Quality reviews: our process
Quality reviews in faculties
Formal programme reviews are addressed in the Quality Promotion Plan. Targets are outlined in the UJ Strategic Objectives: 2025. Reviews consist of an evidence-based self-evaluation report and a formal peer review. The key elements of programme reviews are the samn as those outlined below for quality reviews in academic development, service and support divisions. Module reviews (as described in the Quality Promotion Plan) may feed into the programme self-evaluation and peer review. A programme review may also be combined with a departmental review (as described in the Quality Promotion Plan).
For some feedback on the quality review process written by a faculty member who underwent a review see here.
Quality reviews in academic development, service and support divisions
These reviews are scheduled and approved by the STLC and consist of the following key elements:
- An evidence-based self-evaluation report (SER) of the division/unit by applying HEQC institutional audit criteria customised for the UJ.
- A site visit by a peer review panel.
- A peer review report to the division/unit, followed by an improvement plan (developed by the unit) to be approved by the management structures and line managers in the unit, but also the relevant senate committee(s).
- Annual progress reports on the implementation of the improvement plan (submitted to the relevant Senate committee(s)).
- Support is provided by the institutional Unit for Quality Promotion.
Two faculties were scheduled for Faculty Reviews in 2013, namely the Faculty of Humanities and the Faculty of Health Sciences. These are a new type of review for the UJ and the concept was introduced in late 2012.
Two more faculties were reviewed in 2014, namely, the Faculty of Management and the Faculty of Economic and Financial Sciences.
In 2015, the Faculty of Law and the Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment were reviewed.
The Faculty of Education and the Faculty of Arts, Design and Architecture are being reviewed in 2016.