The UAB monitoring process
Within the VSMA Framework, once a verified degree has been implemented, the process for monitoring begins (degrees and masters / doctoral programs). The follow-up is the process of analyzing the development of the degree in terms of the quality of the training program, pertinence of public information, effectiveness of the Quality Assurance System, teacher adequacy, effectiveness of learning support systems and quality of the results. The final objective is to assure the quality of the training program
- guarantee the continuous analysis of the development of bachelor's degrees implemented. The detection of proposals for improvement to promote the improvement of the quality of the training program
- to be evidence for the subsequent accreditation of the bachelor's degree
This process has to allow:
- to detect the strong and weak points of the bachelor's degree
- to identify the most problematic aspects and to plan improvement actions
- to gather evidences of the degree pace that help in the periodical external evaluation processes and in the renewal of the accreditation
- to give account to society of the use of public resources of the results achieved and the degree of satisfaction of the different agents
It is important to insist in the fact that these reports reflect, based on available indicators and evidences, the analysis task of the degree development and of the possible improvement proposals. These reports are not the real purpose of the monitoring task but simply its observable aspect.
Bachelor and master degrees:
- The degree coordinators, in cooperation with Teaching Commissions and/or coordination teams, analyse the development of the degree and prepare the degree monitoring report (DST), that they send to the dean/director of the centre.
- The Centres (Faculties and Schools) are responsible to guarantee the development and the quality of their bachelor’s and master’s degrees. The Centres revise the DST of their degrees and prepare the centre monitoring report (ISC), that they send to the vice-rector in charge of the teaching quality assurance.
- The university steering committee, according to the information they receive through the different ISC, prepare the university monitoring report (ISU), that helps to analyse needs and resources and to give account to the government bodies in charge of higher education issues.
- The coordinators, in cooperation with Teaching commissions and/or coordination teams, analyse the development of the programme and prepare the Doctoral Programme Monitoring Report (ISPD).
- The Doctoral School, according to the information they receive from the different ISPD, prepare the University doctoral programmes monitoring report (ISUPD) that helps to analyse needs and resources and to give account to the government bodies in charge of higher education issues.
Bachelor and master degrees:
The first UAB monitoring report on the degrees that was undertaken during the academic year 2009/2010, analysed 47 degrees (22 bachelor’s degrees and 25 master’s degrees), that supposed approximately the 40% of the total.
The ISU of the academic year 2010/2011, that included 163 degrees (76 bachelor’s degrees and 27 master’s degrees), analysed practically the totality of bachelor’s degrees and the 90% of master’s degrees.
Since the academic year 2011/2012, all the university degrees are undertaking the monitoring report, except for the interuniversity degrees not coordinated by the UAB and for the Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degrees.
2011/12: ISU Informe Seguiment UAB i IVSU Valoració AQU
2010/11: ISU Informe Seguiment UAB i IVSU Valoració AQU
2009/10: ISU Informe Seguiment UAB i IVSU Valoració AQU
The doctoral programmes monitoring process referred to the academic year 2015/2016, when the UAB Doctoral Programmes Monitoring Report was prepared, gathers the analysis and the assessment of 38 programmes in total (6 implemented the academic year 2012/2013 and 32 the academic year 2013/2014).
ISUPD Informe de seguiment UAB programes de doctorat 2015/16
The annual reflection process on the development of the degrees has to be the base of the accreditation. In the sense that this accreditation has to be the culmination of the monitoring process. Therefore, these two processes have to be understood as only one: a process of continuous improvement that concludes with the external validation of the results accomplished.