RULES OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEM OF EDUCATIONAL, CREATIVE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES AND INTERNAL QUALITY EVALUATION OF EDUCATIONAL, CREATIVE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH BOHEMIA IN ČESKÉ BUDĚJOVICE

The Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic registered on 28th July 2017 under Ref. MSMT-20833/2017 pursuant to Section 36 paragraph 2 of Act No. 111/1998 Coll., regulating Higher Education Institutions and on Amendments and Supplements to some other Acts (the Higher Education Act) these Rules of Quality Assurance and Internal Evaluation System of Educational, Creative and Related Activities of the University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice

RULES OF

QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEM OF EDUCATIONAL, CREATIVE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES AND INTERNAL QUALITY EVALUATION OF

EDUCATIONAL, CREATIVE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH BOHEMIA IN ČESKÉ BUDĚJOVICE

PREAMBLE

In accordance with Section 17 (1) j) of Act No. 111/1998 Coll., on Higher Education Institutions and on the Amendment and Supplements to Other Acts (the Higher Education Act), as amended (hereinafter "the Act"), the Statute of the University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice and the Statute of the Internal Evaluation Board of the University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, the following Rules of Quality Assurance System for Educational, Creative and Associates Activities and Internal Quality Evaluation of Educational, Creative and Related Activities of the University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules" constitute an Internal Regulation of the University of České Budějovice (hereinafter referred to as "US "). These Rules also contain the Accreditation Code for Programmes of Studies.

The rules are based on efforts to continually improve the quality of educational, scientific and research, development and innovation activities, artistic activities and other related activities that support the development of studies, students, educators, scientists and other employees of the USB, for which the USB also uses feedback mechanisms. This enables the involvement of relevant external agents, in particular through expert colloquiums, meetings, questionnaires and surveys.

The aim of these Rules is to contribute to the development of freedom in the academic environment, to strengthen the national and international relevance of the USB activities, to build and advance the USB's good reputation, to advance human knowledge, to enhance the quality of research and artistic outcomes and to produce graduates able to successfully enter the international job market in the fields of their education acquired at the USB.

These Rules are based on long-term USB strategic documents, primarily on the Strategic Plan for Educational and Scientific, Research, Development and Innovation, Artistic or Other Creative Activities of the USB (hereinafter referred to as "USB Strategic Plan") and annual Plans for Implementation of the USB Strategic Plan, the USB Code of Conduct, long-term mission and vision of the USB as a public high school of university type, the applicable legislation, the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area and the Declaration of Social Responsibility of the USB in relation to educational activities.

The USB quality evaluation is also reflected in balance sheets, annual activity and management reports of the USB and as applicable also in strategic documents of individual Faculties and their annual reports on activities and management.

One of the USB priorities is equal access to studies. In accordance with the Declaration of Social Responsibility of the USB in relation to educational activities, the managerial staff of the USB and its components take responsibility for evaluating impulses provided to ensure and improve the quality of the university environment and for activities related to the fulfilment of the university mission in accordance with Section 1 of the Act. In the event of any deficiencies, timely and appropriate steps to remedy these are taken in cooperation with the USB Ethics Committee, Disciplinary Boards of individual Faculties and other relevant bodies and authorities.

The USB emphasizes protection of intellectual property at all levels, including unpublished student work. To prevent and detect gross violations of intellectual property laws in the students’ Bachelor’s, Master’s, Dissertation and Advanced Master’s (Rigorosum) theses (hereinafter referred to as "graduation theses"), the USB uses system tools as specified in the USB Studies and Examination Regulations.

PART ONE
DEFINITION OF TERMS AND STRUCTURE OF THE
QUALITY ASSURANCE AND INTERNAL QUALITY EVALUATION SYSTEM AT THE USB

Article 1
Quality, Assurance and Evaluation of Quality

  1. Within these Rules, quality is understood as meeting the required standards of the USB activities, or respectively as an endeavour to exceed them and to continually improve the outcomes of all activities implemented by the USB.
  2. Quality assurance is seen as a lasting, systematic, internally structured care for the quality of all activities implemented by the USB.
  3. Apart from these Rules, the quality assurance also relies on other internal USB regulations, especially the Studies and Examination Regulations of the USB, the Bursary Code of the USB, Rules of Academic Staff Recruitment at the USB, Statute of the USB Internal Evaluation Board as well as Rector’s and Deans’ Ordinances and methodological guidelines of the Bursar, Vice-Rectors and Vice-Deans and managerial staff members of the university linked to these Internal Regulations. Quality assurance is part of the strategic development of the USB and is mainly covered by the Rector's Ordinance setting out the Rules for Creation, Approval and Publication of USB Strategic Documents and the related Ordinances of the Faculties and other components of the university.  
  4. Quality assurance is a continuous process involving other institutions in the Czech Republic as well as abroad, relying on mutual cooperation between universities, institutes of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic and other institutions.
  5. Quality evaluation assesses the performance of the USB and its individual components in meeting the USB required standards in their individual activities. Quality evaluation also involves identifying the strengths and weaknesses of USB-based activities with the long-term goal of ensuring that quality standards are consistently met and, where possible, exceeded towards excellence. The evaluation process involves applicants for studies, students of Bachelor's and Master's degree programmes that do not follow Bachelor's degree programme (hereinafter referred to as the "Master's degree programme"), students of Master's degree programmes which follow the Bachelor's degree programme (hereinafter referred to as the Consecutive Master's degree programme") and students of Doctoral degree programmes, participants of Lifelong Learning programmes, graduates, employers and relevant domestic and foreign experts. The ultimate goal and commitment is to ensure quality improvement in all activities provided by the USB.
  6. Quality evaluation consists of several independent processes and takes place at multiple levels of management, i.e. at the level of the USB as a whole, at Faculty and other USB components and other Faculty components (hereinafter referred to as the "Department") level, at the level of education areas, the level of programmes of studies and at the level of individual subjects of studies (hereinafter referred to as "subject") as defined by the law and related implementing legal regulations
  7. The basic principle of developing a Quality Assurance and Evaluation System lies in a coordinated and cross-sectional approach, finding common and unified solutions and tools for the whole USB.

Article 2
Educational and Creative Activities

  1. Educational and related scientific, research, development and innovation, artistic or other creative activities (hereinafter referred to as "creative activities") constitute an inseparable unit with the principal aim to provide the students with studies at the current level of scientific knowledge, drawing on artistic production of the Teachers where relevant and using state of the art methods, organizational forms of teaching and relevant studies supports.
  2. The quality of the educational and creative activities is ensured and evaluated both in relation to the implemented programmes of studies and in relation to the implemented programs of Life-long Education.
  3. The definition and requirements of each programme of studies are regulated by Section 44 of the Act.
  4. The minimum quality requirements of an educational activity, respectively the provision of a programme of studies are, in addition to the Act, laid down by Government Regulations No. 247/2016 Coll., on Standards for Accreditation in Higher Education and by Government Decree No. 274/2016 Coll., on Fields of Education in Higher Education, the evaluation outcomes of the National Accreditation Bureau for Higher Education (hereinafter referred to as "NAB") as the main guarantor of the external evaluation of the USB and the higher education in the Czech Republic in general, the USB Statute, the Code of Habilitation Procedure Code and Procedure for Appointment of Full Professorship at the USB, the USB Studies and Examination Regulations, these Rules, the Rector's Ordinance on the Standards of Programmes of Studies at the USB and the related Internal Regulations of the USB and its individual Faculties.
  5. All fields of education at the USB are subject to all the requirements for quality assurance and evaluation. Uniform criteria apply to all Bachelor's, Master's, Consecutive Master's and Doctoral degree programmes, taking into account the specifics of programmes of studies with academic or professional orientation, and the requirements of the relevant recognition bodies when preparation for regulated professions is concerned.

Article 3
Related Activities

  1.  Related activities mean activities implemented in support of the USB purpose as stipulated in Article 2, paragraph 1 to 2 in the USB Statute.
  2.  Within these Rules, the considered related activities are in particular: management of the University, infrastructure, personnel and financial resources, information and advisory systems and services including libraries, editorial and publishing activities, accommodation and boarding of students and provision of facilities for their free time activities (sport areas, student club, etc.).

Article 4
Guarantor of a Programme of Studies

  1. The Guarantor of a Bachelor's, Master's and Consecutive Master's degree programme together with the given Board of Programme of Studies is responsible for the quality of the relevant programme of studies. The Guarantor of a programme of studies is a conceptual academic employee who methodically manages the realization and development of the programme of studies.

