1. 28 June, 2013

2.  Strong emphasis on the self-evaluation phase  A European perspective  A peer-review approach  Improvement oriented  Focus on institution as a whole  Aim: Contribute to the dynamics of development and evaluates the university’s capacity for change

3.  Examination of short and long term objectives (mission statement)  Examination of external and internal constraints, as well as the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats  Recommendation of strategies to improve the quality of the institution  No standardised solution nor imperative proposals, but support to the institution for improvement  A voluntary process

4.  What is the institution trying to do?  How is the institution trying to do it?  What proves that it works?  How does the institution change in order to improve?

5.  Self-evaluation resulting in Self-Evaluation Report  Two visits by the Evaluation Team  Oral report (main findings)  Written report by the Evaluation Team  Dissemination by the University and the IEP  Follow-up evaluation (optional)

6.  Kerstin Norén, Chair  Gerard Wrixon  Simona Lache  Jacob Müller  Fabrice Hénard, Team Coordinator

7.  Integration of faculties ◦ Dissemination of good examples ◦ Cooperation between faculties in multidisciplinary teams ◦ Keeping track of national and European changes/developments  Complication of governance structure  Who is responsible?  Good integration of students in governing bodies

8.  We support idea of a more cohesive university ◦ Visibility ◦ Reputation ◦ Central intelligence ◦ Subsidiarity remains  Enhance communication to achieve consistency  Lobby for multi-year financing contract to secure development

9.  Students are pleased with their studies  Uneven development of Bologna process  Duplication of courses  Need for more practical training  Too much concentration on research development could threaten undergraduate education

10.  Make sure that habilitation process includes deep knowledge of the Bologna Process  Continuous improvement of didactics  Develop Life Long Learning  Make sure resources are not used to duplicate courses  Start careful restructuring and search for coherence and mutual recognition between faculties  Promote further contacts with stakeholders for (re)- design of programmes

11.  Excellence in research and development  Predominant applied research, basic research in some limited areas  Good examples of multidisciplinary research in the region between “Poland-Black Sea”

12.  Research as a service to the society  Students needs for contacts with employers  Possibility of European funding  Characteristics of the country profiling the university  Internationalisation in the wider area  = Applied research should be favoured

13.  University is important for the stakeholders  The way the Career Center works  Good work with surrounding society

14.  Expand contacts with society around and undertake collaborative projects  Formalised structure for the stakeholders  Increase Alumni students contacts in all faculties  Become the focal point for the region

15.  Ambitious new university-wide strategy including both research and education  High number of incoming students  Strategic links with universities

16.  Tighten strategic links at faculty level  Look for university networks with similar universities  Advocate for English-taught programmes

17.  Good system with Quality Development Centre and the Quality Assessment Committee  Round table discussions following programme evaluation for improvement of questionnaires  Results of reports are not always implemented

18.  Incentives to take up decisions on QA  A portion of funding should be tied to the extent to which the faculty responds to recommendations in the yearly quality reports  Quality Development Centre to include Teaching and Learning Development (including staff development).