Regulations
Administration Council
Regulation Project no. …/2009
Regimen for the assessment and accreditation procedures of higher education institutions and their study cycles
During the X legislature, a set of legal diplomas was passed aiming at creating higher education quality assurance mechanisms or at improving already existing mechanisms, with a major focus on the assessment and accreditation of higher education institutions.
Therefore, the Decree-Law no. 74/2006, of 24 of March (in the meantime altered by Decree-Law no. 107/2008, of 25 of June), that has enacted the juridical regime of degrees and diplomas, has also established the general principles for the accreditation of higher education institutions and their study cycles. Building up on the fundamental options contained in that diploma, Law nº. 38/2007, of 16 August, has approved the juridical regime of the assessment of higher education institutions and Law no. 62/2007, of 10 September, has approved the juridical regime of higher education institutions. At last, Decree-Law no. 369/2007, of 5 of November, has created the Assessment and Accreditation Agency for Higher Education, which was conferred the responsibility for the procedures relative to higher education quality assurance, namely those of assessment and accreditation.
Law no. 38/2007, of 16 of August, and Law no. 62/2007, of 10 of September, have chosen not to exhaustively regulate the assessment and accreditation procedures, which were deferred to a regulation to be issued afterwards. To this effect, the no. 5 of article 7 of Decree-Law no. 369/2007, of 5 of November, has determined that the norms relative to the accreditation procedures and its relation with the assessment procedure were to be approved by the Administration Council of the Assessment and Accreditation Agency for Higher Education.
Therefore, the present regulation approves the system of regulations of the assessment and accreditation procedures for the higher education institutions and their study cycles.
Considering that no. 2 of article 83 of Decree-Law no. 74/2006, of 24 of March, edited by Decree-Law 107/2008, of 25 of June, determines that the accreditation of the study cycles already in operation when the Agency initiated its operation must be completed until the end of the 2010-2011 academic year, a transitory procedure of preliminary accreditation is established, without detriment of the full assessment of all the requirements legally imposed for accreditation.
The present regulation has been submitted to public discussion.
Therefore:
Under the terms of no. 5 of article 7 of Decree-Law no. 369/2007, of 5 of November, and of item e) of number 2 of article 11 of the Statutes of the Assessment and Accreditation Agency for Higher Education, approved by Decree-Law 369/2007, of 5 of November, the Administration Council of the Assessment and Accreditation Agency for Higher Education determines:
Chapter I
General arrangements
Article 1
Object
The present regulation determines the assessment and accreditation procedures of higher education institutions and their study cycles.
Article 2
General principles of assessment and accreditation procedures
1 - Quality assessment and accreditation procedures should be designed in such a way that they are appropriate to the aims and objectives of assessment.
2 - In the assessment and accreditation procedures, the contributions of all interested parties are openly asked for and taken into consideration in the decisions to be taken.
3 - The Agency may ask for the collaboration of any institution, public or private, national, foreign or international, within the scope of assessment and accreditation procedure.
Article 3
Computer treatment of assessment and accreditation procedures
1 - All the actions and formalities of the assessment and accreditation procedures are made using the electronic platform available at the Internet site of the Assessment and Accreditation Agency for Higher Education (from this point called Agency) except if the law and regulations or the nature of the acts and formalities explicitly determines a different practice.
2 - All the communications between the bodies and services of the Agency and the institution interested are made through electronic mail whenever there are no appropriate forms in the electronic platform referred under no. 1.
Article 4
Virtual Administrative Process
1 - All the acts and formalities performed in the assessment and accreditation procedures will be registered in the Agency’s electronic platform, as well as all the written documents relative to those procedures, allowing every process to be complete in electronic format.
2 - The virtual administrative process may be examined by the interested higher education institutions.
Article 5
Communications
Every decision with external consequences that is passed in the assessment and accreditation procedures must be communicated to the interested higher education institutions.
Article 6
Publicity
The Internet sites of the Agency and of the interested higher education institutions must publish:
a) The final decisions of the Administration Council and of the Revision Council in all matters of assessment and accreditation.
b) The evaluation reports and the responses of the interested higher education institutions.
Chapter II
Accreditation procedures
Section I
General principles
Article 7
The need for accreditation
1 – The coming into force or the maintenance in operation of a study cycles leading to degrees of licenciado, master or doctor depends on the accreditation of the institution for this purpose.
2 – The accreditation is conferred aiming at the operation of one or more specific study cycles, and each higher education institution must be accredited for all the study cycles it operates.
