Comments: To facilitate the analysis of this document presented below is a list of abbreviations used in the document:

Transkrypt

1 Application Form for Accreditation Agencies Comments: To facilitate the analysis of this document presented below is a list of abbreviations used in the document: KAUT - Komisja Akredytacyjna Uczelni Technicznych [Accreditation Commission of Universities of Technology] KRPUT Konferencja Rektorów Polskich Uczelni Technicznych [Conference of Rectors of Polish Universities of Technology] KRASP - Konferencja Rektorów Akademickich Szkół Polskich [Conference of Rectors of Academic Schools in Poland] KA KRASP Komisja Akredytacyjna Konferencji Rektorów Akademickich Szkół Polskich [Accreditation Commission of the Conference of Rectors of Academic Schools in Poland] PKA Państwowa Komisja Akredytacyjna [The State Accreditation Committee] MNiSzW Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego [Ministry of Science and Higher Education] "Memorandum Memorandum of Understanding of the Conference of Rectors of Polish Universities of Technology on the Quality of Teaching and Learning Process "Rules Rules and Manner of Accreditation Procedure MOSTECH Programme of the domestic student exchange UKA University Accreditation Commission KAAUM Accreditation Commission of Medical Universities KA FPAKE Foundation for the Promotion and Accreditation of Economic Education KAUR Accreditation Commission of Agricultural Universities KAUP Accreditation Commission of Pedagogical Schools KAUWF Accreditation Commission of Universities of Physical Education 1

2 I. Basic Information Accreditation Commission of Universities of Technology Office Akademia Górniczo-Hutnicza [University of Science and Technology in Krakow] Al. A. Mickiewicza Kraków pavilion A0, room 101 tel. (+48 12) fax. (+48 12) Jarosław Bułka, Ph.D., Engineer, Secretary of KAUT 2. History and development of the agency The Accreditation Commission of Universities of Technology (KAUT) was appointed on 17 th February 2001 by the Conference of Rectors of Polish Universities of Technology under the "Memorandum of Understanding of Rectors of Universities of Technology on the Quality of the Teaching and Learning Process (hereinafter referred to as the "Memorandum (Attachment no. 1). The "Memorandum" introduced a voluntary accreditation system to which all engineering-specific programmes are subjected. All matters related to the activity of KAUT such as the manner and rules of appointing the Commission, tasks of the Commission, general and accreditation procedures are laid down by KRPUT. The "Memorandum" was subsequently approved by the Senates [authorities] of all Schools and Universities that are the signatories of the Memorandum. The basis of KAUT's activity is the above-mentioned "Memorandum and the "Rules and Manner of the Accreditation Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules ) adopted on 17 February 2001 as amended on 21 st May 2009 (Attachment no. 2). The Chair of the Commission in the term is Professor Bohdan Macukow, Doctor Habilitated, Engineer appointed by KRPUT on 16 th January 2009 (Attachment no. 3). The system of higher education in Poland since 1990 is based on the Law of Higher Education (Journal of Laws No. 65 item 385 of 12 Sept and Journal of Laws No. 164 item 1365 of 30 Aug. 2005). Also, in the beginning of the 1990s, together with political changes, the universities in Poland received broad autonomy which resulted in a rapid creation of many non-state universities. In 1990 there was 106 state HEIs and 6 non-state. In 2010 there is 112 state and 325 non-state HEIs. Thus, the number of students grew from 400 thousand in 1990 to 2 million in The biggest growth was in the field of humanities, which became the biggest part of the offer of more than 300 newly founded private universities. The number of fields of study grew up to almost 120. Unfortunately, the 2

3 engineering and technical students constitute only 13 % of all the students. The Bologna Process has started in late 1990 transforming the system of uniform 5-year model to the two cycles system with the adoption of all necessary mechanisms (i.e. establishment of a credit point system ECTS, promotion of mobility of students, teachers, researches and administrators, adoption of a system of easily readable and comparable degrees, promotion of European cooperation in quality assurance, promotion of a European dimension in higher education with regards to curricula development, inter-institutional cooperation, mobility schemes and integrated programmes of study, training and research, implementation of the qualification frameworks in the EHEA based on learning outcomes). 3. Motivation of the application KAUT is one of the local Commissions functioning within the framework of the statutorily appointed Conference of Rectors of Academic Schools in Poland (KRASP), whose activities promoting the higher education system are regarded by Rectors as vital and necessary. In Poland, in addition to the local accreditation system, there is also the State Accreditation Committee (PKA) which is an agency of the Government Administration intended to ensure the compliance with the prevailing regulations by the higher education units. PKA is the guardian of the standards understood as the conditions necessary to provide educational services at a higher level, while the local Commissions focus on the assessment of these qualities which cannot be assessed by PKA. The areas of KAUT's activities include the following: Accreditation of educational programmes, Handling of the domestic student exchange programme - MOSTECH, Offering support to universities with respect to implementation of the internal and external education quality assurances systems, Promoting "best practice" examples and implementing education quality assurance systems at universities. The key objective of the local accreditation is identifying the university units which provide education services at the highest level, i.e. promoting the establishment of the elite of higher education units. Especially now, in a situation in which the entire higher education system in Poland is to undergo vast changes related to the introduction of the National Qualification Framework and the entirely new perception of the education process, the local Commissions are an important element in the establishment of the mechanisms guaranteeing its high level. It is necessary to combine the supervisory nature of PKA with the activities of the local Commissions in favour of creating a "quality culture. The KAUT accreditation should become one of the most important promotional elements of the universities. 3

