Evaluation of SP












            ******************************************************************************************

            *
            ******************************************************************************************
            The evaluation of the implementation of study programmes is complementary to the processes

            intentions and proposals for study programmes. It is designed so that each study programme
            evaluation at least once during the validity of its authorisation to be implemented or its
            In the period under review, Charles University (CU) devoted considerable attention to the 

            this process, including the establishment of the necessary IT infrastructure. This infrast
            the entire process, from the preparation of the self-evaluation report by the guarantor of
            programme, through the provision of analytical materials by the Rectorate of Charles Unive

            the collection of statements from relevant stakeholders. Thanks to these measures, the eva
            programmes was gradually piloted and subsequently introduced into standard operation in bo

            and postgraduate education.

            The starting point for the evaluation of study programmes is the definition of their key a

            are subsequently monitored and assessed in each individual case. These include in particul
            creative and research activities, internationalisation, applicants’ interest, completion r
            satisfaction, the structure of the curriculum, engagement with graduates, and external con

            the functioning of the study programme. Selected aspects of study programmes are supported
            that illustrate how the programme was implemented in the period under review. The evaluati
            programme therefore always takes place on the basis of information on its actual implement

            sources include, among other things, feedback from students and graduates, which is regula
            through University-wide surveys.


            Within the evaluation process, the guarantor, on the basis of the data provided by the RCU
            self-evaluation report addressing the predefined key aspects of the study programme. This 
            with the supporting data, is subsequently assessed by the relevant panel of the Internal E

            (IEB), which then prepares a draft of final evaluation report on the study programme. The 
            the study programme and the Dean of the relevant faculty may subsequently comment on this 
            draft report, including these comments, is then discussed and, where appropriate, approved

            crucial element of the process is the strong involvement of guarantors, who bear responsib
            implementation of study programmes. The evaluation process is therefore designed so that t
            genuinely plays a central role. In this way, guarantors are also encouraged to actively mo

            evaluate information on the implementation of their study programmes, even beyond the form
            process.



            Evaluation of a Study Programme – Process Overview: 1. Collection of data on the study pro
            Data on each SP are collected and compiled on an ongoing basis, whether through the SIS, s

            or other means, so that they can subsequently be used (not only) for evaluation purposes. 
            takes place exclusively for the purposes of CU’s internal evaluation of SPs and is accessi
            actors involved in the evaluation process (Department of Quality of Education and Accredit

            faculty coordinators, guarantors, faculty management, etc.). 2. Compilation of data – For 
            of SP evaluation, the DQEA compiles the data materials, if necessary in cooperation with t
            coordinator, who continuously assists in verifying the accuracy of the entered data. 3. Ma

            faculty/guarantor – Via the Student Information System (SIS), the DQEA sends the Self-Eval
            form (including the uploaded data materials) to the guarantor of the SP. 4. Self-Evaluatio
            the SP – The guarantor completes the Self-Evaluation Report form in the SIS. 5. Initial as

            guarantor’s Self-Evaluation Report – The rapporteur/IEB panel carries out the first assess
            Evaluation Report within the SIS. 6. Decision on the involvement of an external evaluator 
            of its assessment, the IEB panel decides whether to appoint an external evaluator and, if 

            evaluator and defines the specific assignment. The contact with the evaluator and the admi
            evaluator’s report are managed by the DQEA. 7. Decision on holding a joint meeting – On th
            assessment, the IEB panel decides whether to hold a joint meeting with the guarantor and r

            of the faculty. Any such meeting is organised by the DQEA in cooperation with the faculty 
            Draft Evaluation Report on the SP – The IEB panel prepares the Draft Evaluation Report on 
            SIS, including the section intended for publication. 9. Submission of the draft report to 

            and the Dean – Both the guarantor and the Dean have the right to review the Draft Evaluati
            prepared by the IEB panel and, if necessary, to add their comments. 10. Final Evaluation R
            – The draft report, together with any comments from the Dean and the guarantor, is submitt

            via the SIS. Upon approval by the IEB, it becomes the Final Evaluation Report on the SP. 1
            the results – The results of the evaluation serve as an incentive for the further improvem
            programme (the formative function of evaluation) and become one of the supporting material

            processes of evaluation and approval of SPs.

            Page Admin: Václav Műller