Precedents database
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – MAB – Partial compliance (2019) Use and regular publication of thematic analysis
MAB
Application Initial Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 03/04/2019 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords Use and regular publication of thematic analysis Panel conclusion Substantial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “While evidence of thematic analysis can be found within the programme accreditation reports, annual reports and other publications of the staff on the "activities, trends and outlook" of the HAC (SAR 41), the panel found that HAC’s level of activity in thematic analysis is limited and insufficiently developed. In its additional representation the agency stated that a thematic overview and analysis on ESG compliance from its most recent institutional accreditation round was presented during a recent event and it will be published by HAC. Further thematic analysis are planned for
2019. The Committee acknowledged the agency’s recent activity, however as it stands the agency’s progress is modest. The Committee underlines the review panel’s recommendation of ensuring the regular publication of thematic work and making use of such analysis more widely.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – ARACIS – Compliance (2019) thematic analysis conducted on a regular basis
ARACIS
Application Renewal Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 04/04/2019 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords thematic analysis conducted on a regular basis Panel conclusion Full compliance Clarification request(s) Panel (26/02/2021)
RC decision Compliance “While the panel found that none of the research projects described by ARACIS in its self assessment report met the requirement of the standard, the panel nevertheless formed the view that the agency is (fully) compliant with ESG 3.4, based on the Quality Barometer reports produced for 2009, 2010 and 2015.
The Register Committee could not conclude on the basis of the panel’s analysis whether the agency made use of the outcomes of these analysis and whether the Barometer reports are conducted on a regular basis. The Committee has therefore asked the panel for further clarifications.
In its response the panel stated that it was keen to see that ARACIS continues its commitment to the Quality Barometer series and reiterated its appreciation for the agency's dedication in preparing them, even though it comes at a substantial financial and management burden on the agency.
With a view to the application of Quality Barometers, the panel stated that they are used by ARACIS to engage with quality professionals, academics, students, and others throughout Romania and to disseminate aspects related to higher education to interested parties.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – NQA – Partial compliance (2019) thematic analysis not conducted on a regular basis
NQA
Application Initial Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 19/06/2019 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords thematic analysis not conducted on a regular basis Panel conclusion Partial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “The Register Committee noted that thematic analysis is not a regular activity performed by NQA, and that only a limited number of thematic analyses have been carried out in the past following requests from higher education institutions. The Register Committee underlined the recommendation of the panel to include thematic analysis as part of NQA’s regular planned activities and to make use of the experience and knowledge of internal and external secretaries in order to conduct such analyses. In its additional representation the agency stated that it concurs with the review panel’s analysis and that the agency has put in place an improvement plan which it will realised in the following four years.. The Register Committee welcomed the steps taken by NQA but noted that presently the agency has not yet implemented its plans to carry out systematic analysis. The Committee therefore concurred with the panel that NQA is only partially compliant with standard 3.4.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – FIBAA – Compliance (2017) Systematic approach to analyses
FIBAA
Application Renewal Review Full, coordinated by GAC Decision of 20/06/2017 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords Systematic approach to analyses Panel conclusion Substantial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Compliance “When FIBAA ‘s registration was last renewed, the Register Committee flagged for attention the establishment of a systematic analyses of FIBAA's overarching reflections and observations from its accreditation, evaluation and audit activities. The panel showed in its analysis that FIBAA initiated a regular collection of information on the outcomes of the agency’s processes, such as conditions formulated, feedback from workshops and from staff. The findings are presented in FIBAA’s newsletters, workshop articles and academic articles. While the review panel noted an increase in the analytical publications prepared by the agency, the panel also recommended that such publications are extended so as to also cover fields of activity beyond programme and system accreditation. ”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – QANU – Partial compliance (2017) Lack of systematic approach to system-wide analyses
QANU
Application Renewal Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 16/11/2017 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords Lack of systematic approach to system-wide analyses Panel conclusion Partial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “ In its decision for inclusion, the Register Committee flagged QANU’s systematic approach to system-wide analyses. While QANU has not produced thematic analysis in its strict sense, the panel noted that the agency published reports at the request of research universities and state of the art reports for programmes that are assessed in clusters. The panel noted that QANU did not have a systematic approach towards producing thematic analysis and that the agency views this activity to remain mainly in the responsibility of NVAO. In its additional representation, QANU's underlined that its core activity is to conduct assessments, and due to its limited size, financial resources and scope QANU’s ability to conduct thematic analyses in a systematic way was limited. The Board of QANU had nevertheless considered the recommendations of the panel and stated that it would adapt its approach to thematic analysis.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – IQAA – Compliance (2017) studies based on expert panel review reports are published