4 II. Accreditation Standards and Procedure Programme Outcomes 1. The six Programme Outcomes defined in the "EUR-ACE Framework Standards for the Accreditation of Engineering Programmes are: Knowledge and Understanding, Engineering Analysis, Engineering Design, Investigations, Engineering Practice, Transferable Skills. The analysis of engineering programs to be accredited performed by KAUT is based on the main assumptions: 1. Qualifications require to be precisely defined at each higher education level. It means credits for the First Cycle Degree, credits for the Second Cycle Degree (totally at least 300 credits). 2. Definition of the relationship in the learning outcomes for First and Second Cycle. This arises the problem coming from opposite postulates: "logic of Qualifications Framework "increase of competences, i.e. entering higher level demands "openness of the Second Cycle for candidates with different character of competences as a result of different First Cycle programmes (vertical mobility). Generally it is assumed that learning outcomes for the "higher cycle have to be more in depth and extent (more advanced knowledge and skills), but they can be in narrower area. For the First and Second Cycle it means that the learning outcomes of the Second Cycle are based on the competences derived from the First Cycle, but not necessarily all of them. 3. Some Quantitative targets for the First and Second Cycle programs which are based on the Ministry of Higher Education regulations: knowledge of mathematics, physics, chemistry and other area of engineering necessary to formulate and solve problems in the discipline at least 40 credits (20% credits for general profile), including mathematics at least 18 credits, and physics 12 credits, knowledge and skills connected to non-technical aspects of engineering profession and other non-technical general skills and competences at least 32 credits (app. 15% credits for general profile), including ability of communicate effectively in foreign languages at least 12 credits, 4

5 fundamental knowledge and skills connected with engineering sciences and engineering design appropriate to the student s field of study at least 50% credits of a program. 4. Ability to communicate in foreign languages after the First Cycle one foreign language at least on the B2 level of fluency according to the Council of Europe s Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. 5. Practical placement First Cycle o depending of the area of engineering 4-8 weeks (defined by the Ministry of Higher Education regulations). Second Cycle o higher educational institution decision. The basic element of the evaluation of the agency subjected to accreditation is a formal from the point of view of satisfaction of the university standards and a subject matter evaluation of the training programme with respect to the mission fulfilment and satisfaction of the adopted educational goals (learning outcomes). In Poland, educational programmes must comply with the so-called education standards laid down in the relevant directive of the Minister of Science and Higher Education. Programme requirements (minima) are a collection of rules for higher education in a given subject area and at a specified level of education. Apart from general data such as length of duration of studies, number of ECTS points etc., the requirements outline the content of education and the qualifications and competences of a graduate defined by the outcomes of education. Programme minima incorporated the most essential aspects of a given field (of engineering). According to the Law of Higher Education the requirements are a set of rules concerning higher studies education offered in different forms within fields of studies, macrofields of studies, and interdisciplinary studies. Educational standards are defined at three levels: General requirements, referring to all forms, levels and fields of studies, highlighting the primary structure of the graduate s qualifications and defining types of diplomas. There exist three modules in these standards: foreign language, information technology and sports. Basic requirements, referring to study area it is a group of basic courses. Specialist requirements referring to particular fields of studies within a given study area it is a group of specialist courses. At each level requirements are defined through characterising the knowledge, i.e. the educational contents specific for a given scientific discipline, and the study outcomes specifying skills and competences, i.e. defining the activities that a graduate is able to perform, including the specialist and the universal ones (independent studying, interpersonal communication, team work, etc). Obviously the requirements are formulated 5

6 so as not to create too-fixed frameworks and not to result in unifying study curricula for a given field offered at different universities. The study contents resulting from the requirements have to be complemented with the elements making a given university unique among others and facilitating realisation of its mission. This year in Poland, the National Qualification Frameworks have been developed which are in the final stage of local level consultations. In the area of engineering (Sectoral Benchmark) there were assumed following assumptions: use of existing solutions, fit with international standards, wide discussion with the stakeholders. The learning outcomes descriptors have to fit together with qualification descriptors describe in European and national documents like: Qualifications Framework for EHEA (Dublin Descriptors). Qualifications Framework for Long Life Learning. National Qualifications Framework (for Poland). Speaking in the wide Engineering Sector, we can identify a number of relevant initiatives, again driven by different objectives, hence with somewhat different structures: EUR-ACE (EURopean ACcredited Engineer project) framework for accreditation of engineering programmes. ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, USA). CDIO (Conceive-Design-Implement-Operate initiative). JABEE (Japan Accreditation Board for Engineering Education). IEA (International Engineering Alliance). Programme Organisation 2. How do you assess whether the teaching programme is organised, managed and maintained in a way that ensures that the Programme Outcomes are achieved? The assessment whether a particular teaching programme is property organised, managed and maintained so as to ensure the fulfilment of the assumed learning outcomes is carried out in three stages. In the first stage, the agency fulfilling the programme carries out the assessment within the framework of one of the versions of the self-assessment report related to the current accreditation proceedings. Four self-assessment report versions are applicable and correspond to the following situations: Resumption of the accreditation of the fields of studies by the Accreditation Commission (KAUT); First accreditation of the field of study while having a KAUT accreditation of other programme offered by the same organizational unit; 6

