Precedents database

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	02/11/2020
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of systematic approach to thematic analysis; Quality of analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The review panel found that BAC’s thematic review report provided a limited analysis, and was rather descriptive by simply summarising the content of inspection reports. Overall, the review panel felt there were still significant weaknesses in BAC’s approach to thematic analysis. In its additional representation, BAC agreed with the assessment of the panel and committed to prepare more meaningful thematic analysis that will serve to improve key areas related to the agency’s work by January 2021.While the Register Committee acknowledged the agency’s work towards improving its thematic analysis, the Committee remarked that such changes have not yet been implemented.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	22/06/2020
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of systematic approach to thematic analysis; Absence of regular analysis;
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The Register Committee noted that the agency has produced two analyses since its last review in 2014, both written in Russian but only published on the English version of AKKORK’s website. According to the panel, the last publication, however, does not meet the requirements of a thematic analysis. In particular, the panel noted the great qualitative difference between the publications, indicating a missing systematic approach to the publication of thematic analysis. The Register Committee underlines the panel’s recommendation that the agency should establish a clear process to address all of its activities in thematic analyses. ”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	05/11/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Producing effective thematic analysis reports
Panel conclusion	Full compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“In its decision of 2015 to admit QQI to the Register, the Register Committee flagged for attention the production of thematic analyses by QQI.The Register Committee understood from the panel's report that QQI has been proactive and effective in producing a range of thematic analysis reports, which are considered useful in the sector for improving quality and quality assurance, even though not having completed full cycles in all external quality assurance activities.The Register Committee therefore considered that the flag has been addressed and concurred with the panel's conclusion that QQI complies withthe standard.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	05/11/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Producing effective thematic analysis reports
Panel conclusion	Full compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“When evalag’s registration was last renewed, the Register Committee noted that the current review should address whether evalag produced analyses of the general findings of all reviews carried out by the agency. The review panel described clearly how evalag conducts thematic analyses based on the findings from its reviews. The Register Committee therefore concluded that the flag has been addressed.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	05/11/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“In the previous review the panel found that Unibasq had yet to produce a system-wide analysis and there was a lack of sufficient resources which is why this standard was flagged.The panel recognised that Unibasq has made clear progress in this area in recent years. The reports that agency produces show a clear shift from the evaluation of the procedures to a genuine thematic analysis (see page 24 of the report).The Committee concluded that the flag has been addressed and concurred with the review panel’s conclusion that Unibasq complies with the standard.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	05/11/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Producing effective thematic analysis reports
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“At the time of its previous review in 2014, the Register Committee noted that AQ Austria was working on its first thematic analysis report on the development of quality assurance in Austria, and has not yet produced documentation to evidence substantial compliance. In its 2019 review report the panel’s findings show that the agency has since produced a number of reports focused on the results of QA processes and related issues in higher education. While the Register Committee underlined the recommendations of the panel for a further development of the thematic analysis, the Register Committee concluded that the flag has been satisfactorily addressed.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	03/04/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Implementation of thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The Register Committee considered the panel's analysis as well as SQAA's statement on the panel report, referring to its recently published “methodology and procedure for drafting and disseminating system-wide and thematic analyses”. While the Committee welcomed the steps taken by SQAA to swiftly address the panel's recommendation, their actual implementation remains to be analysed within the next external review of SQAA.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by GAC
Decision of	20/06/2017
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	systematic approach to analyses and publishing
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“When AQAS last had its registration renewed, the publication of thematic analyses was flagged. Considering the review report, the Register Committee concluded that AQAS carried out a number of relevant internal analyses and produced relevant reports, e.g. the overarching report produced based on its accreditations in Moldova. These were, however, carried out on an ad-hoc basis, internal and not published as required by the standard. In its statement on the review report, AQAS explained that it had published a first set of thematic analyses on its website. While the Register Committee welcomed the efforts taken to date, it was not yet possible to conclude whether thematic analyses are produced regularly.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	20/06/2017
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of thematic analyeses
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“While a number of thematic analyses have been published since the last external review of the agency, the panel found that the analyses have been paused since the merger of FINHEEC into FINEEC. The panel also noted that FINEEC has not yet initiated thematic analyses of the accreditations of engineering degree programmes due to the small number of finished accreditations. ”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	03/12/2016
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of systematic approach/lack of resources
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The panel stated that ACPUA has focused on thematic reports during its first year of existence, however the constraints on human and financial resources have hindered the agency’s activity in this area in recent years. Considering the increased number of external quality assurance activities carried out by ACPUA in recent years, the Register Committee underlined the panel’s recommendation to allocate sufficient resources to the activities supporting thematic analysis and ensure their implementation in a more systematic way”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	03/03/2023
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Content of the thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“From several Annual reports of the agency from recent years, the Committee learned that the agency provides key figures on its work, but