(2)   Guarantor of a programme of studies is appointed and dismissed by the Dean after a discussion with the Vice-Deans. The Internal Evaluation Board of the USB is immediately notified of a change of the Guarantor of the programme of studies. The Faculty provides relevant data on the Guarantor of the programme of studies to the Register of Associate Professors, Professors and Extraordinary Professors of Higher Education Institutions, administered by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (hereinafter referred to as the "Ministry").

(3)   The Guarantor of the programme of studies has the obligation to actively participate in the work of the Board of Programmes of Studies at the given Faculty and to respect the methodological guidelines and the recommendations of the Faculty Quality Coordinator.

 (4) The Guarantor of the programme of studies performs regular evaluation of the quality of the programme of studies, all its subjects, including the provision of any practical lessons in cooperating institutions (especially at clinical workplaces, Faculty schools). They also take into account the regional, national and international benchmarking surveys and, where appropriate, European and world university rankings when available for programmes of studies in the given field of education, in particular if there is the opportunity to compare the quality of similar programmes of studies provided by universities in the Czech Republic.

 (5) The Guarantor of the programme of studies regularly evaluates the results of the student's evaluation of all obligatory and elective subjects of the programme of studies, in agreement with the Heads of Departments providing the teaching of subjects of the programme of studies, advocates possible correction of the identified deficiencies, discusses the students’ needs with them and reflects the results of national, University and Faculty surveys and polls.

 (6)  The Guarantor of the programme of studies respects the established academic or professional profile of the programme of studies, and - in the light of outside expert evaluation and the evaluation of students, graduates and employers - evaluates the structure of the programme of studies and the graduate profile. In preparation for regulated professions, the Guarantor warrants the programme of studies compatibility with the requirements of the competent recognition authority. All the actions and Ordinances taken by the Guarantor should ensure increasing quality of the programme of studies.

 (7) The Guarantor of the programme of studies provides a Self-evaluation Report of the programme of studies and its annual addenda. 

Article 5
Course Guarantor

  1. The Course Guarantor ensures that the subject concept complies with the graduate profile of each programme of studies in which the subject is included. The Course Guarantor follows methodological guidelines and recommendations of the Guarantor of the programme of studies.

(2)   The Course Guarantor assures quality at the level of individual subjects, either independently or in cooperation with other subject Teachers. 

(3)   In case of the subject being taught by more Teachers, the Course Guarantor significantly participates in its provision as a rule.

(4)   At the subject level, the evaluation is carried out mostly on the basis of student evaluation surveys, the subject of assessment being the subject’s contribution to the achievement of partial goals and overall conception of the given programme of studies, including the graduate profile.

 (5) The Course Guarantor proposes any amendments of the subject to the Guarantor of the programme of studies for consideration.

Article 6
Heads of Departments

  1. The Head of the Department provides for the long-term personnel and professional development of the Department thus helping it to achieve the highest possible quality of all programmes of studies the Department participates in.
  2. The Head of the Department ensures due implementation of the subjects guaranteed and taught by the academic staff of the Department, following the relevant standards, methodical instructions and recommendations of the Guarantors of the programmes of studies concerned. In the event of any deficiencies identified, they are obliged, in co-operation with the Dean, Vice-Deans and the relevant panels to negotiate a remedy within a reasonable deadline.
  3. The Head of the Department coordinates the activities of the Guarantors of Programmes of Studies within the Department.
  4.  Any issues the Department has been dealing with regarding quality assurance shall be included in the Departmental meeting minutes. 

Article 7
Programme of Studies Board

  1. The Programme of Studies Board is established for each Bachelor's, Master's and Consecutive Master's degree programs. If the programme is implemented in more than one mode of studies, a common Programme of Studies Board is established for all forms of studies.
  2. The Programme of Studies Board is established by the Guarantor of the given programme of studies. Its members are the academic staff of the Departments involved in the provision of the given programme of studies and other specialists from similar fields within the Faculty or the whole USB. The specifications and rules for the Programme of Studies Board operation are regulated by the relevant Rector's Ordinance.
  3. The task of the Programme of Studies Board is to ensure quality of the programme of studies, to present suggestions for possible improvement of the teaching of individual subjects and modification of curricula, which are approved by the Programme of studies Board of the relevant Faculty and by the Accreditation Committee of the Faculty, if such is established.
  4. The Programme of Studies Board involves in its activities students of the programme of studies - in particular in the form of discussions and meetings – where they determine their motivation for studies, expectations related to the completion of the studies, the compliance of the reality of the programme of studies with the expectations of applicants, students and graduates. The Programme of Studies Board also involves Teachers in the evaluation of quality of the programme of studies and in its activities takes into account information obtained from other external agents.
  5. The Programme of Studies Board holds regular coordination meetings, at least once a semester, where minutes are taken demonstrating the effort to continually improve the quality of the programme of studies and all its subjects.

Article 8
Doctoral Degree Programme Doctoral Studies Board

  1. Doctoral Degree Programme Doctoral Studies Board (hereinafter referred to as the "Doctoral Studies Board") performs similar tasks in the field of quality assurance as the Programme of Studies Board and, in accordance with the USB Studies and Examination Regulations is responsible for the tasks that arise from the law, the Internal Regulations of the USB and Ordinances of the relevant Faculty.
  2. The Guarantor of a programme of studies acts as the Chair of the Doctoral Studies Board.
  3. The Guarantor of a newly introduced programme of studies is appointed by the Dean.A proposal for a change of the Guarantor of a programme of studies is submitted to the Dean together with its justification by the Doctoral Studies Board or the Internal Evaluation Board. If the Dean does not comply with the proposal of the Doctoral Studies Board, they are obliged to justify the decision to the Doctoral Studies Board.
  4. If the proposal is approved, the Dean immediately informs the Vice-Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board, who shall discuss the matter at the next meeting of the Internal Evaluation Board. If the Dean disregards the proposal of the Internal Evaluation Board for a change of the Guarantor of a programme of studies, their reasons shall be discussed by the Rector's Advisory Board who makes the final decision.

Article 9
Board of Programmes of Studies

(1)   A Faculty Board of Programmes of Studies comprises of the Guarantors of individual programmes of studies provided by the given Faculty.

(2)   At least once per semester, the Board of Programmes of Studies holds a coordination meeting to discuss the programme of studies development vision, to coordinate quality requirements of individual programmes of studies, to discuss proposals for new programmes of studies or extension of accreditation of existing programmes of studies and to deal with the tasks assigned by the Faculty Quality Coordinator.

 (3) Meetings of the Board of Programmes of Studies are called and chaired by the Faculty Quality Coordinator. Minutes of the meetings are made demonstrating the effort for ongoing quality improvement.  

(4)   If the fields of education provided by one Faculty overlap fully or partially with education fields provided by other Faculties, the Faculty Quality Coordinators of the other Faculties are invited to the Board of Programmes of Studies meetings as advisors to ensure transparency and coordination of all quality assurance and evaluation processes for the given area of education at the USB.

Article 10
Faculty Accreditation Committee

(1)   The Faculty Accreditation Committee discusses proposals for new programmes of studies or extends the validity of accreditation of existing programmes of studies and performs other tasks in the area of assurance and evaluation of the quality of programmes of studies for which they are responsible under the relevant Dean's Ordinance. 

(2)   If a Faculty does not operate an Accreditation Committee, its function is taken on by the Board of Programmes of Studies.   

Article 11
Quality Coordinator

(1)   Faculty Quality Coordinator coordinates and directs the activities of the Boards of the Programmes of Studies at the given Faculty, acts as a mediator between Faculties and the Internal Evaluation Board or Scientific Council of the USB and Scientific Councils of individual Faculties to coordinate procedures and quality assurance and evaluation of the related activities provided by the given component of the USB.  

(2)   The Quality Coordinator is responsible for keeping records of the quality provision within the given component of the USB.  

(3)   In the case of an institutional accreditation for a field of education provided by more than one Faculty, the Quality Coordinator of the Faculty, which coordinates the preparation and discussion of the application for the institutional accreditation, takes on the role of Quality Coordinator for the whole field of education across all participating Faculties.

Article 12
Internal Evaluation Board

(1)   The Internal Evaluation Board activities are governed by the law, the USB Statute and the Statute of the Internal Evaluation Board.

(2)   The Internal Evaluation Board is – in agreement with the USB Statute – a guarantor of quality of educational, creative and related activities provided by the USB.