IQAA
Application Initial Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 20/06/2017 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords studies based on expert panel review reports are published Panel conclusion Partial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Compliance “While the panel welcomed the consistent publication of studies by IQAA addressing the Kazakh higher education and QA systems and the impact of IQAA’s reviews on institutional enhancement the panel however noted that IQAA does not analyse in its publication the results from its institutional and programme reviews. In its statement on the External Review Report, the agency explained that it did not interpret standard 3.4 to explicitly require analyses based on external review reports, but it nevertheless agreed on the importance of these findings and has published a number of studies based on expert panel review reports on institutional accreditation. Considering the evidence provided the Register Committee found that IQAA has addressed its compliance with the standard.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – ASIIN – Partial compliance (2017) systematic approach to analyses
ASIIN
Application Renewal Review Full, coordinated by GAC Decision of 20/06/2017 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords systematic approach to analyses Panel conclusion Partial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “The review panel considered that the ASIIN newsletter and the annual meetings only partially fulfil the requirements of the standard. The panel noted that the newsletters do not include an analysis of finding ascertained by ASSIIN in its own work. While the annual meetings might address the type of issues to be covered by thematic analyses, the panel noted that there was no specific documentation with summary analyses resulting from those meetings. The Register Committee took note of ASIIN's Statement on the review report and the additional representation. While referring to a number of valuable initiatives and publications, the Committee considered that many of those rather represent internal feedback mechanisms or approaches to ensure consistency in decision-making. While some of ASIIN's newsletters and publications contain elements of thematic analyses, there are currently no regular published analyses which fully respond to the requirements of this standard.The Register Committee further underlined that the standard is not entirely new, but succeeded the standard “system-wide analyses” of the ESG 2005, which, despite its name, applied to all registered agencies already in the past.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – ECCE – Partial compliance (2017) Lack of plan for thematic analysis;
ECCE
Application Renewal Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 20/06/2017 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords Lack of plan for thematic analysis; Panel conclusion Substantial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “In its decision of inclusion the Register the Committee noted that attention should be given to whether ECCE publishes regularly and systematically overarching analyses from its accreditation activity. The review panel’s finding showed that ECCE had not undertaken an analysis into its external quality assurance activities although the agency had committed to a series of research of pedagogic papers in its Draft Strategic Plan 2016-2020. The Register Committee underlined the view of the panel that while the need to undertake such analysis had increased (as a result of the rise in the number of reviews) that ECCE lacked the human resources and capacity to undertake such a structured analysis. In its additional representation ECCE provided three research papers co-authored by one of the accreditation committee members that were used to update ECCE standards. The agency also stated that the newly hired consultant will be expected to perform specific research on the internal activities of the organisation. While the Register Committee noted that resources were allocated into the development of thematic analysis, the Committee could not conclude that ECCE’s research papers describe and analyse the general findings of the agency’s activities nor that ECCE has developed a plan to ensure that thematic analysis will be regularly undertaken.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – EVALAG – Partial compliance (2024) Inactivity in thematic analysis
EVALAG
Application Renewal Review Targeted, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 02/07/2024 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords Inactivity in thematic analysis Panel conclusion Partial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “21. The Register Committee understood by the panel’s analysis that the agency, since the last review, produced two publication named “Thematic analysis 2018 to mid-2021” and “Thematic Analysis mid 2021 to mid 2023”. However, as noted by the panel “these significantly digressed from the previous approach and in the eyes of the panel could not be taken as reports that describe and analyse the general findings of evalag’s external quality assurance activities as established by the standard. These reports give merely an overview of the most important projects, publications and events in the period under study, more like an annual report.”
22. The Register Committee, could concur with the panel analysis and underlined the panel’s recommendation that the agency should resume the work on thematic analysis, which was abandoned after 2018, particularly in light of the severe changes in the ‘German system’.
23. The Register Committee therefore concurred with the panel that evalag complies only partially with the standard.
24. For the remaining standards, the Register Committee was able to concur with the review panel's analysis and conclusion without further comments.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – QAA – Compliance (2023) the geographical coverage of thematic analysis
QAA
Application Renewal Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 13/10/2023 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords the geographical coverage of thematic analysis Panel conclusion Partial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Compliance “21. The Register Committee noted that QAA carries out systematic thematic analysis within Scotland, sector-wide analysis in Wales, while UK-wide QAA has only carried out “The Quality Assurance of Alternative Providers: A Retrospective View”.
