Report summary
In the evaluation process, the institution was evaluated according to 17 standards in the
procedures for reaccreditation of the institution. We identified advantages in four of the
seven standards in the field of operation of the higher education, and opportunities for
improvement in all seven standards. In Standard 2, during the first evaluation visit in
December 2021, we identified two major shortcomings or inconsistencies related to the
composition of the senate and the academic board of the institution, which the institution
eliminated until the second evaluation visit in April 2022. In both standards in the field of
human resources, we identified advantages and opportunities for improvement, and in
standard 6 also a major shortcoming or inconsistency related to the appointment to the
title of associate professor, which was eliminated on May 23rd 2022, by the Senate
decision. We identified strengths in two of the four student standards and opportunities for
improvement in all four. In four standards in the field of material conditions, we found
advantages in one standard and opportunities for improvement in two, as well as a major
shortcoming or inconsistency in standard 17 (during the first evaluation visit in December
2021), as the library did not provide at least one copy of mandatory study literature for
study units of study programs, which the institution eliminated until the second evaluation
visit in April 2022. As a very good practice (excellence) we highlight the set system of
obtaining information through focus groups in the internal quality system (standard 6),
which has already come to life in the field of focus groups with students of all study
programs, and such a system is also planned for other stakeholder groups.