Evaluation

The Faculty Board has decided that, from 2023, all levels of education and research at the subject environments will be evaluated simultaneously. This will take place every six years. The evaluations are to be conducted by external experts. In addition to self-evaluation, dissertations/theses and interviews with students, doctoral students and staff, the documentation includes summaries of information about the environment (including the composition of the collegium, expertise and publications, course evaluations) and documents such as course syllabuses, general syllabuses and individual study plans.

The scholarly content and subject relevance of the education are evaluated in relation to nationally determined learning outcomes, the changing needs of society and the latest research, as well as research results and activities, from national and international subject perspectives.

The experts must highlight strengths and areas for development and give each area (first, second and third-cycle education and research) a rating of High Quality or Unsatisfactory Quality. The Faculty Board decides on the result of the evaluation. For areas rated as Unsatisfactory Quality, the subject environment must report measures taken after one year. Three years after the evaluation, the Faculty Board will invite the subject environment to a ‘quality dialogue’ about its ongoing quality work and development.

If an evaluation identifies serious shortcomings, the Faculty Board contacts the vice-chancellor. This also happens if deficiencies are detected via a programme report, etc. The vice-chancellor and the Faculty Board also conduct an annual follow-up during which a summary of the completed evaluations is presented and then discussed.

Adapted evaluations are carried out for areas whose organisation differs from that of the academic schools.

Follow up

The Faculty Board conducts university-wide surveys to investigate the attitudes and experiences of students and doctoral students. These surveys are conducted every three years.

A programme report must be written every three years, with analysis and reflections on the status of the relevant programme and its development. It is produced by the relevant programme council and programme convenor. The report will primarily provide support for programme development but is also a basis for follow ups at the academic school, etc., and one element of the documentation for the quality dialogue.

Results of course assessments are dealt with by collegial bodies (which include student representatives) at the level of subjects and programmes at academic schools/the equivalent. There are university guidelines for course evaluations, validated by the Faculty Board.

External review

The Swedish Higher Education Authority (Universitetskanslersämbetet, UKÄ) evaluates quality assurance work at Swedish higher education institutions. In this HEI audit (‘lärosätesgranskning’), Södertörn University received the highest rating of three – Approved quality assurance processes (Godkänd kvalitet) – after remedying the problems identified by the review (the review was conducted in 2021 and the final verdict given in February 2024). For more information, please visit the Swedish Higher Education Authority’s website External link, opens in new window..