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 Å ubic - 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.