(3)   The Internal Evaluation Board is responsible for assuring and evaluating quality of all types of programmes of studies provided by the USB. In the event of identifying any deficiencies, it ensures remedy of those via the Quality Coordinators at Faculties and other components of the University and in the long-term monitors that the report on internal evaluation of quality of educational, creative and related activities (the "Internal Evaluation Report") and its annual updates are created.

 (4) The Internal Evaluation Board decides on the available options and scheduling of an international evaluation of the USB carried out by a renown foreign rating agency, sufficiently in advance, in order to ensure financial resources for the evaluation.

 (5) The Internal Evaluation Board can at its own discretion set up its own work groups and advisory bodies, in particular with regard to accreditation of programmes of studies.

(6)   A permanent work group of the Internal Evaluation Board constitutes of the Faculty Quality Coordinators who are regularly informed of the activities of the Internal Evaluation Board by its Chair and invited to participate in its meetings as requested by the Internal Evaluation Board, providing communication between the Internal Evaluation Board and the Faculty panels, in particular the Doctoral Studies Boards of the Doctoral Degree Programmes and Boards of Programmes of Studies.

(7)   The Internal Evaluation Board provides upon request and on its own initiative its opinions and recommendations to the Rector, the USB Scientific Council, and the USB Academic Senate, including matters that may affect the USB budget (budget priorities regarding excellent and stagnant workplaces or development needs of related USB activities).

 (8) All members of the USB academic community can through their elected representatives in the USB Academic Senate submit their suggestions to the Internal Evaluation Board. These suggestions, along with the suggestions of the USB Academic Senate, are forwarded to the Internal Evaluation Board by the Chair of the USB Academic Senate.

Article 13
International Council of the USB

 (1) The International Council of the USB (hereafter only International Council) is an advisory body to the Rector whose main objectives are to assess the direction and quality of the USB's educational and creative activities, as well as the USB’s management, financing and other related activities, as requested by the Rector at their own discretion.

(2)   The ongoing tasks of the International Council is to promote the involvement of the USB in international scientific and educational networks and the internationalization of the USB, to increase the USB’s international relevance and excellence in the educational and creative activities outcomes, and to facilitate and support the involvement of the USB in the worldwide transfer of scientific knowledge and international mobility of students and researchers.

Article 14
Appointment of Members and Composition of the International Council

  1. The International Council consists of at least 6 and up to 10 members from respected international experts who reside outside of the Czech Republic on a long-term basis.
  2. Members of the International Council are proposed to the Rector by members the Rector's Advisory Board, taking into account the needs of the USB development, educational fields developed at the USB and the scientific reputation and moral integrity of the future Council members.
  3. The Rector, after a discussion in the Rector's Advisory Board, appoints members of the International Council for a period of five years, with the possibility of a reappointment for a further term of office. If the mandate expires prematurely, a new member is appointed for the remainder of the term only.
  4. The Rector appoints the Council President and Vice-President from the members of the International Council.  

Article 15
International Council Activities

The International Council in particular:

  1. provides opinions and recommendations on newly developed USB programmes of studies and the future direction of the intended programmes of studies at the USB, comments on the fields of education for which the USB seeks accreditation, or proposes procedures for possible improvement of the overall education concept of the USB,
  2. Instigates improvement of organization and processes of scientific and research activities at the USB,
  3. advocates the Internal Evaluation Board, in particular regarding conceptual matters, especially in connection with the findings of the Internal Evaluation Report.
  4. at the request of the Rector performs an evaluation of individuals or teams proposed for grants, medals and USB awards,
  5. provides opinions on and recommendations for other matters requested by the Rector.

 Article 16
International Council Meeting Regulations

  1. The meetings of the International Council are chaired by its President, or the Vice-President or another member of the International Council authorised by the President.
  2. On the USB side, in cooperation with the President of the International Council, the agenda of the meetings are drawn up by the Rector or an authorised Vice-Rector in charge of External and International Relations or the Vice-Rector responsible for Internal Evaluation at the USB.
  3. The meetings of the International Council, unless otherwise decided at the meeting and agreed to by the Rector, are not public. The right to take part in the meetings of the International Council is reserved for the Rector, the Vice- Rectors, the Bursar, or upon the approval of the President of the International Council and the Rector, other invited experts.
  4. The International Council can at its own discretion set up a work group in order to deal with a specific issue, where other experts from the academic community of the USB and foreign experts can be appointed. 
  5.  The International Council meets at least once during the period in which the Internal Evaluation Report is prepared to take a position on the results of the past evaluation period and to offer proposals and suggestions for improvement for the next cycle of this report. The date of the International Council meeting is determined by agreement between the President and the Rector.
  6. At least once per year, unless there is a meeting in the given year, the International Council acts by means of an electronic vote (hereinafter "per rollam"), commenting on the issues raised by the Rector. This communication takes the form of group e-mail correspondence between the members of the International Council and the Rector, or the Vice-Rector, and the Secretary of the International Council. Within the "per rollam" communication, a deadline is set up by which all members of the International Council should express their views on the issue. If one of the members of the International Council requests some supporting documents, the deadline is extended by the time needed for the Secretary of the International Council to provide the required documents.

 

Article 17
Organizational Issues of the International Council

  1. The official language of the International Council is English, all written documents for its meetings are prepared in English, including the documents establishing the International Council and its scope of activity.
  2. The secretary of the International Council responsible for communication with the International Council and taking minutes at its meetings and per rollam statements, is appointed by the Rector from the USB Rectorate staff. The minutes are distributed to all members of the International Council, the Rector, Vice-Rectors, and the Bursar.
  3.   Members of the International Council actively participate in its meetings and take an active part in its work.
  4.   Membership of the International Council is an honorary position.
  5.   After approval of the President of the International Council and the Rector, the resolutions and statements or recommendations of the International Council as well as other essential information concerning the points discussed are published on the USB website. These resolutions are processed in particular by the Internal Evaluation Board, which is informed of the resolutions and recommendations of the International Council at its meetings.

Article 18
Rector's Advisory Board

 (1) The Rector's Advisory Board, in accordance with Article13, paragraph 2 of the Statute of the USB, serves as Rector's advisory body.  Members of the Rector's Advisory Board are the Deans of Faculties and other persons appointed by the Rector.

(2)   The Rector’s Advisory Board comments on the USB strategic documents, makes recommendations and presents opinions to the Internal Evaluation Board upon the Rector’s, as a Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board, request. In particular the Board expresses their opinion on overlapping programmes of studies at Faculties and on related activities of the USB that need to be monitored

Article 19
USB Scientific Council

 (1) The USB Scientific Council is committed to quality assurance, particularly in the area of ​​habilitation and professorship appointment procedures, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the USB Scientific Council, exercising competence in the process of appointing a professor and habilitation procedures to the extent stipulated by the law.

(2)   The USB Scientific Council - in accordance with the USB Statute - conducts assessment of applications for accreditation of habilitation procedures and procedures for granting full professorship, evaluates the recommended criteria required of an applicant in the given field.

(3)   In line with ethical principles and the USB Code of Conduct, the USB Scientific Council and the Scientific Councils of Faculties ensure that there is no conflict of interest between the members of the committees when appointing members of the habilitation committee and committee for granting full professorship, (especially when close persons are concerned according to Section 22, paragraph 1, Act No. 89/2012 Coll., the Civil Code). Similarly, close persons cannot serve as readers of habilitation theses and initiators of the appointment procedure for full professorship. Similarly, close persons cannot be members of review committees reviewing the validity of an appointment of an Associate Professor.

Article 20
External Agents

(1)   Within the framework of quality assurance, the USB continuously and systematically develops cooperation with all external and internal agents influencing the USB activities and approaches them in accordance with general ethical principles, the USB Code of Conduct, the Declaration of Social Responsibility of the USB when the educational activities are concerned and according to the Rector's Ordinance on Concluding Contracts of Cooperation with Foreign Entities as applicable.

(2)   Internal agents are all students and employees of the USB; external agents are co-operating subjects from non-USB workplaces who find the activities provided by the USB relevant or whose activities are relevant to the quality of the USB. In terms of these Rules, the evaluated information in particular concerns opinions of students, employees, applicants, graduates and employers of USB graduates. Within the effort to improve the quality of the educational activities, feedback is also obtained from students who terminated their studies other than by completing a programme of studies. The results of surveys focused on participants and graduates of Life-long programmes of studies are evaluated separately.