Article 8
Initiative
1 – The accreditation procedure starts with a submission signed by the head of the interested higher education institution, or when the institution is not public, of the respective founding body.
2 – The submission can only be made by means of a user name and a keyword to be obtained from the Agency.
Article 9
Submission of accreditation
1 – The submission of accreditation must contain the following elements:
a) Identification of the interested higher education institution;
b) Identification of the (organic) unit in charge of the cycle to be accredited;
c) Characterisation of the educative, scientific and cultural project where the study cycle to be accredited is integrated;
d) Identification of the study cycle to be accredited and of the academic degree it confers;
e) Characterisation of the study cycle to be accredited;
f) Indication of the main scientific area of the study cycle to be accredited;
g) Indication of the number of ECTS credits necessary for a degree;
h) Indication of the normal duration of the study cycle;
i) Indication of the curricular structure and syllabus;
j) Indication of options, branches or other organisational forms of alternative routes that eventually are available through the study cycle;
k) Identification of academic staff members allocated to the study cycle;
l) Synthetic curricula of the academic staff members allocated to the study cycle;
m) Identification of the facilities where the study cycle operates;
n) Description and evidence of other material and human resources indispensable for assuring the level and quality or education in the study cycle to be accredited, considering the academic degree it confers;
o) Concise analysis of weaknesses and strengths, opportunities and threats of the study cycle to be accredited;
p) If the submission refers to a study cycle leading to a masters degree, evidence that there are high level training or research or development activities in the scientific areas that integrate the study cycle’s speciality;
q) If the submission refers to a study cycle leading to a doctor degree:
i) Description and evidence there are the human and organisational resources necessary for carrying out research;
ii) Evidence that the interested higher education institution detains by itself or through its participation and collaboration, or of their academics and researchers, of an accumulated research experience, duly evaluated and realized in relevant academic and scientific production in the scientific areas integrating the knowledge area or the speciality being considered.
2 – The Administration Council passes the electronic forms for submission of accreditation demands that realize and specify the elements referred in the previous items, and defines the elements that the interested higher education institution must provide in English.
3 – At any moment, the Administration Council, the Procedure Manager or the external review team may demand that the interested higher education institution provides the original documents certifying the elements referred in number 1, giving the institution a reasonable period to do so.
Article 10
Identification number of the process
Together with the user name and the keyword referred to under number 2 of article 8, the interested higher education institution receives the identification number of the process.
Article 11
Procedure manager
1 – Each accreditation procedure has a manager, appointed by the Administration Council either through an individual or a generic decision.
2 – The procedure manager is responsible for instructing the accreditation procedure, unless the Administration Council decides to retain the instruction.
3 – Without detriment of the previous number, the Administration Council may:
a) Without retaining the management of the instruction, it may retain the competency for realising specific instruction acts or formalities.
b) While retaining the management of the instruction, it may ask the procedure manager to undertake some specific instruction acts or formalities.
Article 12
Preliminary appreciation
1 – If the submission is not in agreement with the requirements established in article 9, the interested higher education institution is invited to overcome the detected deficiencies within a period of ten days.
2 – The submission is preliminarily turned down if the detected deficiencies are not overcome or if the lack of requirements for accreditation is evident.
3 – In the case of the later part of the previous number, the interested higher education institution is always listened to before the preliminary refusal is made.
Article 13
Relation between accreditation and assessment
1 – The formulation of an accreditation submission implies the immediate opening of an assessment procedure of the study cycle to be accredited.
2 – The decision about the accreditation is supported by the external assessment report.
Article 14
Preliminary hearing
1 – Once the external evaluation report is completed, the interested higher education institution is listed to about the probable orientation of the decision of the accreditation procedure.
2 – In case of an unconditional accreditation decision the preliminary hearing of the interested higher education institution may be waived.
Article 15
Legal capacity for decision about the accreditation submission
The decision on the accreditation submission falls within the legal capacity of the Administration Council.
Article 16
Contents of the decision about the accreditation submission
1 – The decision on the accreditation submission may be favourable or unfavourable.
2 – The favourable decision may be conditioned to the adoption by the interested higher education institution of determined quality assurance measures, within a reasonable period of time.
3 – The decision about the accreditation submission may be any one of those mentioned in the previous numbers for any of the study cycles under accreditation demand.
Article 17
Effects of the favourable decisions
1 – A favourable accreditation decision implies the authorisation to initiate the operation of the accredited study cycle in a higher education institution and the recognition of the degree it leads to.