7 Accreditation of the field of study offered by an agency which has not been awarded any of the KAUT accreditations, yet a KAUT accreditation was granted to another agency of the university; KAUT accreditation granted to the university for the first time (Attachment no. 4). The self-assessment reports in these versions differ in the informational content concerning the higher education institution and its agency (part A) while parts B concerning the detailed assessment of the field of study offered by the agency are the same for all reports. At the same time, while obtaining a KAUT accreditation, it is necessary to obtain the accreditation of the State Accreditation Committee whose one of the tasks is to evaluate the satisfaction of the national requirements concerning the programme content as laid down by the Minister of Science and Higher Education in the directive on educational standards concerning the particular types of studies. The outcomes of the educational programme are declared in the mission statement of the HEI in the graduate profile of a particular faculty and in the syllabuses of the subjects taught in the ccredited fields of study. The issues related to the organization of the educational programme ensuring the achievement of the curricular effects are discussed in the following items of the Part B of the self-assessment report: in the 1 st Part, item 6, concerning the documented cooperation with the domestic and foreign universities and research centres carried out on the basis of agreements, memorandums of understanding, etc. within the scope concerning a particular field/programme; in the 1 st Part, item 7, concerning the documented exchange of the teaching staff with other universities with respect to teaching tasks; in the 2 nd Part, items 1 and 2, concerning the necessity to prepare a diploma project (engineering tasks) and the detailed description of the manner of performance of such works is given in the 3 rd Part, items 20 25; in the 2 nd Part, items 3 6, concerning the necessity to ensure student's internships and their organisation in correlation with the assumed effects of the programmes of the studies; in the 2 nd Part, item 10, concerning the necessity to identify such elements of the basic subject teaching which allow the students to acquire the general and specialisation content and thus achieve the assumed programme outcomes; in the 2 nd Part, item 14, concerning the description of the manner of achievement of these educational programme outcomes which are directly related to professional competences of the graduates; the entire 3 rd Part describing the system and organisation of education with particular emphasis on the following issues: o presentation of complete information about the teaching and learning offer, the rules of fulfilment of the curricula and syllabuses, teaching and learning programmes and studies plans to the students; 7

8 o exhaustive presentation of the assumed programme outcomes such as the graduate knowledge, competences and skills, and the related discussion of the training process outcome assessment methods used by the HEI and identification of the subjects and tools used to achieve the objectives related to the graduate qualifications; o issues related to the organisation and maintenance of the system ensuring the efficient fulfilment of the assumed programme objectives by using the proper rules of planning, fulfilment and monitoring of the course of studies; o student questionnaire concerning among other things the assessment of the fulfilment of the intended curricular objectives; o ensuring the proper subject matter level of the teaching staff enhancing the achievement of the assumed programme outcomes; o correlation of the student training programme with the research work of the university on the practical as well as implementation level; Majority of the issues presented in the 4 th Part concerning the educational conditions and in particular: o adaptation of the teaching infrastructure, mainly the classrooms and labs, to the plans and curricula of the studies programmes ensuring in particular the maintenance of the relevant effects of the engineering teaching using IT tools; o issues related to the cooperation with the business, administrative and selfgovernment units in the areas related to the fulfilment of the assumed programmes outcomes; o student engagement in the research and practical works carried out by a particular HEI; o availability of library information and electronic databases related to the course of studies. The entire Part D, where the activities of the agency related to the implementation of the system of verification of the teaching and learning effects are presented; this part is of a descriptive nature and allows the institution to present its most important achievements. The second stage of the assessment encompasses visitation of the agency by the examination team appointed from among the members reported by the universities signatories of the "Memorandum in the secret ballot at the plenary meeting of KAUT (Attachment no. 1). The candidates must be supported by the local universities and will be subsequently approved by KAUT at a plenary session. The evaluation team is composed of the representatives of the universities yet excluding the representative of the university subjected to accreditation, representatives of employers, students or Ph.D. students. The university teaching staff who are members of the assessment team are high quality experts in the field of study subjected to accreditation and guarantee performance of reliable assessment with regard to both the subject matter and organisation of the accredited course of studies. Having become familiar with the self-assessment report and after its analysis, the 8

