University of Ljubljana
Univerza v Ljubljani
Basic information
-
Identifiers
- DEQARINST2799
- SI0001
- ROR: https://ror.org/05njb9z20
- SI-ETER.BAS.NATID: 33
- Erasmus: SI LJUBLJA01
- SCHAC: uni-lj.si
- Erasmus-Charter: E10209243
- EU-PIC: 999923240
- EU-VAT: SI54162513
- WHED: IAU-020664
Erasmus Institution Code
Identifier assigned by the European Commission to higher education institutions participating in the Erasmus+ programme - data harvested from ETER/OrgRegSCHema for Academia
Internet domain (DNS)-based identifier of institutions, used in several European initiatives for data exchange in the education and research sector, e.g. Emrex - data acquired using the European University Foundation (EUF) HEI APIErasmus Charter for Higher Education (ECHE)
Application number related to the ECHE, required for higher education institutions participating in the Erasmus+ programme - data acquired using the European University Foundation (EUF) HEI APIParticipant Identification Code (PIC)
A PIC is assigned to legal entities participating in EU-funded programmes - data acquired using the European University Foundation (EUF) HEI APIEU VAT number
Identifier of economic operators for value-added tax (VAT) within the EU system, assigned by their national authority - data acquired using the EU participant register APIIAU World Higher Education Database (WHED)
Identifier used in the world-wide WHED database of higher education institutions, managed by the International Association of Universities (IAU) - data harvested from ETER/OrgReg -
Provider typehigher education institution
-
Legal seat(s)Ljubljana, Slovenia
-
Further location(s)
-
Website
-
Founding year1919
-
QF-EHEA levelsthird cycle, second cycle, first cycle, short cycle
-
Permalink
National External Quality Assurance Requirements
-
Accreditation of a study programme
is granted for an indefinite period or the application is denied. -
Re-accreditation of a higher education institution
is granted for a period of maximum five years (or less) or, if quality standards are not meet the accreditation is denied. -
Initial accreditation of a higher education institutions
is granted for a period of five years or, if quality standards are not meet, the application is denied. -
Accreditation of changes of higher education institutions
Changes to another type, merger by acquisition, merger by the formation of a new entity or division of higher education institutions, changing the location in Slovenia - Further information on external quality assurance in Slovenia
External Quality Assurance Reports and Decisions
Institutional level
-
DEQAR Report ID2951
-
Agency
-
Type
- Re-accreditation of higher education institutions
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/01/2014
-
Valid until30/09/2020
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0000033-201806
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
DEQAR Report ID4809
-
Agency
-
Type
- Institutional evaluation outside Germany
-
Statusvoluntary
-
Formal decisionnot applicable
-
Date12/02/2015
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifier2015-16
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
DEQAR Report ID97640
-
Agency
-
Type
- Institutional quality audits
-
Statusvoluntary
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date24/01/2024
-
Valid until24/01/2030
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifier3:2024
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
DEQAR Report ID89838
-
Agency
-
Type
- Re-accreditation of higher education institutions
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date21/04/2022
-
Valid until30/09/2027
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifier6031-3/2019/26
-
Verifiable Credential
-
DEQAR Report ID114235
-
Agency
-
Type
- Institutional accreditation
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date07/02/2025
-
Valid until07/02/2031
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Verifiable Credential
-
DEQAR Report ID114234
-
Agency
-
Type
- Institutional accreditation
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date07/02/2025
-
Valid until07/02/2031
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Verifiable Credential
-
DEQAR Report ID114231
-
Agency
-
Type
- Institutional accreditation
-
Statusvoluntary
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date07/02/2025
-
Valid until07/02/2031
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Verifiable Credential
Programme level
-
Qualification/award
- Bachelor
-
Levelfirst cycle (NQF 7)
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID89812
-
Agency
-
Type
- Extraordinary evaluation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date21/04/2022
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Summary
Report summary
A group of experts in accordance with recommendations carried out the external evaluation of the Faculty of Health Sciences and the three study programs (Nursing - 1st cycle, Nursing - 2nd cycle, Laboratory Dental Prosthetics 1st - cycle) and criteria set by the Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (SQAA). Faculty meets the requirements in all five standards of assessment. The opinion of group of experts is that faculty is a wellorganized higher education institution that puts a lot of efforts in continuous improvement of all fields of its activities. As a member of the University of Ljubljana, faculty accepts all rules and regulations from the University and prescribes its own rules in accordance with them. The quality assurance system (QAS) was, until its introduction, continuously improved with consequential acceptance of quality culture and the awareness of its importance in all relevant stakeholder groups. Each year self-evaluation procedure is performed and their conclusions serve as a starting point for action plan for future period. The contents of this document is comprehensive and summarize results from surveys and interviews with all stakeholders included in all activities of the faculty. The main objectives of annual self-evaluation reports are education, research, quality assurance and management. The annual self-evaluation reports are creating by different parties (teachers and associates, departments, study program coordinators, professional support employees, and students) and every party give their opinion regarding the performance during the past period and suggestions for future one. The quality assurance committee analyses those partial reports and merge them into the final document. Afterwards, the faculty’s Senate discusses the document, gives its approval, and accepts it. All the parties included in creating the document got feedback information about conclusions of the report. The evaluation visit was performed on-line due to an epidemiological situation connected with COVID-19 pandemics. Group of experts has got from the faculty a long list of documents necessary for evaluation that, together with answers got during interviews with relevant groups of stakeholders, served as a basis for evaluation of the institution and study programs evaluated. The disadvantage of such approach was that group of experts did not have the opportunity to witness the actual material and other conditions on-site. However, the above-mentioned elements have enabled group of experts to get pretty good insight in the functioning of the faculty and its activities. The group of experts got the impression that faculty and all stakeholders involved (management, teachers