2 – A conditional accreditation decision produces the effects mentioned under the previous number until the decision mentioned in article 18.
Article 18
Re-appreciation of a conditional accreditation decision
Once the period mentioned in the conditional accreditation decision is over, the Administration Council decides, based on the report determined on number 3 of article 39, its transformation into an unconditional accreditation or into an unfavourable decision.
Article 19
Re-appreciation of the accreditation
1 – If there are indications that the presuppositions that supported the accreditation decision were altered, the Administration Council may at any time decide to open a re-appreciation of the accreditation procedure.
2 – The re-appreciation of the accreditation procedure is ruled by the arrangements applicable to the accreditation procedure with the necessary adaptations.
3 – The assessment procedure originated by the re-appreciation of the accreditation procedure may be limited to specific aspects of the operation of the study cycle under discussion, to be determined by the Administration Council.
4 – As a result of the assessment procedure, the Administration Council may decide:
a) To maintain the accreditation as it was issued and keeping its validity period;
b) To maintain the accreditation as it was issued, but conditioned to the adoption, by the interested higher education institution, of quality assurance measures to be determined for a reasonable period of time, under the terms of article 20.
c) To repeal the accreditation, under the terms of article 21.
Article 20
Supervenient accreditation conditioning
1 – The supervenient accreditation conditioning is ruled by the provisions of numbers 2 and 3 of article 16, of number 2 of article 17 and article 18, with the necessary modifications.
2 – Once the period defined in the supervenient accreditation conditioning is over, the Administration Council decides, based on the report determined on number 3 of article 39, to maintain the accreditation as it was issued and keeping its validity period, or to repeal the accreditation under the terms of article 21.
Article 21
Repeal of accreditation
1 – The accreditation can only be repealed in case of lack of fulfilment of legal requirements of statutory determinations or in case of lack of satisfaction of the scientific and pedagogic criteria that supported the accreditation.
2 – The decision that determines the repeal of the accreditation defines the period when the study cycle will cease its operation and the measures to safeguard the expectations of the enrolled students.
Article 22
Validity of the accreditation period
1 – The accreditation is valid for a five years period, without detriment to the provisions of article 18, items b) and c) of number 4 of article 19, number 22 of article 20 and article 21.
2 – In case the conditional accreditation is transformed into full accreditation, the period of conditional accreditation is taken into account when calculating the period established in the previous number.
Article 23
End of accreditation effects
1 – The effects of accreditation may end by:
a) Expiration due to the passing of its validity period;
b) Transformation of a conditional accreditation decision into an unfavourable decision;
c) Repeal.
2 – The provisions of item a) of the previous number will not take place if the submission for an accreditation renewal has been duly formulated within the period established under article 26 and the procedure has not been stopped by reasons ascribable to the interested higher education institution.
3 – Without detriment to the provisions of number 2 of article 21, the end of the accreditation effects implies the immediate prohibition of keeping in operation the study cycle in discussion and the loss of the recognition of the corresponding academic degrees.
Article 24
Taxes
1 – For every procedure of accreditation, re-appreciation, renewal and revision taxes are due.
2 – When the initiative of the procedure lies with the interested higher education institution, the submission must be accompanied by proof that the taxes due were paid.
3 – The taxes referred to under number 1 are determined by a deliberation of the Administration Council that takes into consideration the average costs of the services provided, following criteria of economy, efficiency and efficacy, as well as the best international practices in these matters.
Section II
Special legal provisions
Article 25
Previous accreditation
1 – The submission of previous accreditation should be formulated within the period established every year by the Administration Council and advertised in the Agency’s site in the Internet.
2 – In the previous accreditation procedure, the assessment procedure referred to in number 1 of article 13, exclusively aims at verifying the fulfilment of the accreditation requirements established by article 57 of Decree-Law no. 74/2006, of 24 of March, and the assessment measures determined in article 32 may be waived, except for those determined under item b) of number 2 of the same article.
Article 26
Renewal of accreditation
If the interested higher education institution wants to keep in operation the accredited study cycles, it should submit an accreditation renewal until the end of the academic year that precedes that when the accreditation will end.
Chapter III
Assessment procedure
Article 27
Object of assessment
1 – The assessment has as its object:
a) The quality of the performance of higher education institutions;
b) The quality of the study cycles leading to a degree of licenciado, master and doctor.
2 – The assessment may deal with relevant cross performance parameters of sets of higher education institutions or of study cycles.
3 – The assessment of the performance quality of a higher education institution implies the assessment of all study cycles in operation.
