational matters and contribute to the further development of the university’s total study portfolio, in line with society’s need for knowledge and competence.

The Pro-Rector for Research is responsible for development and quality work in doctoral educations in dialogue with the Pro-Rector for Education. The Pro-Rector for research shall lead the central research and innovation committee, strengthen the connection between education, research, innovation, and societal contact, and stimulate a culture of quality.

The rector has the overall responsibility for all quality work at UiS. The rectorate will be in dialogue with the units about the ongoing quality work through its regular management forums and in the annual dialogue meetings with the faculties. The rector is the secretary of the university board and is responsible for presenting cases about the quality work for processing by the Board.

The Education Committee handles cases concerning the quality work, accredits new bachelor’s, master’s, and Ph.D. studies, approves periodic programme evaluations, and reaccredits degree programmes. The committee processes and advises the board in the annual case of Quality in the Study Portfolio. The Board is the highest body at the university and, according to the University and College Act, is responsible for ensuring that the academic activities and educations maintain high quality. The board shall ensure that quality work is central to the strategic work at the institution and that the organization performs the quality work in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, statutes, and decisions. Through the case of Quality in the Study Portfolio, the board receives annual reports on the quality work and overarching action plans.

• Higher Education | Government of Norway (In Norwegian)
• Letter of Assignment for 2022, UiS | Government of Norway (In Norwegian)
• National Frameworks | Government of Norway (In Norwegian)
• Regulations | Government of Norway
• Higher Education | NOKUT
• Norwegian Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning | NOKUT
• Quality Areas for Study Programmes in Higher Education | NOKUT
• Quality Summaries - Higher Education | NOKUT (In Norwegian)
• Distribution of authority and deadlines for accreditation, establishment and closure of studies at the University of Stavanger | UiS (In Norwegian)
• Procedure for the work towards accreditation and the establishment of new degree studies at UiS, pdf | UiS (In Norwegian)
• Accreditation of studies at the University of Stavanger, revised November 2022, pdf | UiS (In Norwegian)
• Guidelines and Procedures for the Periodic Evaluation and Reaccreditation of Study Programmes | UiS
• Regulations and forms related to PhD education | UiS
• Quality System for Education, UiS internal site (for employees only)

• Student ombudsperson at UiS
• Let us know!