(3)   The USB includes individual external agents in quality assurance and evaluation mainly through questionnaire surveys and subject polls (as part of student evaluation), round table talks (for example when meeting with employers), meetings with graduates and cooperation with graduates in the USB Graduate Club and graduate Faculty clubs and other forms of cooperation.

Article 21

Organization of Quality Assurance and Evaluation

(1)   The basic structure and operation of the USB bodies, Faculties, and other components in the area of ​​quality assurance and evaluation is governed by the law, the USB Statute, these Rules and other Internal Regulations of the USB in accordance with the organizational structure of USB.

(2)   The Rector, as a Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board, together with its Vice-Chair and Vice-Rector responsible for internal evaluation and the Rector's Advisory Board, coordinate the quality assurance and evaluation activities. At the level of Faculties and other units, this role lies within the responsibility of the Deans and Directors of units who designate a Quality Coordinator for each unit.

(3)   At a Faculty, there can be up to two Quality Coordinators (one for Doctoral degree programme and habilitation and full professorship appointment procedures, the other for other educational and creative activities at the Faculty), other USB components appoint one Coordinator (in the case of the Dormitories and Refectories of the USB, two coordinators can be appointed – one for each area of responsibility). The Director of a unit or the Dean may appoint themselves to the position of the Quality Coordinator, in general it is considered that the Quality Coordinator is the Dean or Vice-Dean of a Faculty, respectively the Director or Deputy Director of a component.

(4)   The organizational side of the Quality Assurance and Evaluation System is provided by the Rectorate in cooperation with Deans and Directors of USB components, including financial provision (USB budget). Administrative and methodological support is provided by the Departments headed by the Vice-Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board and the Secretary-General of the Internal Evaluation Board.

(5)   The USB provides comparable tools for all Faculties and components to evaluate their core activities, especially for student and graduate surveys, develops methodological guidelines for co-operation with graduates and employers of graduates, generates questionnaire surveys and ensures their evaluation and distributions to relevant actors (Internal Evaluation Board, Deans, Quality Coordinators, Guarantors of Programmes of studies and Guarantors of Subjects). This agenda is provided by the Rectorate departments headed by the Vice-Deans responsible for internal evaluation, studies agenda and creative activities.

PART TWO
ACCREDITATION CODE FOR PROGRAMMES OF STUDIES AT THE USB

Article 22
Basic Provisions

  1. The purpose of this Code is to establish a uniform procedure for submitting, negotiating and approving of programmes of studies, intents to apply for accreditation, extension  of the scope of an accreditation or extension of the duration of an accreditation of programmes of studies (hereinafter referred to as the "application for accreditation of a programme of studies") intent to apply for institutional accreditation for the field or fields of education and extension of the scope of the institutional accreditation for another area or fields of education (hereinafter referred to as an "application for institutional accreditation") or intents to apply for accreditation of a habilitation or a full professorship appointment procedure at the USB.
  2. A proposal for a programme of studies, an application for accreditation of a programme of studies or an application for institutional accreditation shall be submitted by the Faculty bodies in sufficient time to comply with the prescribed USB procedures and to respect the administrative time limits of the NAB (National Accreditation Bureau) in accordance with the law in relation to the subsequent implementation of accredited programmes of studies.
  3. USB-level programmes of studies - in accordance with the USB Statute – are discussed and approved by the Internal Evaluation Board, the intent to apply for institutional accreditation is approved by the USB Scientific Council. The procedure of dealing with accreditation of individual programmes of studies is managed by the Vice-Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board, possibly in co-operation with the Vice-Rector responsible for internal evaluation, unless the Vice-Rector acts as the Vice-Chair of the Internal Evaluation Council. Discussion of institutional accreditations at the USB Scientific Council is directed by the Vice-Rector responsible for organizational issues of the USB Scientific Council.
  4. The Internal Evaluation Board, in accordance with its needs, nature of the discussed materials and its Statute, establishes working groups to assist in assessment of quality of the submitted proposals, particularly in clarifying the differences between individual fields of education, particularly in terms of the nature and potential of creative activities, internalization or experience in individual fields of education and programmes of studies.
  5. The preparation of accreditation materials is governed by the law, Government Order No. 274/2016 Coll., On Standards for Accreditation in Higher Education, NAB recommended practice, these Rules, Rector's Standards of Accreditation and Implementation of Programmes of Studies at the USB and related Internal Regulations of Faculties.

 

Article 23
Procedure of Application for Accreditation of a Programme of Studies

  1. The intent to apply for an accreditation of a programme of studies (or its specialization extension) or for an extension of the accreditation validity (hereinafter referred to as intent) is prepared by the Dean appointed Guarantor of a Programme of Studies and the discussion is coordinated by the Faculty Quality Coordinator. In preparing the Intent (especially in the case of re-accreditation), the Faculty consistently follows received feedback and works in accordance with these Rules.
  2. The intent means information providing the name, type (Bachelor's, Master's, Consecutive Master's, Doctoral) and profile (academic or professional orientation) of the programme of studies and the considered forms of studies, name of the Guarantor of the programme of studies, overview of the subjects of the profiling base and their Guarantors, a graduate profile and their labour market prospects, information about the envisaged number of students, possibly also information concerning the specialization of the programme of studies, the division of the programme of studies into several curricula and the considered combinations of these specializations or curricula.
  3. When presenting an intent, the Faculty evaluates whether it can provide the adequate teaching facilities, studies literature and other teaching and studies resources for the realization of the programme of studies, and in the case of a programme with professional orientation whether they can provide the necessary facilities and students’ work placements. If the Faculty is in doubt about the sufficiency of the facilities, the issue is discussed with the Rector and the Bursar before submitting the intent; if there is insufficient capacity of teaching space and other facilities and resources necessary for the realization of the programme of studies within the USB and if it is not possible to provide these before the commencement of the programme of studies, the intent cannot be submitted. If there are any doubts on the part of the Rector or the Internal Evaluation Board, the Faculty is invited to supplement information on the provision of facilities and support resources for the implementation of the programme of studies; if the doubts are not dispersed, the intent cannot be accepted.
  4. It is expected that the intent is presented by the Faculty in accordance with the USB and Faculty strategic documents. If the intent does not correspond to the Faculty's long-term objectives, the Dean is obligated to provide an explanation of the change of the strategy and the reason for submitting the project to the Rector in an accompanying letter.
  5. After the discussion in the Faculty bodies established for quality evaluation (Board of Programmes of Studies or the Doctoral Studies Board or Accreditation Committee of the Faculty), the Faculty's Scientific Council presents the intent to the Rector via the Dean, the Faculty Quality Coordinator and the Vice-Chair of the Internal Evaluation Council.
  6. If the programme of studies is implemented in cooperation with several Faculties, the intent is accompanied by an affirmative statement of the respective Faculties that they will participate in the implementation of the given programme of studies (hereinafter referred to as the "participating Faculties") under the conditions and in the way described in the intent documentation. The accreditation holder - in terms of quality assurance - is considered to be the Faculty where the Guarantor of a Programme of Studies resides.
  7. The Deputy Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board informs the Deans of the new intent for a programme of studies after receiving the intent documentation. In the case of objections filed within five working days by the Dean of one of the Faculties, especially in terms of duplication or the quality of the programme of studies, the Rector submits this intent to the Rector's Advisory Board, who will discuss possible conflicts with other programmes of studies and issue their opinion. The Internal Evaluation Board will take into account the objections of the Deans and the opinion of the Rector's Advisory Board when approving the intent.
  8. In accordance with the Statute of the Internal Evaluation Board, the Rector subsequently submits the intent for discussion and approval at the next meeting of the Internal Evaluation Board. The intent can be discussed repeatedly, provided that the Faculty incorporates the comments of the Internal Evaluation Board into the intent between each of the Internal Evaluation Board meetings. The intent may also be approved by the Internal Evaluation Board, with specific recommendations for the Faculty to incorporate in the intent.
  9. After approval of the intent by the Internal Evaluation Board, the Faculty prepares a draft of the programme of studies accreditation application and a proposal of the programme of studies in a standardized form, which is discussed by the Faculty bodies established for quality evaluation (Board of Programmes of Studies or the Doctoral Studies Board, possibly the Accreditation Committee of the Faculty) and then submits it to the Academic Senate of the Faculty for discussion. After this discussion, the proposal of the programme of studies is submitted for approval to the Scientific Council of the Faculty.
  10. The preparation of the application for accreditation and the proposal of the programme of studies is overseen by the Guarantor of the Programme of Studies, its discussion within the Faculty is coordinated by the Faculty Quality Coordinator. Methodological assistance in preparing the application for accreditation of the programme of studies is provided at the level of the Faculty by the Vice-Dean responsible for the accreditation agenda, at the USB level by the Vice-Rector for Studies who is responsible for the final form of the application and the proposal of the programme of studies and for its submission to the NAB, including verification of the electronic access to the submitted application and the proposal of the programme of studies.
  11. If the proposal of the programme of studies is approved by the Scientific Council of the Faculty - incorporating the amendments that have resulted out of the process of discussion as applicable - the Scientific Council of the Faculty informs the Rector via the Dean.
  12. In accordance with the Statute of the Internal Evaluation Board, the Rector subsequently submits the proposal of the programme of studies for discussion and approval at the next meeting of the Internal Evaluation Board. For reasons of special consideration (especially time related), the Board may, at the request of the Rector and with the approval of the Internal Evaluation Board, vote on the proposal per rollam. In other cases, the Board discusses the proposal at another regular or extraordinary meeting. Per rollam voting is excluded in cases of approval of a new programme of studies accredited under institutional accreditation.
  13. In a programme of studies aimed at preparation for a regulated profession pursuant to Section 78 (6) of the Act and in accordance with Government Regulation No. 275/2016 Coll., On Higher Education, the proposal of a new programme of studies submitted to the Internal Evaluation Board must be accompanied by the competent accreditation body statement.