and associates, professional support employees, and students) are very interested and dedicated to the performance and quality improvement of educational process. In this regard, there are well-established protocols of information flow and communication between different stakeholder groups in both, formal and informal way. However, experts think that not all of the involved stakeholders are equally familiar with all of their rights and responsibilities. Nevertheless, the overall impression is that education is performing in a successful way and that there are noticeable improvements every year. Management of the faculty encourages all the efforts in that direction. They are trying a lot to improve teaching and working conditions (including material and ICT) for both, students and employees. From previously mentioned sources, group of experts got the impression that research activity at the faculty has some challenges to deal with in the future. Although there are evidences that research activity is improving over time, experts think that high teaching burden of teachers and especially younger colleagues represents an obstacle for greater research productivity and greater inclusion of students in the research. Currently, there are 28 active projects at the faculty. Most of them are not thematically connected with the analyzed study programs. Group of experts believes that the increase in number of thematically adjusted projects is needed since their results and findings would enable greater transfer of research knowledge into the teaching process and would help the process of teaching staff renewal. Finally, group of experts concluded that a number of advantages and examples of good practice characterizes both, Faculty of Health Sciences and the analyzed study programs. On the other hand, there are some topics that should be improved in future with regard to ensure future development and better positioning of faculty and its programs in wider educational and research area. We would like to thank all those who have put efforts that this virtual visit to faculty has passed at a very high level: Mr. Klemen Šubic - NAKVIS expert, faculty management and all other stakeholders for constructive cooperation in interviews. Since this evaluation took place on-line, the efforts for successful implementation to all participating parties were even greater. -
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifier6031-3/2019/26-UL-ZF
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Master
-
Levelsecond cycle (NQF 8)
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID89812
-
Agency
-
Type
- Extraordinary evaluation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date21/04/2022
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Summary
Report summary
A group of experts in accordance with recommendations carried out the external evaluation of the Faculty of Health Sciences and the three study programs (Nursing - 1st cycle, Nursing - 2nd cycle, Laboratory Dental Prosthetics 1st - cycle) and criteria set by the Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (SQAA). Faculty meets the requirements in all five standards of assessment. The opinion of group of experts is that faculty is a wellorganized higher education institution that puts a lot of efforts in continuous improvement of all fields of its activities. As a member of the University of Ljubljana, faculty accepts all rules and regulations from the University and prescribes its own rules in accordance with them. The quality assurance system (QAS) was, until its introduction, continuously improved with consequential acceptance of quality culture and the awareness of its importance in all relevant stakeholder groups. Each year self-evaluation procedure is performed and their conclusions serve as a starting point for action plan for future period. The contents of this document is comprehensive and summarize results from surveys and interviews with all stakeholders included in all activities of the faculty. The main objectives of annual self-evaluation reports are education, research, quality assurance and management. The annual self-evaluation reports are creating by different parties (teachers and associates, departments, study program coordinators, professional support employees, and students) and every party give their opinion regarding the performance during the past period and suggestions for future one. The quality assurance committee analyses those partial reports and merge them into the final document. Afterwards, the faculty’s Senate discusses the document, gives its approval, and accepts it. All the parties included in creating the document got feedback information about conclusions of the report. The evaluation visit was performed on-line due to an epidemiological situation connected with COVID-19 pandemics. Group of experts has got from the faculty a long list of documents necessary for evaluation that, together with answers got during interviews with relevant groups of stakeholders, served as a basis for evaluation of the institution and study programs evaluated. The disadvantage of such approach was that group of experts did not have the opportunity to witness the actual material and other conditions on-site. However, the above-mentioned elements have enabled group of experts to get pretty good insight in the functioning of the faculty and its activities. The group of experts got the impression that faculty and all stakeholders involved (management, teachers and associates, professional support employees, and students) are very interested and dedicated to the performance and quality improvement of educational process. In this regard, there are well-established protocols of information flow and communication between different stakeholder groups in both, formal and informal way. However, experts think that not all of the involved stakeholders are equally familiar with all of their rights and responsibilities. Nevertheless, the overall impression is that education is performing in a successful way and that there are noticeable improvements every year. Management of the faculty encourages all the efforts in that direction. They are trying a lot to improve teaching and working conditions (including material and ICT) for both, students and employees. From previously mentioned sources, group of experts got the impression that research activity at the faculty has some challenges to deal with in the future. Although there are evidences that research activity is improving over time, experts think that high teaching burden of teachers and especially younger colleagues represents an obstacle for greater research productivity and greater inclusion of students in the research. Currently, there are 28 active projects at the faculty. Most of them are not thematically connected with the analyzed study programs. Group of experts believes that the increase in number of thematically adjusted projects is needed since their results and findings would enable greater transfer of research knowledge into the teaching process and would help the process of teaching staff renewal. Finally, group of experts concluded that a number of advantages and examples of good practice characterizes both, Faculty of Health Sciences and the analyzed study programs. On the other hand, there are some topics that should be improved in future with regard to ensure future development and better positioning of faculty and its programs in wider educational and research area. We would like to thank all those who have put efforts that this virtual visit to faculty has passed at a very high level: Mr. Klemen Šubic - NAKVIS expert, faculty management and all other stakeholders for constructive cooperation in interviews. Since this evaluation took place on-line, the efforts for successful implementation to all participating parties were even greater. -