9 Team carries out a two or three-day site visit followed by a report (Attachment no. 5). Its layout and content are harmonized with the standards applicable to the course of studies concerning the education quality adopted by KAUT. A model quality standard for the electronics and telecommunications faculty is given in (Attachment no. 6). Such standards are prepared for all technical studies accredited by KAUT. The report prepared by the assessment team includes, among other things, the information concerning the evaluation whether or not a particular programme (curriculum) of the accredited field of study is properly organised, managed and maintained so as to ensure the fulfilment of the assumed outcomes of the programme. The group of basic attributes which must be satisfied by the agency to obtain accreditation include the detailed information concerning the following elements of the assessment: Necessity to prepare the diploma projects (engineering projects) at the end of the studies the 2 nd Part, items 1 and 2; The duty to ensure and organise student internships strictly related to the outcomes of the programme by KAUT at the minimum level the 2 nd Part, item 3; Making available complete and up-to-date information concerning the teaching and learning offer, and the assumed programme outcomes to the students the 3 rd Part, items 2 and 4; The functioning of the internal education quality assurance system ensuring the fulfilment of the assumed programme outcomes the 3 rd Part, item 5; Student questionnaires and use of their results while evaluating the teaching staff the 3 rd Part, item 5; Ensuring the university teacher selection process corresponding to the assumed outcomes of the university teacher selection process the 3 rd Part, item 6; Ensuring the basic conditions for the auditorium and lab classes ensuring achievement of the intended programme outcomes the 3 rd Part, item 8 and the 4 th Part, item 1; Ensuring student access to libraries and electronic databases through the Internet. Within the group of additional attributes which determine the possible awarding of the KAUT accreditation for the period of five years among the issues related to the evaluation whether the accredited course is properly organised, managed and maintained, to ensure the fulfilment of the assumed programme outcomes, subjected to the evaluation by the team, are the following: Documented cooperation with domestic and foreign universities and research institutes in the areas related to the programme of studies the 1 st Part, item 6; Exchange of the teaching staff with other universities and research institutes with respect to teaching and learning tasks, deriving from the fulfilment of the educational programmes the 1 st Part, item 7; Participation of experienced experts in the fulfilment of the educational programmes having the documented practical experiences the 1 st Part, item 8; 9

10 Compliance of the syllabuses of the basic subjects with the content and requirements of the general and specialisation subjects the 2 nd part, item 4; Ensuring achievement of the programme outcomes which are directly related to the professional competences of the graduates of the accredited studies the 2 nd part, item 6; Organisation of student practices within the scope exceeding the minimum requirements of KAUT the 2 nd part, item 10; Organisation of the educational process according to the assumed curricular teaching and learning effects and enabling the individual development of students the 3 rd Part, items 5 and 6; Guaranteeing improved qualifications of lecturing staff the 3 rd Part, items 8 and 9; Harmonisation of the sizes of the groups in auditorium and lab classes with the requirements of the teaching and learning programmes the 3 rd Part, item 10; Proper organisation of submission, approval, supervision, issuing opinions, evaluation and awarding distinctions to the diplomas / graduation projects the 3 rd Part, items 11 18; Availability of the information related to the offered field of study through the own Web site of the agency the 4 th Part, items 1 and 2; Documented cooperation with business, administration and self-government units to ensure achievement of the assumed teaching process outcomes the 4 th Part, item 4; Participation of the students in research and implementation activities carried out by the agency and related to the curriculum the 4 th Part, items 8 and 9; Proper organisation of Access of the teaching Staff and students to the information related to the ongoing management of the teaching and learning process and its handling the 4 th Part, items The third stage of evaluation of the organisation, management and maintenance of the educational programme ensuring the achievement of the assumed curricula effects is carried out by KAUT at the plenary meeting. Before the meeting all members of KAUT receive a selfassessment report and the report of the assessment team. During the plenary meeting, the Chair of the assessment team evaluates and presents in detail the report and the course of the site visit to the agency and answers the possible questions. The Chair of the assessment team being the person from the outside of KAUT, does not participate in the subsequent parts of the plenary meeting where the discussion takes place and then a decision to award or deny accreditation is made through the secret ballot. This decision encompasses all aspects of evaluation of the quality of education offered in a particular field of study by the HEI without carrying out the individual evaluations of the composition and without a separate evaluation of the organisation, management and maintenance of the educational programme. 10