 

Article 24
Authorization to Implement Programmes of Studies

(1)   After the programme of studies has been approved by the Internal Evaluation Board, the Rector promptly applies for authorization to implement the given programme of studies to the NAB to be reviewed in accordance with their requirements, including ensuring electronic access to the submitted application.

 (2) In the case that a programme of studies has been approved by the Internal Evaluation Board under the USB authorization to create and implement a given type of programme of studies based on an institutional accreditation granted for the relevant field of education or training, the authorization to implement the programme of studies follows from the decision of the Internal Evaluation Board.

(3)   The Rector informs the USB Scientific Council about the newly accredited programmes of studies at its next meeting. The Rector also duly notifies the NAB of the changes made under the authorisation resulting from institutional accreditation and any changes in the list of the programmes of studies carried out at the USB.

Article 25
Changes Implemented During the Accreditation

(1)   If, in the course of the validity of the accreditation, any changes to the accredited programme of studies occur with the consent of the Guarantor of the programme of studies, the Faculty Quality Coordinator is informed without delay as well as, where applicable in accordance with paragraph 2, the Vice-Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board.

(2)   Changes in the accredited programme of studies at the level of the parameters of a particular subject or changing the selection of elective or optional subjects do not need to be discussed with the Internal Evaluation Board; these are fully within the competence of the Faculty bodies set up for quality evaluation (Board of Programmes of Studies or Doctoral Studies Board of Accreditation Committee of the Faculty). Any other changes in the programme of studies approved by the Quality Evaluation Bodies of the Faculty are communicated by the Quality Coordinator to the Vice-Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board, who at least once a year submits an overview of the changes to the Internal Evaluation Board. The Internal Evaluation Board has the right to request additional information, or to reject the change and to demand a return to the original state if this is objectively possible.

(3)   A change of a Guarantor of a programme of studies and, in the case of a Doctoral degree programme, the Chair of the Doctoral Studies Board, is possible only after a prior discussion of the proposal of this change and its justification in the Internal Evaluation Board; the proposal must include all relevant information regarding the new Guarantor of the programme of studies to the same extent as in the case of a new accreditation.

(4)   During validity of an accreditation of a programme of studies, all changes take place in order to ensure continuous improvement of quality of the educational activities, creative activities and related activities linked to the relevant field of education and the programme of studies.

Article 26
Institutional Accreditation

(1)   An institutional accreditation is granted by the NAB for a specific field or fields of education, based on a written application from the USB. This accreditation grants the USB the authority to independently create and implement programmes of study in the given field or fields of education.

(2)   The form of the application for institutional accreditation is based on the requirements of the NAB and includes the Internal Evaluation Report and Self-evaluation Report describing and evaluating the fulfilment of the requirements of the standards for accreditation in higher education.

(3)   An application for institutional accreditation in one or more fields of education can only be prepared after discussing the intent in the Rector's Advisory Board, in such a way that it is clear whether programmes of studies within the given field of education will be created and implemented by only one Faculty or more Faculties, while the intent of institutional accreditation is submitted by the Dean of the relevant Faculty or by the Deans of all participating Faculties. In the case of joint proposal of several Faculties, the institutional accreditation intent also contains the information, which of the Faculties will coordinate the preparation and discussion of the institutional accreditation intent and preparation of the accreditation application itself. Shall the institutional accreditation be granted, this Faculty also fulfils the role of a Quality Coordinator for the given field of education at the USB as a whole and coordinates the activities of all the Faculties concerned. All participating Faculties take part in preparing the documents for the accreditation application.

(4)   The intent of an institutional accreditation is discussed in the Academic Senate of the Faculty and approved by the Scientific Board of the Faculty (or all participating Faculties) and subsequently approved by the USB Scientific Council. In the case of large-scale substantive objections, or rejection of the proposal by the Scientific Council, the proposal is returned for a new discussion.

(5)   Extension of an institutional accreditation by another field or fields of education during validity of the accreditation is possible upon an application submitted to the NAB. The duration of the validity of the institutional accreditation is not affected. When submitting such an application, the procedure set out in paragraphs 1 to 4 shall be proportionately followed.

Article 27
Collaboration with Other Institutions in Providing Accreditation

(1)   If cooperation with another public higher education institution or a public research organization (institutes of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic) is expected for the implementation of certain programmes of studies, this must be stated in the application for institutional accreditation or accreditation of programme of studies.

(2)   In accordance with Section 47a of the Act, the implementation of a programme of studies can also be carried out in cooperation with a foreign higher education institution, which implements a programme of studies related in content. The terms of the cooperation are laid down by an agreement of the participating universities in accordance with the legislation of the countries of their operation. The terms of the cooperation are approved by the Rector upon the Dean's proposal submitted after the terms have been discussed by the Scientific Council and the Academic Senate of the Faculty.

Article 28
Validity of the Accreditation and Authorization to Implement a Programme of Studies

(1)   The period of validity of the accreditation of a programme of studies awarded by the NAB is determined by the NAB, including any further decisions of the NAB during the period of validity of the accreditation, where the NAB is authorized to restrict or totally remove the accreditation in case of serious deficiencies.

(2)   Within an institutional accreditation, the Internal Evaluation Board decides on the period of validity of an authorization to implement a programme of studies, while the right to provide a programme of studies can be granted only for the duration of the institutional accreditation for the given area of education the longest, i.e. a maximum of 10 years.

(3)   The Internal Evaluation Board will decide on a shorter period of validity of the authorization to implement a programme of studies in the event that the implementation of the programme of studies, in particular the qualification and age structure of the staff and the fulfilment of quality assurance standards do not provide quality assurance for such a long period of time.

(4)   In the event of significant doubts as to the quality of a programme of studies, the Internal Evaluation Board may decide to grant a programme of studies authorization only for the purpose of enabling the existing students to complete their studies or reject or revoke the authorization of the programme of studies completely.

(5)   The Internal Evaluation Board also considers setting a shorter period of validity of the authorization to implement a programme of studies when considering newly accredited programmes of studies, with which the Faculty has no previous experience (not even in the form of previous study fields).

Article 29
Internal Evaluation Board's Decision on Authorization to Implement a Programme of Studies

(1)   In the event of establishment of a programme of studies within an institutional accreditation, the Internal Evaluation Board makes the decision to grant the authorization to implement the programme of studies by means of a resolution. The following basic characteristics of the programme of studies must be made obvious in the resolution:

  1. type of the programme of studies and the academic degree awarded,
  2. standard length of studies,
  3. mode of studies (full-time, distance or combined),
  4. profile of the programme of studies (when Bachelor’s, Master’s or Consecutive Master‘s degree programme is concerned, the academic or professional profile is established, when a Doctoral degree programme is concerned, it is always an academic profile),
  5. the field or fields of education to which the programme of studies belongs; in the case of a combined programme of studies, the ratio of the basic thematic areas belonging to the individual educational fields implemented in the teaching is also determined,
  6. in the case of a programme of studies with a specializations or curricula for combined studies, all specializations or curricula of the programme of studies (and all the possible combinations of the given specializations and curricula if applicable) are stated,
  7. the duration of the validity of the authorisation to implement the programme of studies,
  8. the Guarantor of the Programme of Studies,
  9. the Faculty or Faculties providing the tuition of the given programme of studies,
  10. the language in which the programme of studies is implemented,
  11. when Master’s or Consecutive Master’s degree programme are concerned, the decision to authorise holding of the State Advanced Master’s (Rigorosum) Examination (including the Advanced Master’s (Rigorosum) Thesis Defence as part of the State Advanced Master’s (Rigorosum) Examination and the authority to award an academic degree,
  12. in the case of cooperation with another institution in the implementation of a programme of studies, information of this cooperation is included, including a reference to the terms of such cooperation; in addition to the USB Faculty, the relevant cooperating institution is also informed of any decision issued.

(2)   In the case of a decision to restrict the authorization to implement a programme of studies, the resolution of the Internal Evaluation Board also stipulates the required corrective Ordinances. In the case of granting an authorization to implement a programme of studies for a shorter period than the validity of the institutional accreditation, the statement includes justification of this decision and possible requirements for improvement of the quality of the programme of studies. The Guarantor of the programme of studies subsequently submits these to the Internal Evaluation Board in accordance with the timetable set by the Internal Evaluation Board.

(3)   The decision of the Internal Evaluation Board to grant an authorization to implement a programme of studies is signed by the Rector as the Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board. Pursuant to the law, the decision shall be published without delay with all its requisites on the public section of the USB website.

Article 30
Non-granting or Revocation of Authorization to Implement a Programme of Studies

(1)   The Internal Evaluation Board decides not to grant or revoke an authorization to implement a programme of studies it is:

  1. in contradiction with the legal regulations of the Czech Republic or in violation of the law, the Government Regulation No. 274/2016 Coll., on Standards for Accreditation in Higher Education, or the Internal Regulations of the USB, or
  2. does not meet other requirements for programmes of studies conducted at the USB, or
  3. in the event of failure to meet the requirements of the Recognition Authority for a programme of studies aimed at preparation for a regulated profession.

(2)   If the submitted documents necessary for reaching a decision are incomplete, the Internal Evaluation Board shall suspend the process of authorization to implement the programme of studies until all the required documents are provided. The relevant Faculty submitting the programme of studies proposal is then requested to provide the missing documents within a reasonable deadline. If the requested documents are not provided within 100 days, the proposal of the programme of studies is deemed as withdrawn by the submitter.

Article 31
Objections to the Internal Evaluation Board's Decisions

(1)   If the Internal Evaluation Board decides not to grant or revoke an authorization to implement a programme of studies, the Dean or the proposed Guarantor of the programme of studies may submit a request for a review of this resolution to the Rector within 30 days of the notification of this decision.

(2)   The Rector reviews the resolution of the Internal Evaluation Board in accordance with the law and the Internal Regulations of the USB, they may also consult the opinion of the USB Scientific Council.

(3)   The Rector's decision confirming the resolution of the Internal Evaluation Board is final. If the Rector finds the objections to non-granting or revocation of a programme of studies valid, the resolution of the Internal Evaluation Board is cancelled and the matter is returned for further discussion to the Internal Evaluation Board, supplemented by the documents submitted to the Rector during the review procedure; the Faculty may also submit additional documents to the proposal for a new programme of studies during this second round of discussion.

Article 32
Expiry of an Institutional Accreditation

(1)   An institutional accreditation for a field or fields of education terminates upon the expiry of the period for which it has been granted, or by the revocation of the accreditation by the NAB or upon the USB notification to the NAB that the University has decided to relinquish the institutional accreditation.

(2)   The intention to relinquish an institutional accreditation (for a particular field or all fields of education awarded to the USB) is approved by the USB Scientific Council upon the recommendation of the Rector after prior discussion of the matter in the Internal Evaluation Board and in the Scientific Councils and Academic Senates of the Faculties concerned which have responsibility for the accreditation.

Article 33
Accreditation of Habilitation Procedure and Procedure for Appointment of full Professorship  

(1)   The intent to submit an accreditation application for habilitation procedure or procedure for appointment of full professorship is proposed to the Rector by the Dean on behalf of the relevant Faculty's Scientific Board.

(2)   The Rector, after verifying that the proposal meets all requirements, submits it to the USB Scientific Board. If the Rector or the USB Scientific Board express any doubts as to the completeness of the submitted documents or suitability of carrying out the procedure in the given field, the Dean is invited to supplement further documents or reconsider suitability of the intent. If the Faculty insists on the proposal, it is re-discussed - inclusive of the comments - by the Scientific Council of the Faculty. The outcome of this discussion is either an endorsement of the proposal, including any possible supplements or amendments and justification of these changes, or a withdrawal of the proposal.

(3)   If the proposal is endorsed by the USB Scientific Council, the accreditation application for habilitation procedure or procedure for appointment of full professorship, the Rector submits the application in due form and inclusive of all requisites to the NAB without delay.

PART THREE
INTERNAL QUALITY EVALUATION

Article 34
Procedures Involved in Internal Quality Evaluation

(1)   Internal quality evaluation focuses on all major USB functions, with increased emphasis placed on the evaluation of educational activities, in the context of creative activities and with regard to international and national significance of the USB activities.

(2)   The basic common framework for the evaluation of the USB as a whole is the evaluation of the academic staff and other staff, which takes place annually and is governed by the relevant Rector’s Ordinances. The evaluation of the academic staff focuses in particular on their pedagogical workload and scientific, artistic and other creative activities and performance (in connection with guaranteed subjects and programmes of studies). All staff are evaluated on the fulfilment of their tasks, their career growth and their education and training needs if applicable. When evaluating Master's, Consecutive Master's or Doctoral degree programmes, the guaranteeing component is also assessed on the provision of an adequate amount of grant projects carried out outside the USB.

(3)   The common evaluation framework also includes assessment of the scientific, artistic and creative activities of individual academic staff and Departments providing teaching in accredited programmes of studies as well as evaluation of Lifelong Learning activities and related activities.

(4)   Internal quality evaluation also usually includes:

  1. feedback mechanisms based on regular questionnaire surveys aimed at gaining feedback from clearly defined target groups, in particular students at different stages of studies, including students leaving the USB for various reasons, graduates, employees, employers and other external agents,
  2. student evaluation of teaching (especially subject questionnaires and their analysis by the Guarantors of programmes of studies),
  3. national or international surveys and sociological surveys conducted by various ministries and other authorities within the Czech Republic or the European Union,
  4. international and national quality evaluation league tables with the view to belong among the best universities in the Czech Republic and to represent the USB and the Czech Republic in international rankings, when individual studies field rankings are concerned, with an emphasis on international comparison especially in those fields where international comparison is more accessible due to international publishing platforms and functional field publishing platforms,
  5. performance indicators (both public and internal) resulting from long-term strategic goals of USB,
  6. quantitative and qualitative analyses (in particular monitoring success rate in admission procedures, rates of failure to complete a programme of studies, degree of due completion of a programme of studies, job market applicability of graduates and possible problems); an integral part of these analyses is also the evaluation of ensuring equal conditions for all applicants and students,
  7. bibliometric analyses,
  8. evaluation of quality of the USB in accordance with the valid methodology of evaluation of research organizations and evaluation of programmes of purposeful support of research, development and innovation,
  9. Faculty evaluation assessing coupling the needs of USB development with financial limits and resources of the USB, especially in terms of the USB budgetary planning.

 

Article 35

Quality Evaluation of Educational Activities

 

  1. The internal quality evaluation monitors mainly the evaluation of programmes of studies and related graduation thesis, assessment of feedback processes from members of the academic community, applicants, graduates and employers of graduates. It also takes into account the graduates' applicability on the job market, the degree of due completion of studies and the termination of studies other than in due form or the degree of failure in the admission procedure.
  2. The basis for evaluation of programmes of studies is a Self-evaluation Report of the given programme of studies submitted by its Guarantor. The administrative formalities of the Self-evaluation Reports are provided in Part. 41.
  3. Statistical and other data for processing the Self-evaluation Report of the programme of studies which are available from the USB information systems are provided to the Guarantor of the programme of studies by the Rector's office in cooperation with the relevant Faculty.
  4. The Self-evaluation Report of each programme of studies is discussed by the Internal Evaluation Board with participation of the Faculty Quality Coordinator, the Dean, the Chair of the Academic Senate of the Faculty, the Guarantor of the programme of studies and other selected representatives of the evaluated programme of studies (Teachers and Heads of Departments implementing of the programme of studies). If the Internal Evaluation Board expresses any doubt as to the quality of the submitted Self-evaluation Report, the Guarantor of the programme of studies is required to take part in the meeting of the Internal Evaluation Board in order to complete the evaluation.
  5. The USB Internal Evaluation Board determines on a scale from A to E whether the outcomes and provision of the programme of studies can be rated as excellent (A), above average (B), standard (C), below-average (D) or falling short (E), while the main evaluation parameters are the teaching provision (staff stability, publications, grants, domestic and international contacts and cooperation), assessed specifically for academic and professional programmes of studies.

