To assure the quality of its study programmes, the University of Antwerp has developed a six-year cycle for study programme evaluation. The system is based on the confidence in the quality assurance and quality culture of the study programmes, which all have been accredited by NVAO twice.
The programme evaluation complies with the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Higher Education.
The six-year cycle consists of three parts:
- Systematic care of educational development (SYZO) Systematic processes
- Internal process monitoring and guidance (IPS) in year 3 of the cycle
- Self-reflection with peer review (ZPR) in year 6 of the cycle
Systematic care of educational development: Throughout the six-year cycle, the study programmes organise different evaluations, analyses and follow-up, such as the evaluation of courses by means of student surveys, measurement of study time, sounding board group discussions with alumni and the professional field, discussions with focus groups, programme evaluations andan external benchmark of the master thesis. The resulting documents or actions are demonstrated in the education portfolio of the faculty and the programme portfolio.
Internal process monitoring and guidance: The department of Education evaluates the programme, and examines to what extend the systematic care of educational development is sufficiently and qualitatively embedded in the daily functioning of the Educational Commission. Based on the education portfolio of the faculty and the programme, the department of Education defines strengths and weaknesses. The department of Education and the vice-rector of education discuss the results with the representatives of the programme. The report of this discussion is presented to the Education Board.
This planning table shows which study programme is scheduled for Internal process monitoring and guidance in the future and when the results are presented to the Education Board.
Self-reflection with peer review: Ones every six years the study programme reflects more systematically and thoroughly on the quality of the programme, the results and future challenges and discusses these with two external and two internal experts and a student (not in the study programme). This peer review team visits the study programme and looks into the quality of education, based on documentation and discussions. At the end of the visit the peer review team expresses whether it has confidence in the (future) quality of the study programme. Ina feedback conversation with the study programme representatives, the peer review team also highlights strengths and weaknesses of the study programme. Based on this feedback the study programme writes a development plan. The peer review report, together with the development plan, is presented to the Education Board and to the Executive Board of the university. The university Board for Programme Evaluation validates the experts and the peer review report and guarantees that the final judgement of the peer review team has been made accurately, fairly and objectively.
This planning table shows which study programme is scheduled for a peer review visit in the future and when the results appear on the website of the study programme.
Approved peer review reports of English-taught study programmes:
Master of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy