Rules for the System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance ****************************************************************************************** * ****************************************************************************************** Under section 36 (2) of Act No. 111/1998 Sb., to regulate higher education institutions an amend other laws (“the Higher Education Act”), the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports Rules for the System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance of Charles University un MSMT-2793/2017 on January 31, 2017.                                                                                        ………                                                                                        Mgr Gondková                                                                         Director of Higher Department ****************************************************************************************** * Rules for the System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance of Charles University 2017 ****************************************************************************************** Under sections 9 (1) (b) (3) and 17 (1) (j) of Act No. 111/1998 Sb., to regulate higher ed institutions and to change and amend other laws (“the Higher Education Act”), as amended, Senate of Charles University has adopted the following Rules for the System of Internal Ev Quality Assurance of Charles University as an internal regulation of the University: ****************************************************************************************** * Part I Introductory Provisions ****************************************************************************************** *========================================================================================= * Article 1 Introductory Provisions *========================================================================================= This internal regulation defines the rules for the system of quality assurance of the educ creative, and related activities and of the internal evaluation of the quality of these ac for the System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance”) of Charles University (“the under Article 47 (2) of the Constitution of the University (“the Constitution”). *========================================================================================= * Article 2 Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance *========================================================================================= 1. The purpose of internal evaluation and quality assurance is to support the development in accordance with the European concept of quality of university education and to support research, development, innovative, artistic, or other creative activities (“creative activ foster the development of individuals and their preparation for life in an increasingly co the teachers, their development and cooperation with students in a free academic environme preparation of graduates who can succeed on the international labour market and can work w findings, and maintain, disseminate, and build upon the existing results attained by manki of science, technology, culture, and society. 2. Quality means compliance with standards applied by the University to its activities, or the standard practice in accordance with the mission and goals of the University. The conc applicable in a particular case is determined by the context. 3. Quality assurance means systematic and structured attention paid to the quality of educ creative, and related activities, as well as the maintenance and improvement of quality. 4. Evaluation of quality means verification of whether and to what extent the University i in fulfilling its mission and goals, in compliance with the standards applied by the Unive activities, and of how the activities of the University surpass its goals and standards. 5. Internal evaluation and quality assurance is based on the definition of the mission and the University as stated in the Constitution of the University, and on the concept of the development provided in its strategic plan of educational, scholarly, research, developmen artistic, or other creative activities (“the Strategic Plan”), and continuously reacts to development of the academic community and initiatives of the bodies of the University and 6. Internal evaluation and quality assurance is further based on the standards and procedu assurance in the European Higher Education Area and takes into account other national, Eur international standards for the activities of higher education institutions. 7. In the internal evaluation and quality assurance of its activities, the University coop higher education institutions, the Czech Academy of Sciences and other research institutio hospitals, public administration bodies, professional and specialist associations, and oth institutions in the Czech Republic and abroad. 8. Internal evaluation and quality assurance is carried out according to subject area and and according to the University, the faculties, and other units of the University. The sub organisational points of view are usually combined. *========================================================================================= * Article 3 Principles of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance *========================================================================================= 1. Internal evaluation and quality assurance respects the internal culture and environment and other units as well as specific aspects of areas of study and subject areas pursued at 2. The rules, procedures, and criteria of evaluation are published in the publicly accessi the University website. 3. The evaluation is carried out in a transparent manner and is driven by subject matter, ethical criteria. 4. The evaluation relies on proven qualitative and quantitative data, it is always put int based on a critical assessment of the findings. 5. Whenever the activities of faculties, other units, or workplaces of the University are entities are always involved in the evaluation and express their opinion on the results. 6. The evaluation usually also relies on the feedback from the members of the academic sta graduates, as well as other relevant stakeholders. 7. Recommendations for the further development of the entity evaluated form an integral pa evaluation and if defects are identified, directives are recommended to correct the defect stipulated period. After this period elapses, a follow-up evaluation or follow-up audit is depending on the type of defect. *========================================================================================= * Article 4 Basis of Evaluation *========================================================================================= 1. The evaluation is usually based on: a) strategic, conceptual, status, analytical, and other documents of the University, facul units; b) data from the information systems of the University, faculties, other units or other pu sources accessible to the University; c) own evaluation reports usually compiled on the basis of a framework outline created in d) expert assessments; e) questionnaire surveys; f) semi-structured interviews; g) bibliometric analyses; h) indicators monitored in the Strategic Plan and the Annual Report of the University. 2. The evaluation further relies on guidance documents approved by the Internal Evaluation University (the “Internal Evaluation Board”) specifying the elements and procedures for in and quality assurance. ****************************************************************************************** * Part II System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance of University Activities ****************************************************************************************** *========================================================================================= * Article 5 Internal Evaluation of Educational Activities in Programmes of Study *========================================================================================= 1. The minimum requirements for the quality of educational activities of the University ar particular by: a) the Higher Education Act; b) Government Decree No. 274/2016 Sb., to regulate accreditation standards in higher educa Government Decree No. 275/2016 Sb., on areas of study in higher education; c) the Accreditation Code of the University; d) the Code of Admissions Procedure of the University; e) the Code of Study and Examination; f) the Code of Procedure for the Granting of Associate Professorship and Full Professorshi University; g) standards of study programmes of the University. 2. Quality improvement of educational activities in programmes of study is achieved in par of: a) evaluation of programmes of study; b) feedback from the members of the academic community and graduates on the quality of ins organisation of study, study facilities, and infrastructure; c) evaluation of qualification theses and possibly also rigorosum theses; d) monitoring of requirements, course, and results of admissions procedure and study; incl equal access to the admissions procedure and to study, and the monitoring of study program success. 3. A programme of study is evaluated on the basis of an own evaluation report on the progr submitted by its guarantor and covering the period since the granting of accreditation by Accreditation Office for the Higher Education [Národní akreditační úřad pro vysoké školstv Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, or since the granting of authorization to perform of study within the framework of institutional accreditation (“the Accreditation”). The re composed of the following: a) assessment of compliance with the standards of programmes of study of the University; b) results of evaluations by students and graduates; c) evaluation of how the related creative activities are reflected in the educational acti d) depending on the type and profile of the programme of study, the evaluation of students activities or cooperation with the practising profession; e) evaluation of the international dimension of the programme of study; f) results of the evaluation of qualification theses and possibly also rigorosum theses if evaluated within the relevant period; g) evaluation of the success rate in the admissions procedure, the dropout rate, the rate completion of study, and the success of graduates of the study programme; h) evaluation of the pedagogical, scientific and technical resources of the study programm i) identification of the strengths, weaknesses, threats, and opportunities of the future d study programme. 4. Data available from the information system of the University for the compilation of an report is provided to the guarantor of the programme of study by the Rector’s Office of th cooperation with the faculty. 5. The evaluation of the programme of study is performed by a working group created by the panel of the Internal Evaluation Board at least once in the period of force of its Accredi 6. The own evaluation report is considered at a joint meeting of the working group of the Evaluation Board, the guarantor of the programme of study being evaluated, and at least on academic staff involved in its implementation. The meeting may also be attended by the dea authorised by the dean, the president of the academic senate of the faculty, or a represen by him, or a representative of students nominated by the academic senate of the faculty im evaluated programme of study. A member of the working group of the Internal Evaluation Boa minutes of the meeting. 7. Based on the own evaluation report on the programme of study and the joint meeting unde the working group of the Internal Evaluation Board prepares a draft evaluation report on t of study. Before the draft is considered by the Internal Evaluation Board the chair of the submits the draft to the guarantor and the deans of the faculties implementing the evaluat study to express their opinions together with the minutes of the joint meeting which form the report. 8. After the approval of the evaluation report on the study programme, a summary of the ev is published in the publicly accessible section of the University website. 9. The elements of organisation and of the course of the evaluation of programmes of study by a Rector’s directive on which the Internal Evaluation Board expresses its opinion. 10. The rules for the evaluation of educational activities by students and graduates of th stipulated by an internal regulation of the University. 11. The rules for the evaluation of qualification theses and rigorosum theses are stipulat directive on which the Internal Evaluation Board expresses its opinion. 12. The requirements, course, and results of the admissions procedure are monitored in par annual report on admissions procedure. 13. The course and results of study are monitored in particular on the basis of data from Information System of the University. *========================================================================================= * Article 6 Internal Evaluation of Quality of Lifelong Learning Programmes *========================================================================================= 1. The evaluation of a lifelong learning programme usually consists of: a) feedback from the participants and graduates on the quality of instruction, organisatio of the lifelong learning programme; b) opinion of the implementer; c) monitoring and evaluation of data collected in particular within the framework of the p Annual Report on Activities of the University. 2. The minimum requirements for internationally recognized courses and rules for the evalu stipulated in a Rector’s directive under Article 34 (4) of the Constitution, and the Inter Board expresses an opinion on the Rector’s directive. *========================================================================================= * Article 7 Internal Evaluation of Quality of Creative Activities *========================================================================================= 1. The conceptual development of the creative activities of the University is ensured in p means of programmes for the support of science and research. 