 

Article 36
Lifelong Learning Programmes Quality Evaluation 

 

  1. The internal evaluation of the Faculties also includes an assessment of the scope and quality of the implemented Lifelong Learning programmes.
  2. This evaluation takes into account in particular feedback from participants and graduates of individual Lifelong Learning programs; the quality of teaching and organizational provision of programmes at the Faculty, the promotion of Lifelong Learning programmes, the development of interest in the programmes offered and the demand for Lifelong Learning programmes.
  3. The organization, record keeping, and quality evaluation of the Lifelong Learning programmes are governed by the Code of Lifelong Learning at the USB and the related Rector's Ordinances and Internal Regulations of individual Faculties.
  4. The Lifelong Learning Council, appointed under the Code of Life-long education, prepares an evaluation report of the Lifelong Learning programmes implemented at the USB. The Rector's Advisory Board and the Internal Evaluation Board are informed of the results of the evaluation and they may make recommendations and suggestions for improvement of these activities, including recommendations on the content-based form of the evaluation report.

Article 37
Quality Evaluation of Creative Activities

  1. The quality of creative activities is evaluated with respect to the strategic documents of the USB, the strategic objectives and the overall creative activities development concept at the USB and its individual Faculties in accordance with the strategic documents of the Faculties and their professional orientation. The consistency of creative activities with individual programmes of studies and educational areas is also monitored.
  2. The development strategy of the USB also includes support of the scientific growth of Doctoral degree programmes students and academic staff in their early and middle stages of scientific growth, using tools such as internal grants of USB (the USB Grant Agency, postdoctoral positions at the USB), or Faculty tools to support the scientific growth of members of the academic community.
  3. The evaluation of creative activities respects the different publishing and citation strategies of individual fields and is mainly based on the comparison of performance of similar fields within the USB, within the Czech Republic and on international comparisons of the given fields. The International Council also contributes to this with its opinions and recommendations.
  4. The basis for creative activities quality evaluation, apart from the evaluation of the quality of the outcomes and bibliometric analysis, is also a Self-evaluation Report of the Faculty presented by the Dean after consultation with the Scientific Council of the Faculty, along with the minutes of this meeting (the relevant part of the minutes of the meeting of the Scientific Council of the Faculty) to the Internal Evaluation Board via the Vice-Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board.
  5. The Internal Evaluation Board determines on a scale from A to E whether the outcomes of the creative activities can be rated as excellent (A), above average (B), standard (C), below-average (D) or falling short (E), while the main evaluation parameters are the bibliometric data, quality of the creative outputs (publications, patents, artistic achievements and projects), development of grant projects outside the USB and cooperation with graduates of Doctoral degree programmes, including graduates of other universities in the Czech Republic and abroad.

 

Article 38
Quality Evaluation of Related Activities

 

  1. The quality of related activities means mainly the quality of activities supporting the main objectives of the USB, i.e. educational and creative activities.  
  2. Evaluation of related activities is usually carried out in connection with the USB Strategic Plan, with partial amendments within the annual update of the USB Strategic plan, in accordance with assessment of the overall USB development needs and in connection with the USB investment plan.
  3. The basis for the related activities quality evaluation is a Self-evaluation Report on the quality of related activities presented to the Rector by the Head of the relevant whole-university department or the Head of another department providing the related activities.
  4. The quality evaluation of related activities is regulated by the Rector or the Rector’s Advisory Board, if the evaluation includes evaluation of other activities of the Faculty or of the Rectorate as a whole.
  5. The Rector's Advisory Board and the Internal Evaluation Board are informed of the results of the evaluation of related activities and they may make recommendations and suggestions for improvement of these activities, including recommendations on the content and form of the submitted report.

 

PART FOUR
DOCUMENTATION

Article 39
Documentation in Quality Assurance and Evaluation System

(1)   The record keeping of quality assurance and quality evaluation at the University level are entrusted to the Vice-Chairman of the Internal Evaluation Board and the Secretary of the Internal Evaluation Board, who, in accordance with the Statute of the USB Internal Evaluation Board, collects documents for the internal quality evaluation of the USB. They follow the Internal Regulations and instructions of the Rector and Vice-Rector in charge of internal evaluation, so that the evaluation of all Faculties, all programmes of studies or all the fields of education for which the USB has been granted an institutional accreditation can be substantiated at any time. The competent authorities, Departments and individual staff members of Faculties and other components of the USB, including the Rectorate, provide appropriate co-operation.

(2)   The core framework for quality assurance and quality evaluation is given by the USB Strategic Plan and the annual Plan for the Implementation of the USB Strategic Plan, including its evaluation in the form of the Annual Report on USB Activities and the Annual USB Financial Statement, including all public and internal quality indicators. In accordance with the instructions of the Rector as a Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board, the USB prepares the Internal Evaluation Report drafted by the Internal Evaluation Board as a strategic document, i.e. with a view to the coming years, in relation to the further strategic direction of the USB and the Faculties and other components of the USB.

(3)   At the Faculty level, the Faculty Strategic Plans, their Annual Implementation Plans, Reports on Activities and Financial Statements of the Faculties or other USB components (in particular Dormitories and Refectories of the USB), Self-evaluation Reports of the Faculty and of individual programmes of studies are to be drafted regularly.

(4)   The Quality Assurance and Evaluation System also includes regularly produced reports on the quality of related activities supporting the core activities set out in Article 2 (1) to (3) of the USB Statute.

(5)   The individual reports, supporting documents for these reports and other documentation kept in the system of quality assurance and evaluation are produced within the deadlines and in a manner set out by the relevant Ordinance or methodological instruction of the Rector or Vice-Rector responsible for USB internal quality evaluation or the Bursar. These also stipulate the prescribed forms and instructions for their completion, the required annexes, a description of the method of evaluation of the submitted materials and other relevant information.

Article 40
Internal Evaluation Report and its Addendum

(1)   The Internal Evaluation Report is based on feedback mechanisms, analyses, suggestions and recommendations of the Internal Evaluation Board and the International Council, data available in the USB information systems, information provided by the Faculty Quality Coordinators, Self-evaluation Reports of Faculties and other components of the University, Self-evaluation Reports of individual programmes of studies and reports on the quality of related activities.

(2)   The Internal Evaluation Report contains in particular a description of the evaluation carried out in the assessed period, the main conclusions of these evaluations, the preventive Ordinances taken and, in the event of identified deficiencies, the corrective Ordinances taken.

(3)   The report also includes recommendations and suggestions for further development of the USB and for improving the current Quality Assurance and Evaluation System, drawing on, among other things, the analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the USB, the opportunities, options and possibilities of further development of the USB as a whole and its individual components.

(4)   The Internal Evaluation Report is - in accordance with the USB Internal Evaluation Board Statute - produced every five years. Every year, an addendum to this report is produced, which is subject to paragraphs 1 to 3 as appropriate.

Article 41
Self-evaluation Report of a Programme of Studies

(1)   A Self-evaluation Report of a programme of studies is one of the main supporting documents for evaluation of quality of educational activities provided by the USB.

(2)   The Self-evaluation Report of a programme of studies includes in particular:

  1. evaluation of compliance with the standards of programme of studies within the area of education, the Faculty and the USB as a whole, especially in terms of compliance with NAB requirements,
  2. results of the feedback mechanisms (in particular students’ and graduates’ evaluation, subject surveys, evaluation from graduates’ employers) and their analysis by the Guarantor of the programme of studies or by the Board of Programme of Studies, including any corrective and preventive Ordinances,
  3. evaluation of the connection between the creative activities of the Teacher and the subjects taught by them, including any corrective and preventive Ordinances,
  4. evaluation of the students' creative activities, especially the quality of their Graduation Thesis,
  5. evaluation of quality of professional practical training and cooperation with its providers, especially within programme of studies with professional orientation,
  6. evaluation of the level of involvement of Teachers and students in international and national co-operation, or participation in dual degree programmes,
  7. evaluation of the educational, creative, technical and material provision of the programme of studies,
  8. evaluation of the success rate in admission procedures, rates of failure to complete a programme of studies, degree of due completion of a programme of studies, job market applicability of graduates. This data is always provided for the period from the last Self-evaluation Report,
  9. a SWOT analysis of the programme of studies, evaluating its strengths and weaknesses as well as threats and other opportunities for development,
  10. outline of further development strategy of the programme of studies.