also provides an in-depth overview of the compliance levels per standard in the undertaken accreditation procedures, summarises the good practices and obstacles observed in HEIs, and presents the most common recommendations by the panels.Following this, the Register Committee found that the current practice fulfils the minimum ESG criteria”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	13/10/2023
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Performing thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The agency does reports covering different

topics – however they are mostly related to projects, rather than findings

from the external quality assurance activities. The panel further highlighted

that the agency is aware of the importance of collecting and analysing data

from the review processes for its own development purposes, but also for

contributing to the system level policies. The Committee acknowledged that while the thematic analyses are

not taking place in a systemic and formal manner, KAZSEE is a relatively

new agency that demonstrates interest to further formalise the processes

for producing thematic analyses.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	14/03/2025
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Use of external QA results
Panel conclusion	Compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“31. The Register Committee noted that ANVUR’s main channel for publishing the thematic analysis is the Biennial Report on the State of the Italian Higher Education and Research System. In addition, ANVUR conducts several ad hoc research initiatives on topics relevant for the Italian higher education system.

32. The Register Committee followed the panel’s conclusion that the agency complies with the standard. The Committee, however, emphasised the panel’s recommendation that ANVUR could use the findings and analyses of its external quality assurance processes more systematically and critically in its thematic analyses.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	25/10/2022
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	relevance of topics, nature of topics to qualify, regularity and frequency of analyses
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“20. The panel discussed the analyses produced by GAC on various topics, with the most recent ones focusing on conditions imposed on higher education institutions/programmes in decisions by the agencies and by GAC, published in 2018 and 2020 respectively. While the panel questioned whether this was “a crucial topic in the development of the HE system”, the Register Committee considered that such an analysis is certainly based on the general findings of GAC's external quality assurance activities and thus meets the expectation of the standard. Moreover, while the panel did not specifically indicate whether stakeholders found the topic relevant, an analysis of conditions might show how the accreditation criteria resonate with the sector and indicate topics that are typically challenging for institutions and programmes, and hence be relevant beyond GAC.

21. Given the role of GAC as the central body of the German accreditation system, the panel considered that the current publishing rate (one paper per year) was “insufficient”. As the standard remains completely open as to the frequency of analysis, the Register Committee found it an overly strict interpretation of the standard to influence the compliance level on that basis; the remark should rather be seen as a recommendation to publish more analyses.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ASHE
Decision of	15/10/2021
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	thematic analysis conducted on a regular basis
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“In its last renewal of registration on EQAR, the Register Committee noted that ASIIN only partially fulfilled the requirement of the standard, since ASIIN did not conduct such analysis on a regular basis and the prepared analysis and studies contained only elements of what is understood as thematic analysis. In its current review report, the panel commends ASIIN for its efforts in regularly developing thematic analysis through its impact studies which provide significant insights on the agency’s external QA activities. While the panel finds that ASIIN could improve the dissemination of its impact studies among stakeholders, the panel is satisfied that the requirement of the standard is met. Having addressed the earlier concerns in its compliance with ESG 3.4, the Register Committee concurred with the panel’s conclusion that ASIIN now complies with the standard.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	07/02/2022
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	structured approach in carrying out of thematic analysis, limited work carried out
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“26. The panel critically remarked that FIBAA does not seem to collect in a systematic way information on programmes and institutions and that the agency does not produce an overview of the outcomes of it external QA activities.

27. The panel also noted that workshops on topics related to quality assurance and resulting studies are mainly organised by FIBAA Consult. While the panel is of the view that FIBAA should reconsider the assignment of such activities to FIBAA Consult, the Register Committee disagrees and underlines that the standard does not limit the carrying out of thematic analysis by a unit of the agency or the possibility to subcontract this work to an external body.