11 Accreditation procedure 3. The "Rules (Attachment no. 2). are adopted by the Conference of Rectors of Polish Universities of Technology and published at and sent directly to all universities that are signatories of the "Memorandum" (Attachment no. 1). The "Rules are updated by the Conference of Rectors (KRPUT) by adopting a resolution and so far have been amended twice upon KAUT's application submitted by its Chair in connection with the changes introduced to the Higher Education System after the effective date of the "Act on Higher Education binding upon the entire education system in Poland. The 3 rd Chapter, "Rules, concerns the accreditation procedure and is prepared, updated and distributed together with the "Rules. Pursuant to 14 item 1 of these "Rules, model accreditation documents are prepared by KAUT and submitted to Rectors signatories of the "Memorandum and promulgated. These models are as follows: Accreditation Application (Attachment no. 7); Self-assessment Report (Attachment no. 4); Assessment team Report (Attachment no. 5). The accreditation is carried out on the basis of educational quality standards (a model standard for the electronics and telecommunication faculty is given in (Attachment no. 6) and has been prepared by the expert teams appointed by KAUT on the basis of the submissions of the organizational units of a university. The rules of appointment, organisation and the tasks of the expert groups are given in Chapter "Rules. The composition of the groups of Expert for particular fields of study are published at The composition of the evaluating groups for the purpose of accreditation of a field of study on the basis of an application submitted by the agency are determined each time by KAUT from among the members of the candidates previously submitted by the university and approved by KAUT. The lists of persons who are candidate members of the assessment teams are promulgated at and updated upon the request of the units in the event of resignation from the work in the teams or promotion within the university structure, etc. 4&5 a self-assessment or equivalent procedure by the subject of the accreditation process; Self-assessment is carried out in the form of the self-assessment report (Attachment no. 4) by the entity submitting an accreditation application (Attachment no. 7). The basis for the preparation of the self-assessment report is 16 item 1 letter c of the "Rules (Attachment no. 2) adopted by the KRPUT - Conference of Rectors. an external assessment by a group of experts, including, as appropriate, (a) student member(s), and site visits as decided by the agency ; The external evaluation is carried out by the assessment team whose composition is each time determined by KAUT from among the experts identified by the university. The composition of the assessment team includes the university teaching staff, employer representatives and representatives of student or Ph.D. students' self-governments. The manner of appointment of the assessment team and group of persons from among which 11

12 the team is appointed is determined in the 2 nd Chapter of the "Rules" (Attachment no. 2). The site visit to the organizational unit (agency) is carried out on the basis of 13 items 1 letter b of the "Rules". The course of the site visit is agreed with the agency subjected to accreditation, and a model course of such visit is presented in Attachment no. 9 which is published at publication of a report, including any judgements, recommendations or other formal outcomes; The report prepared by the assessment team before its presentation at a plenary meeting of KAUT, is submitted to the accredited entity which within 30 days of its receipt may present its comments. The KAUT presidium considers the comments and presents its position to the agency or possibly formulates the draft conditions which if satisfied will allow to present the accreditation issue at the plenary meeting of KAUT. The KAUT presidium is to fulfil this task within 30 days. Next, the case including the possible opinion of the agency concerning the position of the KAUT presidium is considered at a plenary meeting of KAUT where a decision to award, deny or delay accreditation until all the required conditions are satisfied is made in a secret ballot. KAUT notifies the agency and the Conference of Rectors of Polish Universities of Technology of the decisions. This procedure is determined in 16, item 1, letters g k of the "Rules". The report of the assessment team is confidential and is not promulgated. Its content and KAUT recommendations are available in full version only to the accredited agency and held in the KAUT archives. This issue is regulated in 17 item 1 of the "Rules" (Attachment no. 2). The decision to grant accreditation is open and includes information concerning the level of satisfaction of the accreditation standards with respect to: a) The mission of the agency and its correlation to the region, b) Compliance of the unit's operations with the prevailing laws, c) The level of the teaching and research staff, d) Curricula, e) Correctness of the teaching and learning process, f) Teaching and learning conditions, g) Activities in favour of the promotion of the technical fields of study among young people. The decision concerning granting of accreditation is made public. It is regulated by 16 sections 2 and 3 of the "Rules". a follow-up procedure to review actions taken by the subject of the accreditation process in the light of any recommendations contained in the report; In a situation in which KAUT made a decision to defer accreditation until the identified conditions have been satisfied, the accreditation procedure will be resumed after the entity's submission of the information concerning satisfaction of these conditions. The verification will be made by the assessment team in the preceding composition when necessary, a short site visit to the evaluated unit. Next, the report of the assessment team is corrected and the accreditation procedure is resumed from the stage of familiarization of the agency with the new report. If, however, the accreditation is awarded for a shortened period of two years, the activities undertaken by the agency in connection with 12

13 the KAUT recommendations are evaluated through a full accreditation procedure upon the unit's request and are regarded as resumption of the accreditation. any other processes and procedures; The agency accredited by KAUT receives a certificate whose model constitutes (Attachment no. 10). The certificate is handed during a special ceremony at a special open plenary meeting of KAUT in the presence of the university's authorities and authorities of the certified agency with a customary lecture concerning the engineering education issues. 6. During the accreditation process, all basic decisions are made by KAUT at the plenary meetings through secret ballot with the absolute majority of votes. It is regulated by 7 item 2 of the "Rules" (Attachment no. 2). The following decisions are made through this procedure: Appointment of the assessment team; Award of accreditation; Deferment of accreditation until satisfaction of the identified conditions; Accreditation denial. KAUT presidium in the accreditation procedure: Verification of the self-assessment report and in the event any irregularities are identified, setting of the deadline for their elimination (not exceeding 30 days) and returning it to the unit; Consideration of the comments of the agency concerning the report of the assessment team and submitting the results of the comments analysis to KAUT. Chair of KAUT in the accreditation procedure; Keeps correspondence with the agency concerning the accreditation application; Appoints the plenary meetings of KAUT devoted to accreditation; Notifies the agency and the Conference of Rectors (KRPUT) of the results of accreditation. The Student Self-Government or Ph. D Student Self-Government designates its representative for the composition of the assessment team. A self-assessment report is developed by the HEI without KAUT's participation. It is customary in the process of development of the report that the mangers of the HEI agency appoints editorial team which is in direct contact with the assessment team throughout the site visit. The assessment team has access to the self-assessment report and to other documents related to the accreditation procedure of the HEI unit. 13