(3)   The Self-evaluation Report of a programme of studies covers the period since the NAB accreditation or the authorization to implement a programme of studies within an institutional accreditation was granted.

(4)   The Self-evaluation Report of a programme of studies is processed at least once during the accreditation period of the programme of studies. An addendum to this report is produced annually, evaluating any changes in quality of the programme of studies since the previous evaluation.                     

Article 42
Faculty Self-evaluation Report

(1)   The Faculty Self-evaluation Report deals mainly with the Faculty's creative activities and is presented for the Faculty as a whole. It takes into account and where applicable highlights the diversity and specific conditions of individual disciplines within the Faculty in terms of their evaluation and the opportunities available for engagement within the international environment and the international scientific community, especially specific situation of some humanities for which it is difficult to expand beyond the national framework.

(2)   The Faculty Self-evaluation Report contains in particular:

  1. definition of the Faculty’s purpose regarding its creative activities (mission, vision and creative activities objectives of the Faculty),
  2. a description of further development strategy of the creative activities, including the Ordinances taken to advance further development of creative activities at the Faculty,
  3. bibliometric analysis of the outcomes of the creative activities and annotation of the most important outcomes of these, including the most important publications abroad,
  4. a proof of conformity of the creative activities with the structure of programmes of studies provided by the Faculty,
  5. an overview of internal and external scientific and artistic projects and grants currently dealt with,
  6. a description of the students' involvement in the creative activities, description of the outcomes of the creative activities of Doctoral degree programmes students,
  7. an overview of the Faculty staff members' qualifications and age structure,
  8. evaluation of the social relevance and viability of the Faculty's creative activities,
  9. a description of the methods of evaluation of the creative activities and a list of achieved results, including the academic staff workload within scientific and pedagogical activities;
  10. a description of the strengths and weaknesses of the creative activities outcomes, including the threats and opportunities for further development of the Faculty creative activities.

(3)   An essential part of the Faculty's Self-evaluation Report is a summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the educational activities and individual programmes of studies provided by the Faculty, drawing the Faculty Quality Coordinator's attention to any possible problems in the implementation of programmes of studies and a summary of adopted corrective and preventive Ordinances.

(4)   The Faculty Self-evaluation Report is produced at least every five years. An addendum to this report is produced annually, evaluating any qualitative changes since the previous evaluation.

Article 43
Report on Quality of Related Activities

(1)   The Report on Quality of Related Activities evaluates in particular quality of the teaching premises, quality of the USB Academic Library and its branches, the Faculty libraries, the provision of the USB Dormitories and Refectories, the quality of the infrastructure within the USB premises and other areas of operation of the USB and its components and quality of other services provided by the USB.

(2)   The Report on Quality of the Related Activities is produced by the components and whole-university workplaces providing these activities, in connection to the nature of these services, according to the instructions of the Vice-Rector responsible for internal evaluation.

(3)   The Self-evaluation Report on Quality of the Related Activities is produced at least every five years. An addendum to this report is produced annually, which in particular contains a description of the structure and content of activities carried out during the evaluated period and information on the use of feedback mechanisms or an audit.

Article 44
Information Publication

 (1) The main results of evaluation of quality of programmes of studies, Faculties creative activities and related activities are together with the adopted Internal Evaluation Board resolutions and a summary of the Internal Evaluation Board main agenda published on the public section of the USB website. The Report on Internal Evaluation of Quality of Educational, Creative and Related Activities of the USB and its addendums are made available to the USB and its components' bodies, the NAB and relevant ministries.

(2)   In accordance with the law and other specific legal regulations, the public section of the USB website also publishes information on the programmes of studies provided by the University and a list of areas in which the USB is authorized to hold a habilitation procedure or a procedure of the appointment of full professorship.

PART FIVE
IMPROVEMENT, CORRECTIVE AND PREVENTIVE ORDINANCES

Article 45
Improvement, Corrective and Preventive Ordinances in the Quality Assurance and Evaluation System

(1)   At all levels of management, the USB is committed to continuous improvement in the quality of all principal, managerial and support processes and activities realized by the USB, its Faculties and other components, and continuously improves the efficiency of the internal quality assurance system. For this purpose, the following are used in particular:

  1. adopted policies and quality objectives,
  2. the results of internal as well as external audits,
  3. outcomes of previous evaluations,
  4. data analysis,
  5. adopted corrective and preventive Ordinances,
  6. opinions, recommendations and suggestions of the International Council, the Internal Evaluation Board, members of the Academic Community of the USB and other internal and external agents,
  7. periodic reviews of the Quality Assurance and Evaluation System.

(2)   The USB, within its established Quality Assurance and Evaluation System, ensures that a process or another part of the USB Quality Assurance and Evaluation System, which does not meet the set requirements, is identified and manged in such a way that corrective Ordinances are taken without unnecessary delay. The corrective Ordinance lies in finding and remedying the causes of deficiencies or identified discrepancies between the current and desirable situation (hereinafter just "discrepancy") in such a way as to avoid their recurrence. The corrective Ordinances must be proportionate to the consequences of the discrepancies found. As part of the established Quality Assurance and Evaluation System, the USB also adopts Ordinances to eliminate the causes of potential discrepancies by preventing their occurrence. The preventive Ordinances must be proportionate to the consequences of the potential discrepancies.

(3)   Any employee who discovers a discrepancy is obliged to inform their direct supervisor who subsequently informs the Guarantor of the relevant programme of studies (if the discrepancy found is related to the implementation of a programme of studies), the Quality Coordinator and the Dean or the Director of the relevant USB component. The Quality Coordinator, together with the Dean or the Director of the given USB component, decide whether the situation constitutes a discrepancy and assess its relevance in terms of its consequences on quality of the activities provided by the given University component. Any such identified discrepancy must be reported to the Vice-Chairman of the Internal Evaluation Board without delay.

(4)   In the event that the discrepancy is found at the Rectorate level, the direct supervisor of the employee discovering the discrepancy informs the Vice Chair who then informs the Chair of the Internal Evaluation Board.

(5)   The corrective and preventive Ordinances within the established Quality Assurance and Evaluation System are managed through tasks at the appropriate management levels, which must include at least the following points:

  1. discrepancy description,
  2. the person discovering the discrepancy and the date of such discovery,
  3. description of the cause of the discrepancy,
  4. person responsible for dealing with the discrepancy,
  5. deadline for remedy of the discrepancy,
  6. adopted corrective and preventive Ordinances,
  7. evaluation of the effectiveness of approved corrective and preventive Ordinances.

(6)   The Quality Coordinator is required to oversee and manage the approved corrective and preventive Ordinances and, on request, report to the Vice-Chairman of the Internal Evaluation Board or other authorized staff on the status of the discrepancy management.

(7)   The procedure for reporting and management of discrepancies adequately covers the procedure of submitting suggestions for improvement of the Quality Assurance and Evaluation System.

(8)   Information on the discrepancies dealt with, corrective and preventive Ordinances taken, as well as submitted proposals on improvement and changes of the established Quality Assurance and Evaluation System, are regularly discussed by the USB Scientific Council, the USB Academic Senate, and the USB Board of Trustees on the basis of the Internal Evaluation Report and its addenda.

PART FIVE
TEMPORARY AND FINAL PROVISIONS

Article 46
Temporary Provisions

During the validity of the accreditation of studies courses awarded to the USB before 2016, the term programme of studies within these Rules also means a studies course, even for the purposes of the Self-evaluation Report prepared in connection with the accreditation of programmes of studies under the law.

Article 47
Final Provisions

(1)   This Internal Regulation was discussed under Section 12 (1) h) of the Act by the Scientific Council of the USB on 24 May, 2017.

(2)   This Internal Regulation was approved pursuant to Section 12a (4) a) of the Act by the Internal Evaluation Board of the USB on 13 June 2017.

(3)   This Internal Regulation was approved pursuant to Section 9 (1) b) point 3 of the Act by the Academic Senate of the USB on June 27, 2017.

(4)   This Internal Regulation comes into effect pursuant to Article 36 (4) of the Act on the date of its registration by the Ministry.

Assoc. Prof. Tomáš Machula, PhD, ThD, 
Rector

 

Download PDF