4 – The assessment procedures evaluate the efficacy of the internal quality assurance procedures of education institutions.
Article 28
Assessment obligation
The assessment is obligatory for all higher education institutions.
Article 29
Assessment periodicity
1 – The assessment of the performance quality of higher education institution must occur every five years.
2 – Without detriment to the previous number, it may take place at any moment:
a) The assessment of the performance quality of higher education institutions, following a justified demand of the interested higher education institution or by initiative of the Administration Council.
b) The assessment of the quality of study cycles, following an accreditation demand or an accreditation renewal formulated by an interested higher education institution or by initiative of the Administration Council, under the scope of an accreditation re-appreciation.
3 – The Administration Council may refuse to perform the assessment of the performance quality of the higher education institution at the institution’s request when, after examining the justification of the request, it considers that there is not enough reason to review the assessment schedules in force.
Article 30
External review teams
1 – The assessment is performed by external review teams composed of independent experts.
2 – Each external review team is composed of three to five members, depending on the complexity of the assessment tasks to perform, and must integrate the participation of experts from foreign or international institutions.
3 – The composition of the external review teams is determined by the Administration Council that appoints the respective presidents.
4 – The Administration Council has the legal authority to appoint the external review teams for each assessment procedure, by means of individual or generic decisions.
Article 31
Impartiality, fairness and confidentiality
1 – Only those who in the two previous years had no relation with the higher education institution to be assessed and who promise the Agency not to establish those relations in the two next years can integrate the external review teams.
2 – The members of the external review teams should adopt a conduct that will safeguard the independence, fairness and impartiality of the assessment.
Article 32
Assessment tools
1 – The external review teams following the orientations defined by the Administration Council will perform the activities that are necessary for the assessment, including, namely:
a) Visits to the education institution;
b) Listening to representatives of the bodies of the higher education institution;
c) Listening to the self-evaluation team of the higher education institution;
d) Listening to former students, directly or through their representative associations;
e) Interviewing academics and employees;
f) Listening to professional associations, labour unions and trade unions, as well as with ministries with attributions in the area of the education institution or study cycle to be assessed;
g) Listening to employers in the areas of activity of the study cycle to be assessed;
h) Listening to any relevant scientific, cultural and economic bodies.
2 – It is obligatory to listen to:
a) Students, directly or through their representative associations;
b) In the case of an assessment procedure incidental in relation to an accreditation procedure, the bodies most representative of the professions for which the study cycles aim to train, namely those referred in item f) of number 1.
3 – With due regard to the proportionality principle and the scientific and pedagogic autonomy of higher education institutions, the members of the external review teams have the right to access to every installation of the higher education institution and to consult all the relevant documents for the assessment procedure.
Article 33
Assessment criteria
1 – The assessment consists in the assignment of a qualitative qualification based on relevant aspects of the performance of the higher education institution and of the study cycle.
2 – The aspects to be considered in the assessment are materialized, by taking into account the nature of the higher education institution and of the study cycle, from among the following thematic areas:
a) Objectives of the study cycle;
b) Internal organisation and quality assurance mechanisms;
c) Material resources and partnerships;
d) Qualification and allocation of the academic and non-academic staffs;
e) Characterization of the students;
f) Teaching and learning environment;
g) Teaching objectives, curricular structure and syllabus;
h) Organization of the curricular units;
i) Teaching and learning methodologies;
j) Results of academic, scientific, technological and artistic and other activities;
k) Proposals for performance improvement actions.
3 – The qualitative classification is expressed using the references “satisfies”, “satisfies partly” or “does not satisfy”.
Article 34
Results of assessments performed by other entities
Without detriment to article 40, in the scope of the assessment are to be taken into consideration the internal quality assurance procedures of the interested higher education institution, as well as the results of assessments performed by national, foreign or international institutions that develop assessment activities complying with the principles adopted by the European system of higher education quality assurance.
Article 35
Preliminary report
1 – Once the evaluation tasks are completed, the external review team will draft a preliminary report containing:
a) The given qualitative qualification, both as to each of the parameters considered in the assessment, as well as in relation with the global assessment, in a scale that allows ordering and comparing the assessment object;
b) The recommendations that are considered necessary and useful, relative to concrete aspects of the operation of the higher education institution or of the study cycle, aiming to improve its quality. In this case it should propose actions, or an action plan, to adopt for its fulfilment, as well as the terms of an accompanying process allowing, in a consistent form, to materialize the formulated recommendations;
c) A proposal for a decision on accreditation;
d) A proposal for quality assurance measures to be imposed on the interested higher education institution and for the actions, or action plan, to be adopted for making it effective, when the proposal referred in the previous item is conditional accreditation.
