AUAS logo

Quality Assurance

The quality assurance policy of the AUAS is directed at continuously safeguarding the merit of accreditation and quality of our degree programmes.

The AUAS adheres to sound internal quality assurance.  Working systematically towards maintaining the good quality of our education, we introduce improvements when necessary. We do this according to the Deming’s PDCA cycle methodology: plan, do, check, act.

The AUAS adheres to the following quality assurance cycles:

  • The cycle of accreditation and internal audits. Policy Document Internal Audit (integral quality); 
  • The planning and control cycle (management control);
  • The primary-process evaluation cycle (the monitoring of educational quality from the perspective of the stakeholders, with the aid of tools from the related research institution.

The following three questions are key to assessing and assuring quality: 

  • What is the programme aiming for?
  • How is the programme realising this aim?
  • Is the programme achieving its objectives?

The quality assurance system is composed of interconnected quality cycles, which have their own objectives and dynamics.

Internal audits provide insight and are focused on improvement. External assessments, conducted by a visitation panel once every six years, are a precondition for an accreditation application with the NVAO (Accreditation Organisation of the Netherlands and Flanders). Because the audit has the function of a mid-term review, it will be carried out at the mid-point of the six-year accreditation cycle. This gives the degree programme time to employ improvements, based in part on the findings and recommendations of the panel and the data from the related research institution.

The framework for limited assessments of existing programmes is used for institutions that have obtained a positive judgement following an institutional quality assurance assessment. The (AUAS) Institutional Audit was Positive from 5 November 2013 until 4 November 2019. The assessment is based on a discussion with peers regarding the content and quality of the programme.

The three 'assessment framework' questions have been translated into standards. Regarding each of these, an assessment panel gives a substantiated judgement on a four-point scale: unsatisfactory, satisfactory, good or excellent. The panel subsequently gives a substantiated final conclusion regarding the overall quality of the programme, on the same four-point scale.

 

The three standards

Intended learning outcomes

Standard 1: The intended learning outcomes of the programme have been concretised with regard to content, level and orientation; they meet international requirements.

Explanation: As for level and orientation (Bachelor's or Master's; professional or academic), the intended learning outcomes fit into the Dutch qualifications framework. In addition, they tie in with the international perspective of the requirements currently set by the professional field and the discipline with regard to the contents of the programme.

Teaching-learning environment

Standard 2: The curriculum, staff and programme-specific services and facilities enable the incoming students to achieve the intended learning outcomes.

Explanation: The contents and structure of the curriculum enable the admitted students to achieve the intended learning outcomes. The quality of the staff and of the programme-specific services and facilities is essential to this end. Curriculum, staff, services and facilities constitute a coherent teaching-learning environment for the students.

Assessment and achieved learning outcomes

Standard 3: The programme has an adequate assessment system in place and demonstrates that the intended learning outcomes are achieved.

Explanation: The level achieved is demonstrated by interim and final tests, final projects and the performance of graduates in actual practice or in post-graduate programmes. The tests and assessments are valid, reliable and transparent to the students.

Published by  Communication 21 August 2018