22. The Committee finds that the current activity is sufficient in its understanding and interpretation of the standard and therefore could not follow the panel’s judgment of partial compliance and concluded that QAA complies with ESG 3.4.
23. The Register Committee nevertheless underlines the panel’s recommendation that QAA should develop a clearer plan for thematic analyses for all of its external QA activities in all nations of the UK and publish them on its website.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – AKAST – Partial compliance (2023) publication, analysis
AKAST
Application Renewal Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 12/12/2023 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords publication, analysis Panel conclusion Partial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “14. In its last decision, the Register Committee welcomed AKAST plans for further development of its thematic analysis after an appropriate number of programme accreditation procedures have been carried out.
15. The Register Committee noted that while AKAST has taken some steps in preparing thematic analysis since its last review, i.e., initiating a process for evaluation of the peer review processes carried out by AKAST, since 2022 at the time of the review, no thematic analysis have been made available nor any kind of such analysis have been published.
16. Considering the limited progress made since the inclusion on the Register and the limited development of thematic analysis, the Register Committee concurred with the panel that AKAST complies only partially with ESG 3.4.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – MFHEA – Compliance (2024) thematic analysis
MFHEA
Application Initial Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 11/10/2024 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords thematic analysis Panel conclusion Compliance Clarification request(s) Agency (24/09/2024)
RC decision Compliance “59. The Register Committee learned from the report that the agency has conducted only one thematic analysis, focussing on only one standard from
its EQA Audit procedures carried out by the agency as of
2016.
60. The Committee learned that the agency is considering conducting a thematic analysis for the remaining ten standards. The panel, however, was
not provided with further information on the status of the development of this analysis or, in general, MFHEA’s policy on thematic analysis.
61. The Register Committee noted the agency's plans to revisit its policy and enhance its work on the thematic analysis. The Register Committee
found that these plans have yet to materialise in practice.
62. In its additional representation, the agency informed that it was in a process of conducting its latest thematic analysis and the same should be
finalised by the end of
2024.
63. The Register Committee further asked for clarification whether the work on the thematic analysis is ongoing and whether there is a clear
timeframe when the thematic analysis will be published. The agency clarified that the thematic analysis is currently being finalised and will be
published and presented to the public in December 2024 (see minuted clarification of 2024-09-24).
64. The Committee welcomed the work and progress done by the agency in producing thematic analysis and expects that MFHEA will continue
conducting thematic analysis on regular basis. Given the provided information in the additional representation and the further clarification,
the Register Committee could concur with the panel that the agency is in fact compliant with ESG 3.4.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – AHPGS – Compliance (2024) Thematic analysis
AHPGS
Application Renewal Review Targeted, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 02/07/2024 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords Thematic analysis Panel conclusion Compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Compliance “16. In its previous decision of registration on EQAR (of 2020-03-16), the Register Committee found the agency to be partially compliant with the standard, as the publications prepared by the agency did not analyse the outcomes of the review processes.
17. Based on the analysis of the review panel, the Register Committee understood that, since its last review in 2020, the agency published several thematic analyses. Conducting additional studies is also now part of the agency’s strategic documents.
18. The Register Committee was able to follow panel’s conclusion that AHPGS is now compliant with the standard. The Committee, further highlighted the panel’s recommendation that the agency should secure adequate dissemination of its thematic analysis, keeping in mind the various target audiences.
19. For the remaining standards, the Register Committee was able to concur with the review panel's analysis and conclusion without further comments.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – A3ES – Partial compliance (2024) Inactivity in implementing thematic analyses
A3ES
Application Renewal Review Targeted, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 02/07/2024 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords Inactivity in implementing thematic analyses Panel conclusion Partial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “15. The Register Committee understood from the analysis by the panel that the most recent thematic analysis published by the agency were done in 2017.Furthermore, the Committee, noted that “the agency confirmed to the panel that it does not currently have a systematic approach to conducting thematic analysis but confirmed its commitment to developing this.”
16. The Register Committee concurred with the panel that A3ES only partially complies with ESG 3.4. The Register Committee underlined the panel’s recommendation that the agency should resume conducting and publishing thematic analysis of the outcomes and findings of its external quality assurance activities.
17. For the remaining standards, the Register Committee was able to concur with the review panel's analysis and conclusion without further comments.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – VLUHR QA – Compliance (2024) Thematic analysis
VLUHR QA
Application Renewal Review Targeted, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 27/11/2024 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords Thematic analysis Panel conclusion Compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Compliance “13. In its last decision for renewal of registration (of 2020-03-16), the Register Committee found that VLUHR QA only partially fulfilled the requirements of the standard, as the agency did not publish thematic analysis based on the findings of external quality assurance activities.