2 – The report is translated into English.
Article 36
Previous hearing
The interested higher education institution will be listened to about the preliminary report.
Article 37
Final report
1 – Once the previous hearing of the interested higher education institution is completed, the external review team drafts the final report.
2 – The final report must contain the elements defined in article 35, and needs also to consider the response of the interested higher education institution.
3 – If the final report has contents or elements about which the interested higher education institution was unable to express its opinion, then it must be listened to about the final report.
Article 38
Legal capacity for decision on assessment
1 – The decision about assessment falls under the legal capacity of the Administration Council.
2 – The decision of the Administration Council may consist in an expression of total or partial agreement with the proposals of the evaluation report.
Article 39
Assessment sequence in the case of conditional accreditation
or on supervenient accreditation conditioning
1 – When the Administration Council passes judgement on conditional accreditation or on supervenient accreditation conditioning, it appoints an external review team to follow the activity promoted by the interested education institution aiming at the adoption of the demanded quality assurance measures.
2 – The external review team may use all the tools listed in article 33.
3 – Once the period of conditional accreditation is over, the external review team should draft a well-grounded report with a proposal for transforming that decision into another of unconditional favourable accreditation or an unfavourable decision.
4 – To the report referred in the previous number the determinations of articles 35 to 37 are usable, with the necessary adaptations.
Article 40
Simplified assessment procedures
The Administration Council may establish, by means of regulations, simplified assessment procedures to be used when there are results of assessments performed by national, foreign or international institutions that develop assessment activity complying with the principles adopted by the European system of higher education quality assurance, as well as to education establishments with certified self-evaluation systems.
Chapter IV
Revision of decisions on assessment and accreditation
Article 41
Appeals to the revision council
From the conclusive decisions made by the Administration Council on assessment and accreditation procedures there is appeal to the Revision Council.
Article 42
Submission of appeal
1 – The appeal must be presented in the ten days after the decision is communicated by means of a demand underwritten by the top manager of the interested higher education institution.
2 – The demand is formulated using the determinations of article 9, with the necessary adaptations.
Article 43
Authority of the Revision Council about decisions on appeals
When deciding on an appeal, the Revision Council may confirm, revoke, change or replace the decision of the Administration Council.
Chapter V
Final and transitory dispositions
Article 44
Accreditation of study cycles already in operation
The accreditation of study cycles already in operation when the Agency initiated its operation is mandatory and is carried on under the terms of Chapter II, with changes contained in the following articles.
Article 45
Preliminary accreditation
1 – The preliminary accreditation of study cycles already in operation is submitted within a period that will be established by the Administration Council.
2 – The preliminary accreditation procedures must be completed until the end of the 2010/2011 academic year.
Article 46
Preliminary accreditation regime
1 – To the preliminary accreditation are applicable the dispositions of the accreditation, with the necessary adaptations.
2 – The submission of accreditation contains the elements referred under items a), b), d), f) to n), p) and q) of number 1 of article 9, with the necessary adaptations, and also:
a) Indication about the existence of an internal quality assurance system and its description if it exists;
b) Indication of the number of students enrolled in the study cycle to be accredited;
c) Data on demand, pedagogic efficiency, employability and internationalization of the study cycle to be accredited.
3 – The assessment procedure exclusively aims at verifying the fulfilment of the accreditation requirements established by article 57 of Decree-Law no. 74/2006, of 24 of March.
4 – The preliminary accreditation is valid until its re-appreciation under the assessment of the performance of higher education institutions, without detriment of the provisions in article 17, in items b) and c) of number 4 of article 10, in number 2 of article 20, and in article 21.
Article 47
Re-opening of accreditation procedures
1 – If the preliminary accreditation procedure does not allow for the determination of all the relevant data for a decision on accreditation, the Administration Council may determine re-opening the assessment procedure.
2 – If the assessment procedure is re-opened, the interested higher education institution must provide the elements referred to in number 1 of article 9, and the assessment will follow the dispositions of Chapter III.
3 – In the case of number 1, the accreditation will be valid for the period established in number 1 of article 22, without detriment to the disposition of number 2 of article 23.
Article 48
Performance assessment
The assessment of the performance quality of higher education institutions will start only after the end of the 2010/2011 academic year.
Article 49
Revision
This regulation will be reviewed within the period of one year after coming into force.
RSS