28. The Register Committee however agrees with the panel’s conclusion that FIBAA should ensure a structured approach and allocate more resources to the planning and carrying out of thematic analysis on a systematic basis.

29. Considering the limited work in producing thematic analysis, the Committee concurs with the panel’s conclusion that FIBAA complies only partially with ESG 3.4.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	16/03/2020
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of ressources for thematic analysis
Panel conclusion	Partial compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“The panel’s findings show that ACSUG engages in broader forms of analysis, however these studies do not fully answer the demand for thematic analysis as defined in the ESG. In its Additional information to the external review report, the agency stated that the development of thematic analysis is going to become its priority following the hiring of new staff. ACSUG intends to launch external working groups to develop thematic analysis, which are to be coordinated by the new staff. In addition ACSUG also is considering to develop thematic analysis through their involvement in REACU (the Spanish Network of quality assurance agencies). The Register Committee welcomed ACSUG’s plans of addressing its shortcomings in preparing thematic analysis, but as it currently stands ACSUG does not fully meet the requirement of the standard i.e. no studies have been undertaken yet by its new working group. The Register Committee therefore concurred with the review panel that ACSUG complies only partially with ESG 3.4.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	05/11/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Producing effective thematic analysis reports
Panel conclusion	Non-compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Compliance

“The review panel’s analysis show that CYQAA does not have a thorough and systematic analysis of findings from the evaluations conducted which could feed into a national quality assurance policy or guide quality improvement at higher education institutions. The panel nevertheless found that CYQAA’s Annual Report includes a few paragraphs referring to general issues and good practices in higher education in Cyprus. In its statement to the review report, the agency stated that it has collected the General Evaluation Reports from higher education institutions in Cyprus in November 2018 and has appointed a team of qualified members responsible for producing systematic analysis using the agency’s collected reports. The agency added that the findings of its thematic analysis are expected to be published within

2019. In its addition representation, the agency provided evidence of its implementation of thematic analysis and provided a link to its new publications. The agency has carried out an analysis of the “trends and dominant issues“ within i.e. e-learning programme evaluation, master programmes’ evaluation and the evaluation of short cycle programmes within colleges. The agency stated that it has made use of its thematic results, identifying weaknesses in aspects related to distance learning and recommending further attention to these issues. Considering the changes enacted by the agency, the Register Committee considered that CYQAA now complies with ESG 3.4.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Initial
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	19/06/2019
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	systematic approach
Panel conclusion	Substantial compliance
Clarification request(s)	Agency (06/06/2019)
RC decision	Partial compliance

“In its analysis the panel considered that while NCEQE produced a form of thematic analysis in its annual report, the panel commented that the activity was not yet systematically carried out. In its letter to EQAR, the agency reported that as part of its Twinning Project (starting in 2019) a methodology is developed for carrying out analytical and research activities in a more consistent and streamlined manner. The agency added it has also received support via other projects that will help the agency assess the results of implementation of the revised QA system and further improve its QA procedures. While the Register Committee welcomed the steps taken by NCEQE, it was not yet possible to conclude whether thematic analyses are produced regularly. The Committee therefore concluded that NCEQE complies only partially with ESG 3.4.”

Full decision: see agency register entry

Application	Renewal
Review	Full, coordinated by ENQA
Decision of	16/03/2020
Standard	3.4 Thematic analysis
Keywords	Lack of clarity about existing activities; lack of regular analyses as described by the standard
Panel conclusion	Non-compliance
Clarification request(s)	–
RC decision	Partial compliance

“36. [...] the publication of assessment reports, its yearly board meeting and the publication of books/journals by AHPGS staff – did not represent thematic analyses resulting from the review processes undertaken by AHPGS. […]

38. […] The statement by AHPGS did, however, not provide details as to whether and how these are clearly based on findings from AHPGS accreditation work.

39. In its additional representation, AHPGS reiterated the view that the various past publications would not have been possible without the experience from the agency’s review processes.

40. Moreover, AHPGS provided further details on its concept and work plan of publishing two thematic analyses per year. These were developed based on decisions by its governing bodies in

2019. 41. AHPGS also pointed out that it had already published its first two thematic analyses after the external review.

42. […] The Committee considered that through the combination of past publications and the two recently published thematic analyses AHPGS showed its capacity to implement that concept.”

Full decision: see agency register entry