Higher Education Authority: Solid procedures and opportunities for improvement

“The report is based on three modules: self-evaluation, UKÄ seminars and thematic specialisation, all focusing on how well we interact with the community,” says Magnus Johansson, quality coordinator at Professional Services, KI. “The UKÄ hopes that the report will promote self-insight and learning so that we can all improve our outreach work.”

The three modules that Magnus Johansson mentions together create a national picture of academic outreach that provides the UKÄ with the data required to make the comparisons and recommendations presented in its report.

Confirms KI’s own insights 

Before the UKÄ evaluation, a project group at KI carried out an analysis and evaluation (a self-evaluation) of the university’s outreach work. The results were submitted to the UKÄ for examination by an assessment committee, which returned recommendations within identified areas of improvement.

“I think we at KI are fully aware of our strengths and weakness,” says KI president Annika Östman Wernerson. “The UKÄ’s recommendations confirm to a large extent the strengths and areas of improvement that we ourselves have identified or are already working on improving. For example, the UKÄ looks favourably on the close relations we have between research, education and professional practice. One challenge, however, is that our outreach work is done in so many different ways and contexts. This makes it difficult to gain an overall idea of whether it’s having the intended effect. In this respect, we’re already working on integrating it better in our ordinary operational planning and follow-ups.”

Many higher education institutions received similar recommendations on developing their outreach activities by defining goals and involving their outreach partners and students.

Another common recommendation for the higher education institutions was to develop indicators, to follow up and document outcomes and to use the results of their follow-ups in their systematic quality work. 

Outreach outcomes must also reach different levels of management so that they can be converted into decisions and priorities. At the same time, the visions of management must be anchored more firmly in day-to-day core activities. 

A very important recommendation for the higher education institutions’ continuing development is for outreach skills to be an explicit merit rating for employees. 

Solid platform for prioritisation 

The Faculty Board’s committee for systematic quality assurance (RSK) will now be perusing the recommendations to identify the measures that can be taken in different fields of responsibility. The development work will then be followed up under KI’s quality system. 

In two years’ time, the UKÄ will be following up how the higher education institutions have integrated the recommendations of the assessment committee into their improvement work. 

“The UKÄ’s outreach report is very valuable to KI,” says Professor Östman Wernerson. “KI interacts extensively with the community and the evaluation shows just how important this is and that it’s an effective part of our daily activities. That said, KI must always strive to enhance the quality of our activities and the report supports us in our aim to work even harder with our strategic priorities, responsibility sharing, outreach monitoring and so on.”