14 KAUT members, before making the accreditation decision, have access both to the selfassessment report and the report of the assessment team. During all the plenary meetings of KAUT devoted to accreditation are taken minutes, which are held in the KAUT archives, while their abridged versions are available at while making the summary of the KAUT activity. All KAUT documents are available for the members of the Conference of Rectors. 7. Accreditation decisions made by KAUT do not entail any formal consequences. Accreditation is the expression of the academic milieu's appreciation of the particularly high quality of the education of engineers carried out by the agency at the faculty which has been accredited. Nevertheless, in the matters related to the accreditation decisions, decision to defer accreditation until satisfaction of the conditions or denial to award accreditation, the agency concerned has the right to appeal the decision. The decision is considered by the appeal team appointed by KAUT from among the group of persons who are included in the group of experts and candidates for the assessment teams. Members of the assessment teams who participated in the current accreditation procedure may not participate as the appeal team members. Opinion of the appeal team is considered at the plenary session of KAUT in accordance with the previously applicable rules. KAUT decision is final except for the situations where the basis for the appeal is negligence of procedural and formal nature on the part of KAUT. In such a case, the agency may submit the appeal to the KRPUT, which may re-submit the case to KAUT or make other decisions concerning accreditation. This decision is final. The rules of the appeal procedure are laid down in 16 items 2-5 of the "Rules" (Attachment no. 2). Accreditation procedure laid down in Art. 3 of the "Rules" 14 Model accreditation documents are determined by the Commission. Model accreditation documents are promulgated Accreditation applications are submitted by the basic organisational units (agencies) to the Chair of the Commission. 2. After the receipt of the accreditation application, the President of the Commission identifies the date for the submission of the Self-assessment report according to the agreed model. 3. Presidium of the Commission verifies the documentation with regard to formal aspects and makes the decision concerning the accreditation proceedings and, in the event when negligence is identified, sets out the deadline their elimination. 4. After submission of the required documentation, by the basic organisational unit (agency), the President of the Commission puts the case of accreditation on the agenda of the next plenary meeting of the Commission

15 1. The accreditation procedure encompasses the following stages: Submission of accreditation application by the agency of a university, If necessary, updating the composition of a Group of Experts, Submission by the agency of the self-assessment report prepared according to the model of the Commission, Appointment of the assessment team, Development of the report by the assessment team, Submission of the assessment team report to the Commission, Submission of the report to the basic organisational unit (agency), which may provide comments concerning the report within 30 days of its receipt, Consideration of the comments by the Presidium of the Commission within up to 30 days, Putting the accreditation on the agenda of the next plenary meeting of the Commission after clarification of the comments, Commission's decisions concerning: granting of accreditation, deferment of accreditation until satisfaction of the identified conditions, denial of accreditation. Notification of KRPUT and the agency of the decisions concerning the accreditation Appeal procedures are described in the item III. Institutional information Official status 8. As discussed in item 2, the KAUT was established by KRPUT under the "Memorandum of Understanding of the Conference of Rectors of Polish Universities of Technology on the Quality of Teaching and Learning (Attachment no. 1). The "Memorandum was then accepted by the Senates of all the universities signatories of the Memorandum. The basis for the activity of KAUT is the above-mentioned "Memorandum and "Rules and Manner of Accreditation Procedure adopted by KRPUT on 17 th February 2001 as amended of 21 st May 2009 (Attachment no. 2). KRPUT is one of the conferences of the Conference of Rectors bringing together universities of a particular type which together make up the Conference of Rectors of Academic Schools in Poland (KRASP). KRASP was appointed on 7 June 1997 as an informal voluntary association of Rectors representing universities. The Law on Higher Education of 30 th August 2005 (Journal of Laws no. 164 item 1365 as amended) states in Chapter 7 Art. 54 that "... universities... may 15