14. The Register Committee learned from the panel’s analysis that VLUHR QA has completed three thematic analysis reports since their last review and the number of reports aligns with the level of activity of the agency. Additionally, thematic analysis has been integrated into VLUHR QA’s daily work and in the current Policy Plan (2023-2027).
15. Furthermore, the Register Committee understood that VLUHR QA focusses on the thematic analyses being relevant to higher education stakeholders and ministry representatives, rather than solely concentrating on the outcomes of external review results.
16. The Register Committee was able to follow panel’s conclusion that VLUHR QA is now compliant with the standard.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – AQUIB – Partial compliance (2024) Thematic analysis
AQUIB
Application Initial Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 27/11/2024 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords Thematic analysis Panel conclusion Compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “21. The Register Committee learned from the report that AQUIB has a Thematic Analysis Protocol for a systematic approach to conducting thematic analyses, which was adopted in 2023 and is being implemented for the first time. However, the topic of the only thematic analysis conducted so far does not incorporate the results of its external quality assurance procedures.
22. Considering that the only thematic analysis conducted by AQUIB so far is outside the scope of ESG, the Register Committee was unable to concur with the panel’s conclusion of compliance and found that AQUIB only partially complies with the standard.
23. For the remaining standards, the Register Committee was able to concur with the review panel's analysis and conclusion without further comments.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.4 Thematic analysis – ACCUA – Compliance (2024) thematic report
ACCUA
Application Renewal Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 27/11/2024 Standard 3.4 Thematic analysis Keywords thematic report Panel conclusion Partial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Compliance “20. The Register Committee learned that ACCUA has created a statistical analysis unit and produced five thematic reports since the last external review. However, as noted by the panel, out of the five reports only one can be considered as a thematic analysis in the sense of the standard, since the other four reports provided useful inputs for policy debates with regional stakeholders and for improvements in quality assurance at universities.
21. The Register Committee finds, in line with its interpretation of the standard, that the thematic analysis report in question is sufficient for achieving compliance with the standard and therefore could not follow the panel’s judgement of partial compliance and concluded that ACCUA complies with ESG 3.4.
22. The Register Committee nevertheless underlined the panel’s recommendation that the agency should devise a clear plan for thematic studies and use its evaluation reports to produce these studies.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.5 Resources – SKVC – Partial compliance (2022) reliance on temporary funding sources, state budget allocations insufficient
SKVC
Application Renewal Review Targeted, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 25/10/2022 Standard 3.5 Resources Keywords reliance on temporary funding sources, state budget allocations insufficient Panel conclusion Partial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “20. The panel discussed SKVC funding, relying on sources from several channels. In particular, SKVC's activities still partly depended on EU structural funds, which are temporary by nature. The panel further noted that the funding from Lithuania's state budget seemed to be insufficient to support the agency's activities sustainably.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.5 Resources – EQ-Arts – Partial compliance (2021) volatile resources
EQ-Arts
Application Initial Review Focused, coordinated by ECA Decision of 18/03/2021 Standard 3.5 Resources Keywords volatile resources Panel conclusion Substantial compliance Clarification request(s) – RC decision Partial compliance “28. The 2018 external review discussed that EQ-Arts' financial situation was volatile. While the resources were sufficient to sustain the (currently) small number of reviews, the medium-term perspective was not clear.
29. The panel reported that staff increased to 1.3 FTE in 2019, then fell to 0.5 FTE as result of the Covid-19 pandemic and a drop in activities.
30. While the panel found that the “agile and collaborative approach” assured that workload could be handled, the Register Committee considered that the resources of EQ-Arts remain highly volatile; this has not changed since the initial review.”
Full decision: see agency register entry
-
3.5 Resources – UKÄ – Compliance (2021) Human resources planning and work overload; Staff overturn
UKÄ
Application Initial Review Full, coordinated by ENQA Decision of 18/03/2021 Standard 3.5 Resources Keywords Human resources planning and work overload; Staff overturn Panel conclusion Full compliance Clarification request(s) Panel (15/03/2021)
RC decision Compliance “The review panel noted the continuously high workload and turnover of staff. It further elaborated that the staff and the management had different positions in regards to the reasons (p. 19). The review panel informed the Register Committee about several measures that the agency plans to introduce, including replacing site visits by online interviews and deploying a single expert panel to several institutions. The panel considered that these were welcome measures that enhance UKÄ's activities and their efficiency. The panel saw that some improvements have already taken place, resulting in decreased staff overturn.”
Full decision: see agency register entry