2. Programmes for the support of science and research support the development of subject a University implements, the development of the excellence of its creative activities as wel students and members of the academic and research staff in various phases of their researc 3. The preparation of programmes for the support of science and research is in addition to the Strategic Plan of the University based in particular on the evaluation of the implemen existing programmes and on the results of the creative activities achieved by the Universi period. The preparation involves the bodies of the University, the faculties, and other un particular the members of the academic and research staff of the University who are recogn 4. The draft programmes for the support of science and research are submitted by the Recto International Board, the Research Board, and the Academic Senate of the University which t opinions thereon. 5. The details of programmes for the support of science and research are announced in the Rector’s directive that also stipulates the requirements and criteria of evaluation of the final results thereof. 6. The evaluation of the creative activities of the University is carried out by groups of related to the implemented programmes of study in the individual areas of study, and it is such a manner as to allow the interconnection thereof with the faculties and higher educat 7. The evaluation of creative activities respects the different publishing and citing conv individual subject areas and is usually carried out as an international comparison. 8. The evaluation of creative activities also involves an evaluation of whether the releva area is excellent in an international, or in justified cases, in a national comparison. Th carried out on the basis of a comparison with outstanding foreign or possibly domestic hig institutions or research institutions. 9. The evaluation of creative activities of the University usually relies on: a) an own evaluation report on the creative activities by faculties and higher education i (“Report on Creative Activities”); b) a bibliometric analysis of results; c) an expert assessment of results by independent, internationally recognized experts; d) indicators of quality of the creative activities. 10. The Report on Creative Activities, which takes into account the specific aspects of th higher education institute and the subject areas being implemented, usually describes and a) the mission, vision, and goals in the area of creative activities; b) the strategic management of the development of creative activities; c) the directives adopted to support the development of creative activities; d) the interconnection of creative activities with educational activities; e) staffing and qualification growth; f) student research activities with a special focus on students of doctoral study programm g) University, national, as well as foreign research projects in progress; h) national and international cooperation in creative activities; i) the importance of creative activities to the society; j) the most significant results achieved; k) the manner and results of the internal evaluation of creative activities; l) the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in creative activities. 11. The Report on Creative Activities is compiled by the faculties and higher education in every five years. 12. Before the dean of the faculty or the director of the higher education institute refer Creative Activities to the Rector, the research board of the relevant faculty or higher ed expresses its opinion thereon. 13. The Report on Creative Activities is submitted by the Rector to the Internal Evaluatio University to express its opinion thereon. The Rector may also request the opinion of the Board of the University or the Research Board of the University. 14. The data available from the information system of the University for compilation of th Creative Activities is provided to the faculties and other units by the Rector’s Office. I results of evaluation stated in paragraph 9 b) to d) are used in the preparation of the Re Activities. 15. The main results of the Report on Creative Activities are published in the publicly ac of the University website. 16. The Reports on Creative Activities serve as source documents for the development of su particular in relation to the preparation of the Strategic Plan of the University and to t the University programmes for the support of science and research. 17. The bibliometric analysis is used for the evaluation of results of creative activities of results recorded in the international database used as source for the analysis  represe small part of the results of the relevant area of study or subject area. 18. In cases when the bibliometric analysis does not provide sufficient data, an expert as by independent, internationally recognised experts will be used. The expert assessment is continuously, usually on the basis of cooperation between the University and partner forei and in cooperation with the International Board of the University. 19. The details of and arrangements for the internal evaluation of creative activities are Rector’s directive on which the Internal Evaluation Board expresses its opinion. *========================================================================================= * Article 8 Internal Evaluation of Quality of Supplementary Activities *========================================================================================= 1. The evaluation of the quality of supplementary activities means the evaluation of activ educational and creative activities. 2. The following is usually subject to evaluation: a) management and administration of the University; b) use of resources (in particular human and financial); c) infrastructure; d) information system; e) information and advisory services; f) services in the area of transfer of knowledge and technologies; g) library services; h) publishing and editing activities; i) accommodation and catering services; j) facilities for sports activities. 3. The evaluation of supplementary activities is usually carried out before the beginning preparation of the Strategic Plan of the University. The elements of such evaluation are d Rector. 4. The evaluation of supplementary activities focuses in particular on the activities of o special-purpose facilities, and the Rector’s Office of the University. If the deans and di education institutes agree, the evaluation may also cover the supplementary activities at higher education institutes. 