16 establish a Conference of Rectors of Polish Universities (Attachment no. 11); the relevant articles of the "Law on Associations" (Journal of Laws of 2001 no. 79 item 855 of 2003; no. 96 item 874 and of 2004 no. 102 item 1055) apply respectively. KRASP according to the Rules (adopted on 24 th September 2005 as amended) "... carries out its duties pursuant to Art. 55 of the Act supporting the activities promoting education, science and cultures undertaken by the Polish Parliament and Government.... Within the Framework of KRASP, the Rector Conferences of individual higher education units may act (art. 2 of the Rules). Pursuant to Art. 9 of the RULES, the Presidium of KRASP may be composed of the chair of the Rector Conferences of individual higher education units (including KRPUT). To fulfil the goals special standing commissions of KRASP are appointed; the commissions, their chairs and tasks are appointed and dismissed by KRASP. Until adoption of the KRASP Statute in 2005, pursuant to the Resolution of the Plenary Meeting of KRASP held on 7 th June 2001, the Accreditation Commission of KRASP was appointed as a forum for the cooperation between the local Accreditation Commissions appointed by the conference of Rectors of the individual types of schools acting within the framework of KRASP (UKA, KAUT, KAAUM, KA FPAKE, KAUR, KAUP and KA UWF) (Attachment no. 12). The KA KRASP tasks included among others the following: maintaining the correctness of the accreditation standards and procedures, coordination of activities of the existing Accreditation Commissions, representing the Accreditation Commission on international forums. The local Accreditation Commissions are sanctioned with the provision laid down in Chapter 6 art. 49 section 6 of the "Act - The Law on Higher Education, which states that the "Commission may cooperate with the domestic and international organizations who scope of activities includes assessment of the education quality and accreditation Since 2005, after enactment of the "Law on Higher Education and the Rules of KRASP, pursuant to Art. 11 and 12 of the Rules, the Accreditation Commission of the Bologna Team acts within the framework of KRASP, and since 2009, as separate sub-commissions, i.e. the Accreditation Commission and Bologna Team. The Accreditation Commission of KRASP comprises the chairs of the Accreditation Commission of Rectors of the individual types of schools (including the chair of KAUT "ex officio ) and the persons identified by the Presidium of KRASP. The resolution of KRASP adopted n 4 th June 2009 determined the manner of activity of the Accreditation Commission and the Bologna Team. The subsequent Resolution of the KRASP Presidium of 18 th October 2009 emphasised that the "...local Accreditation Commissions have an important role to play and should continue their activity (Attachment no. 13). In the resolution of the KRASP Presidium of... (Attachment no. 14). On KRASP's accession to ENAEE European Network for Accreditation of Engineering Education, the Presidium gave consent to the accession to entrusting the performance of the relevant activities to KAUT (Attachment no. 14). 16

17 Activities 9. The "Memorandum (Attachment no. 1) lays down the rules of activity and appointment of KAUT. In the preamble, the "Memorandum" determined the following goals: Improve the quality of education, Lay down clear and unequivocal procedures for the evaluation of the conditions and methods of education and the programmes taking into account the systems used in other countries, especially in the European Union, Determining the conditions facilitating the domestic and international exchange of students, Promoting the programmes satisfying the high quality standards. 1 sets out the general assumption of accreditation of a particular field of study: 1. Polish technical schools and universities of technology acceding to the Memorandum aim to establish and agree the standards ensuring the relevant level of education and the criteria and procedures of evaluation of the quality of education for the individual fields of study. 2. An accreditation system is introduced to which the individual fields of study will be subjected. 3. Accreditation is voluntary. Universities interested in obtaining a certificate confirming the quality of the education services they provide may apply for accreditation. Resources 10. KAUT is financed by technical schools and universities - signatories of the "Memorandum" that finance the costs of functioning of the Commission; Art. IV of the attachment to the "Memorandum" (Attachment no. 8) lays down the rules of financing of the accreditation proceedings: 19 The accreditation proceedings are on a chargeable basis. The level of the accreditation fee is determined by KRPUT upon the request of the Commission. The accreditation fees are paid at submission of the accreditation application. The costs of accreditation of a field of study in a school which is not a signatory of the Memorandum are set as 1.5 times the costs of the signatory schools. 20 The detailed rules of financing of the Commission and its Office are determined in the Agreement between the Signatories of the Memorandum. 17

18 Mission Statement 11. In the "Attachment to the "Memorandum" (Attachment no. 8) in Art. 1 and 1 the key tasks of KAUT are laid down: 1. Accreditation Commission of Technical Universities (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) acts in favour of ensuring the quality of training on the basis of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Polish Technical Universities and pursuant to Art. 49 section 6 of the Act The Law on Higher Education (Journal of Laws of 2005, item 1365 as amended). 2. The objective of the Commission is to set out the general standards of education quality applicable to technical schools, stimulating and improving the quality of education and establishment of a system of accreditation of studies and postgraduate studies, Ph.D. studies and basic organizational units of universities. 3. The activity of the Commission encompasses the basic organisational units (agencies) of the Polish technical schools which are signatories of the Memorandum. It may also encompass other Polish schools whose units conduct the studies in technical fields after submission of a particular field of study for accreditation. Documents related to the activity of KAUT are available at the Commission's Web site ( Independence 12. How is the independence of your agency ensured? The Accreditation Commission (KAUT) is composed of the representatives of the signatories delegated by the Senates of the schools and one persons designated by the Conference of Rectors (KRPUT). Any decisions related to the accreditation processes are the within the sole competence of the Commission. Art. 1 7 (Attachment no. 8) lay down the detailed tasks of the Commission: Appointment of experts, assessment teams and their Chairs, Development of the general rules of preparation of the education quality standards, Identification of the education quality standards for the particular fields of master, post graduate and Ph.D. studies upon the request of the expert groups in various fields of research and the rules of accreditation of the basic organizational units of a university or school, Determining the accreditation documentation, Making decisions concerning the commencement of accreditation procedure for a particular field of master, post graduate or Ph.D. studies specialising in a particular research field or for a basic accreditation of an agency, Oversight of the course of accreditation proceedings, 18

