This document discusses the expectations and procedures for reviews of quality assurance agencies conducted for registration on the European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education (EQAR). It provides an overview of EQAR's mission and registration process. It outlines the requirements for independent review coordinators and panels representing various stakeholders. It also describes the changes made in 2015 to the application process, relevant documents for reviewers to reference, the information provided about each agency under review, and coverage of reviews. The document explains the expectations for review reports and decision making by the Register Committee. It concludes by noting that full documentation of reviews will be published.

1. European Quality Assurance
Register for Higher Education
EQAR and its Expectations
of the Reviews of Agencies
ENQA Training of Agency Reviewers
Ljubljana, 22 September 2016
Colin Tück

2. European Quality Assurance Register
for Higher Education (EQAR)
 Mission: enhance
transparency and trust in QA
 EHEA's official register of
QAAs that comply
substantially with the ESG
 Registration and periodic
renewal based on external
review
 Decisions by independent
Register Committee
 QA experts nominated by
ENQA, ESU, EUA, EURASHE,
BusinessEurope, Education
International
 43 registered QAAs
 Governmental members
without registered agency

3. Further monitoring
Registration based on external review of agency
Annual updates on reviews and countries
Substantive change reports
Third-party complaints
Periodic renewal every 5 years

4. Reviews for EQAR
registration
ENQA; 32
German
Accred-
itation
Council;
8
Others; 3
Review coordinators Requirements
 Independent coordinator
 Panel representing various
perspectives
 Interviews with all
stakeholders
 Access to all evidence
 Economic model
 Reviews with dual purpose,
e.g. ENQA and EQAR, or
GAC and EQAR

5. Changes in application
process (2015)
New Old
Application Before review After review
Check of eligibility First step of process Prior check optional
External review Follows eligibility check Before application
Flags No longer used In approval decision
Publication policy: Full documentation Decision only

6. Relevant documents for
reviewers
General
 Policy on Use and
Interpretation of the ESG
for the European Register
 To be read in conjunction with
the full text of the ESG
 Replaces “Practices and
Interpretations”
 New element: “Reports
should at least demonstrate”
 Procedures for Applications
and specific policies
https://eqar.eu/documents/official.html
For each agency
 Eligibility confirmation
letter
(via ENQA)
 Previous decision
(EQAR website)
 Substantive Change
Reports
(EQAR website)
 Complaints
(if any, EQAR website)

7. Information per agency
Substantive
Change
Report
Previous
decision

8. Coverage of reviews
 All external QA activities within the scope of the ESG
 Obligatory and voluntary
 Within the EHEA and outside the EHEA
 See eligibility confirmation letters to agencies
 International/cross-border activities
 Clear procedures and criteria
 Activities “discovered” during review
 Analyse if potentially relevant
 Consultative activities
 Clear separation needed
 Transparency: different nature, what is ESG and what is not

9. Review report
 Clarity
 Link between evidence and conclusions
 Avoid vague statements
 Separate ESG compliance and further recommendations
 Dissenting opinion if major disagreement
 Specifically address different activities under ESG 2.1 – 2.7
 Subheadings are useful
 Demonstrate that all activities comply with the ESG
 Conclusion could differ between activities
 Standard 2.1
 Link between agency's standards and ESG 1.1 – 1.10

10. Decision-making
Conclusions for each standard Overall judgement
Review panel
Substantially compliant
Not substantially compliant
either ...
… or
Register Committee decision
Full compliance
Substantial compliance
Partial compliance
Non-compliance
Compliance
(full or substantial)
Partial compliance
Non-compliance
All standards
One or more
One or more → holistic judgement
 Clarification requests to panel chair if needed
 If conclusion differs from panel, explained in public decision

11. Publication

12. Thank you for your attention!
Contact:
colin.tueck@eqar.eu
+32 2 234 39 11
@ColinTueck @EQAR_he