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifier6031-3/2019/26-UL-ZF
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
-
Levelshort cycle (NQF 6. raven (6))
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID47310
-
Agency
-
Type
- Accreditation of new study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/11/2013
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0017165-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Prva stopnja
-
Level-
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID3420
-
Agency
-
Type
- Extraordinary evaluation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date19/05/2016
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0010710223-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Master
-
Levelsecond cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID3419
-
Agency
-
Type
- Re-accreditation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/11/2013
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0010710224-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Bachelor (univerzitetni)
-
Levelfirst cycle (NQF 7. raven (7))
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID47126
-
Agency
-
Type
- Re-accreditation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/11/2013
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0000196-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Master
-
Levelsecond cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID47127
-
Agency
-
Type
- Re-accreditation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/11/2013
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0000231-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Master
-
Levelsecond cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID47128
-
Agency
-
Type
- Re-accreditation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/11/2013
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0000449-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Master
-
Levelsecond cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID3421
-
Agency
-
Type
- Re-accreditation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/11/2013
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0010710225-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Phd
-
Levelthird cycle (NQF 10. raven (10))
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID47293
-
Agency
-
Type
- Accreditation of new study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/11/2013
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0001390-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Doctorate
-
Levelthird cycle (NQF 10)
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID100025
-
Agency
-
Type
- External (sample) evaluation of a study programme
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionnot applicable
-
Date21/09/2023
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Summary
Report summary
The evaluated doctoral study program Materials Science and Engineering educates well trained experts in the field of materials science and engineering, who are highly employable, and their employment in industry represents an important link with the faculty for future collaboration and research. Good research infrastructure is available and additional research infrastructure and equipment is available at participating faculties and research institutes. The student-centered approach of teaching enables tailoring the study contents to the needs of students with regards to the subject of their dissertations. Dissertations were in general found of good or high quality and students as well as their mentors are active in publishing their research result in international journals. One of the weaknesses of the program is the small number of students, which also complicates the retrieval of their satisfaction with the program through Questionnaires. No formal engagement of stakeholders in the evaluation process has been notified. Study program changes are made individually but not comprehensively monitored by the internal quality assurance system at the level of the institution. Furthermore, monitoring of changes is not documented. This results in several partial compliance or major weaknesses or non-compliances, which need to be addressed and overcome. The group of experts has particularly exposed: - inadequate informing of stakeholders from outside the institution, who as a consequence do not provide feedback needed for improvement of the content, structure and delivery of the study programme, - students are not engaged in actual preparation of self evaluation reports. Their opinion is not considered statistically relevant and therefore not considered in the self evaluation report. This leaves the quality loop not completely closed, since there is no feedback to or from all stakeholders assured. Students and stakeholders outside the institution are not engaged in actual preparation of self evaluation reports. The opinion of students is not considered statistically relevant and therefore not considered in the self evaluation report. In addition: - study program changes are made individually but not comprehensively monitored by the internal quality assurance system at the level of the institution. No effective actions are taken to update the changes in course syllabi or improve the study program based on the needs of the stakeholders outside university, - some course descriptions are empty in terms of content, competences, expected study results, teaching methods and assessment methods, - the number of ECTS points and the workload of students in the compulsory subject "Attendance at the lectures" for both the first and second year of study is too large compared to the expected workload of students. These actions, which by themselves represent important improvements, hould in addition include the opportunities for improvement suggested by the group of experts in their report. -
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifier6034-9/2023/6
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Master
-
Levelsecond cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID3326
-
Agency
-
Type
- Re-accreditation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/11/2013
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0010570052-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Master
-
Levelsecond cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID3324
-
Agency
-
Type
- Re-accreditation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/11/2013
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0010570053-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential
-
Qualification/award
- Bachelor (univerzitetni)
-
Levelfirst cycle (NQF 7. raven (7))
-
Programme typeFull recognised degree programme
-
DEQAR Report ID3325
-
Agency
-
Type
- Re-accreditation of study programmes
-
Statuspart of obligatory EQA system
-
Formal decisionpositive
-
Date01/11/2013
-
Valid untilnot applicable
-
Report and decision
-
Permalink
-
Agency's identifierDEQAR-0010570054-201808
-
External link
-
Verifiable Credential