19 Accepting the Reports of the Assessment Teams, Making decisions to grant, defer or deny accreditation of a particular field of master, post-graduate or Ph. D. studies in a particular field of research, or accreditation of a basic organisational unit (agency), Commences other activities necessary to fulfil the objectives of the Commission. Accountability procedures 13. Art sections 2-4 (Attachment no. 8) lay down the appeal procedures: The basic organisation agency has the right to appeal the Commission's decision. The appeal is sent to the Chair of the Commission. The Commission appoints the Appeal Team composed from three to five members of the Expert and Assessment Teams who have not participated in the accreditation procedure so far. The Appeal Team is not bound with the report of the Assessment team and formulates an opinion concerning the matters constituting the basis for the appeal. After the Appeal team submitted its opinion, the appeal case is put on the agenda of the next plenary meeting of the Commission, which adopts a new resolution concerning the accreditation. The decision made through this procedure is final except for the case discussed in item 4. Where the basis for an appeal is negligence of procedural and formal nature on the side of the Commission, the appeal may be sent to KRPUT which considers it during the next meeting. KRPUT may send to appeal to the President of the Commission through the procedure laid down in item 2, or make other decision concerning accreditation. The KRPUT decision is final. The particularly important elements of the procedures guaranteeing high responsibility standards include: Secrecy of the accreditation vote Independence of the Expert and Assessment Teams members of the university (school) authorities Open nature of the decision Publishing of the composition of KAUT Miscellaneous criteria 14. The Accreditation Commission KAUT is composed of the members delegated by their schools' authorities. They are highly qualified experts with vast experience in the management of teaching and training processes in the higher education system. 19

20 Notwithstanding the above, the KAUT Presidium organises lectures and talks for the members of the Commission, expert groups and members of the assessment teams as a part of the regular meetings of the Commission. The "Rules and Manner of Accreditation Procedure" adopted by KRPUT set out clear and universal rules of the work of the bodies involved in the individual stages of the accreditation process. Each decision of importance in the accreditation process must be discussed within the group of the members of the Commission and, if necessary, with the external experts or members of the assessment team and the final decision is made through a vote. Any possible modifications of the rules of functioning of the Commission are possible only after their proper preparation by the Presidium and their recommendation to the members of the Commission. For the modification to have binding effect its acceptance by KRPUT is required. September 20 th KAUT Secretary President of KAUT Dr. Jarosław Bułka Prof. Bohdan Macukow Please confirm by the signatures of both the Managing Director and the Chair of your agency that the agency seeks an authorisation to award the EUR-ACE Label and agrees to abide by the regulations of the ENAEE s EUR-ACE Label Committee. 20

21 Attachments: 1. Memorandum of understanding of Rectors of Polish Technical Universities on Education Quality Assurance (original +English translation) 2. Accreditation Rules and Procedures (original +English translation) 3. Appointment of the as President of KAUT KRPUT resolution (original +English translation) 4. Self-assessment report a complete version (in Polish) 5. Site visit report 6. Example of standards Electronics 7. University application for beginning of the accreditation procedure (original +English translation) 8. Accreditation procedure (on the basis of the rules) 9. Course of the site visit (original +English translation) 10. Example of certificate (original) 11. Excerpt of the Act on Higher Education (original in English) 12. KRASP resolution appointment of KA KRASP (in Polish) 13. KRASP resolution rules of KA KRASP (in Polish) 14. KRASP resolution in support of the KAUT proceedings to join EUR-ACE (original +English translation) Supporting papers: B.Macukow, E.Chojnacka New Educational Standards, Case study - Computer Science, in: Proc. SEFI and IGIP Joint Annual Conference 2007, ed. L.Szentimai, T.G. Szarka. E.Chojnacka, B.Macukow, A.Napieralski We need engineers. How to promote technical studies, in: Quality Assessment Employability and Innovation, ed. Flemming K.Fink, 2008, ISBN B.Macukow Ten years of Accreditation in Poland in: Proc.Annual Conf. SEFI 2005, eds. C.Simsek, Y.Aaman, , B.Macukow Quality and Standards: The National Perspective of the Accreditation In Poland, in: Proc. INQAAHE 2003 Conference, Dublin, B.Macukow, E.Chojnacka Accreditation System in Poland in: Proc. 31st SEFI Conf. Global Engineering Education and Training for Mobility, ,