5. Other workplaces and special purpose facilities of the University submit to the Rector basis a report containing in particular the description of the structural and content char their activities for the elapsed period. Other elements of the report may be stipulated by 6. The content and elements of the evaluation of activities of the Rector’s Office are sti Rector. Feedback from faculties and other units of the University usually forms part of su 7. The report on the evaluation of the Rector’s Office is submitted by the Rector for cons Extended Rector’s Board. *========================================================================================= * Article 9 Strategic Plan, Annual, Status, and Evaluation Reports of the University *========================================================================================= 1. The System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance of the University encompasses i following strategic documents: a) Strategic Plan of the University and the annual plan for its implementation; b) status report on the actual implementation of the Strategic Plan; c) Annual Report on Activities and Annual Report on Financial Management of the University d) own evaluation report by the University; e) report on the internal evaluation of the quality of educational, creative and related a (“Internal Evaluation Report”); f) self-evaluation report describing and evaluating compliance with individual requirement the institutional accreditation standards; g) similar documents compiled by the faculties and other units of the University. 2. The elements of preparation and use of documents under paragraph 1 a) and c) are stipul 44 (3) and (4) and Article 45 of the Constitution. The relevant provisions apply with the modifications to the documents under paragraph 1 b), d), e), and f). 3. The status report on the actual implementation of the Strategic Plan is compiled on an submitted by the Rector to the Academic Senate of the University to express its opinion th 4. The own evaluation report of the University describes and evaluates the most important and results of the University in educational, creative, and related activities. The decisi compilation, scope, and focus of this report is made by the Rector. 5. After consideration by the Research Board of the University and approval by the Interna Board, the Rector submits the own evaluation report of the University to the Academic Sena University to express its opinion thereon. 6. The Internal Evaluation Report is compiled on the basis of evaluations carried out at t over the last five years or over the period that elapsed from the time when the previous r compiled. 7. The Internal Evaluation Report consists in particular of the following parts: a) description of the evaluations carried out; b) the main results of these evaluations; c) adopted preventive or corrective directives; d) assessment of strengths and weaknesses, opportunities, and threats; e) recommendation for further development of the University and the System of Internal Eva Quality Assurance. 8. The appendix to the Internal Evaluation Report is usually compiled together with the An Activities of the University. The requirements for the Internal Evaluation Report under pa to its appendices with the necessary modifications. 9. The framework results of the Internal Evaluation Report and its appendices are describe Report on Activities of the University. ****************************************************************************************** * Part III Activities of the Bodies, Faculties, and Other Units of the University ****************************************************************************************** *========================================================================================= * Article 10 Activities of the Bodies, Faculties, and Other Units of the University *========================================================================================= 1. The powers, responsibilities, and duties of the bodies, faculties, and other units of t within the System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance of the University are gover Education Act, the Constitution, and other internal regulations of the University. 2. The Rector designates an employee of the University, usually a member of the Rector’s B coordinate the activities related to the System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assuran 3. The internal evaluation and quality assurance at faculties or other units of the Univer in a manner that complies with the requirements of the Higher Education Act, Government De Sb., to regulate accreditation standards in higher education and Government Decree No. 275 areas of study in higher education, and of other legal regulations, internal regulations o or Rector’s directives. 4. The internal evaluation and quality assurance at a faculty or other unit of the Univers framework of this internal regulation is stipulated by an internal regulation of the facul directive or the rules of internal governance or director’s directive of other unit. 5. The dean designates an employee of the faculty, usually a member of the dean’s board, t activities related to the system of internal evaluation and quality assurance. The directo proceeds by analogy. ****************************************************************************************** * Part IV Final Provisions ****************************************************************************************** *========================================================================================= * Article 11 Final Provisions *========================================================================================= 1. This internal regulation was approved by the Academic Senate of the University on Janua 2. This internal regulation comes into force on the date of registration by the Ministry o Youth and Sports. 3. This internal regulation becomes effective on the first day of the calendar month follo coming into force. PhDr. Tomáš Nigrin, Ph.D., m.p. Prof. MUDr. Tomáš Zima, DrSc., m.p. President of the Academic Senate Rector Translator’s note: Words importing the masculine include the feminine, and unless the cont requires, words in the singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the si Article 2 of the Constitution. Article 44 (1) of the Constitution. Article 1 (2) of the Accreditation Code of the University. Article 22 (8) of the Constitution. Article 4 of the Code of Procedure for the Internal Evaluation Board of the University. Article 3 of the Code of Procedure for the Internal Evaluation Board of the University. Rules for the Evaluation of Educational Activities by Students and Graduates of the Univer Article 3 of the Appendix No. 1 to the Constitution. Article 4 of the Appendix No. 1 to the Constitution. Article 12 (1) (b) of the Constitution. S. 9 (1) (i) and s. 21 (1) (b) of the Higher Education Act. S. 9 (1) (d) and s. 21 (2) of the Higher Education Act. S. 9 (1) (d) and s. 21 (3) of the Higher Education Act. Article 47 (4) of the Constitution. S. 77b (3) (b) of the Higher Education Act. S. 81a (2) (d) of the Higher Education Act. S. 85 (b) of the Higher Education Act. S.77b (3) (b) of the Higher Education Act. S. 21 (2) (b) of the Higher Education Act. For example Act No. 130/2002 Sb., to regulate support to research, experimental developmen from public funds and to change other laws, as amended. For example the recommended aspects of evaluation for the procedure for the granting of as professorship and full professorship and the minimum requirements for the content of reaso associate professorship and assessment commission  including stipulation of the requiremen submission of materials. S. 36 (4) of the Higher Education Act. The registration was completed on January 31, 2017.