Assistance with system accreditation

Accreditation agencies supervise and carry out accreditation procedures. They are authorised by the Accreditation Council. The system accreditation procedure at the University of Göttingen is supervised by ZEvA.

The Accreditation Council Foundation is a joint institute of the federal states for quality assurance in Student and Academic Services at German universities.

The tasks of the Foundation are defined in the State Treaty on the Organisation of a Joint Accreditation System (State Treaty on the Accreditation of Studies). As a significant innovation, since 2018 the Accreditation Council, as the central decision-making body of the Foundation, has been responsible for deciding on the accreditation of study programmes (programme accreditation) and the accreditation of quality management systems (system accreditation) on the basis of expert reports.

Is the period between two (internal) accreditation procedures. Internal accreditation takes place for each cluster for the first time in the period up to the winter semester 2026/27, then every 6 years. If the second internal accreditation is successful, the aim is to extend the internal accreditation cycle to 8 years.

Graduates of a degree programme who are integrated into the QM system in accordance with the legal basis. The University of Göttingen conducts a centralised survey of graduates once a year, the results of which are incorporated into the QM system.

As part of the central evaluation, the evaluation commission evaluates the degree programmes. For this purpose, it uses the results of the dQM and the external statements, holds discussions with representatives of the faculty and students and formulates an evaluation report and an accreditation recommendation for the Presidential Board, which makes the accreditation decision.

The central procedure comprises all process steps up to the internal accreditation of a degree programme - starting with the participation of external experts as part of the dQM, their subsequent statement, the central evaluation by the evaluation commission, the subsequent statement by the faculty and the internal accreditation decision by the Presidential Board. It is completed when possible conditions have been fulfilled and the results have been published with the Accreditation Council. A possible complaints and arbitration procedure is also part of the centralised procedure.

The accreditation period of the degree programme is protected for the duration of the (administrative) procedure (with the complete availability of the external reports). If the accreditation period has expired in the course of the procedure, it will be cancelled retroactively so that there is no gap in accreditation.

A cluster is a bundle of several degree programmes that are related in terms of subject content and are considered together for the purpose of accreditation. The University has currently formed around 60 clusters from its approximately 200 degree programmes.

The complaints and arbitration procedure within the framework of the centralised procedure for internal accreditation is a mechanism regulated in the QMO-SL for arbitration in the event of disagreement about the accreditation decision.

Once the accreditation decision has been announced, the faculty has the opportunity to lodge an appeal against the decision within six weeks, which the Presidential Board can then remedy and, if necessary, change its accreditation decision. If this is not possible, the faculty can initiate arbitration proceedings. In the course of this, the Senate appoints an arbitration committee, which reviews the accreditation procedure and the relevant documents and holds discussions with the Presidential Board and the faculty concerned. It then formulates a recommendation for the Presidential Board, which then initiates implementation.

The result can be that either the previous accreditation decision remains in place or another internal evaluation commission carries out another central evaluation or an externally appointed evaluation commission carries out an evaluation in accordance with the rules of programme accreditation.

The KASL is the university-wide committee for the control and further development of quality management in Student and Academic Services. It advises on key developments in the QM system, makes recommendations on quality assurance and reviews the functionality of the dQM.

Is the part of the QM system of the University of Göttingen that is carried out by the faculties.

The University of Göttingen has made a conscious decision to give its faculties freedom of design in the implementation of decentralised quality management in order to meet the specific requirements of different subjects and academic cultures. Within a defined framework of university-wide minimum requirements, the faculties formulate their own decentralised quality management concept, which is adapted to the respective (committee) structures and specifics of the faculty.

The dissent procedure within the framework of the dQM is a mechanism regulated in the QMO-SL for arbitration within the faculty (if necessary together with the Presidential Board) if there are different assessments of the definition, implementation of measures or the fulfilment of technical and content-related quality criteria.

Initially, the Faculty Council makes the final decision. Depending on the case of disagreement, the Presidential Board / Presidential Board member responsible for Student and Academic Services or external experts may also be consulted.

Transparency and documentation are ensured via the central document management system d.3 designed for the QM system. Those involved in the procedure and status groups are granted access to the system as part of a rights concept. The documentation must be completed by all participants.

Among other things, the faculties are obliged to provide information on their dQM concepts, the degree programme clusters and the quality rounds. The implementation status of adopted measures and central quality development measures must at least be publicly accessible to the faculty and presented transparently on the websites. The Student and Academic Services Department makes available the results of the central evaluations, the degree programme reports, all relevant regulations as well as the external statements and results of internal accreditation.

Central document management system designed for the QM system to manage and provide quality documents such as the results from the dQM and central QM, the documentation of internal accreditations, degree programme reports and evaluation data. d.3 ensures transparency and documentation in the QMS.

It also provides support by offering workflows, e.g. for planning quality rounds and controlling measures, as well as facilitating deadline management. The various status groups involved in the system can be given access to the system via a comprehensive rights concept and data protection regulations can be complied with.

The University regularly develops its QM system for Student and Academic Services on the basis of analyses of the effectiveness of individual components and their interaction and in line with changes in university strategies as well as legal and university policy framework conditions. If the QMS does not already provide for a development control loop (e.g. dQM, mission statement and quality objectives, evaluation of courses), the KASL takes on the process. The KASL should submit recommendations for the further development of the QMS no later than one year before the expiry of the accreditation of the QMS, but no less frequently than every eight years.

The evaluation commissions are made up of members from within the university, but not from the faculty, and review the results of decentralised quality management (dQM) as part of internal accreditation. An evaluation commission consists of three lecturers with voting rights, including at least one university lecturer, and two students with voting rights. The University's Equal Opportunities Officer can participate in an advisory capacity. Representatives of the Department of Student and Academic Services advise and support the commissions and participate without voting rights.

The evaluation commission carries out the central evaluation on the basis of the statements of the external experts involved in decentralised quality management (dQM), the results of the dQM (in particular the overview of measures and minutes of the quality rounds) as well as the current degree programme regulations and degree programme reports and proposes possible conditions and recommendations to the Presidential Board in an evaluation report. The Presidential Board makes the final accreditation decision.

To become a member of an evaluation commission, you must be a member of the evaluation pool (see below) and apply for a centralised procedure that has been advertised on the homepage.

Interested university members from all status groups who are willing to participate as members of internal evaluation commissions in internal accreditation procedures for study programmes of other faculties can be nominated for the evaluation pool.

University bodies, faculties and the student body are eligible for nomination. Students can also be included in the pool via a public call for applications.

External experts must be involved in accreditation procedures; an external expert group at the University of Göttingen is made up of one representative each from the academic discipline, professional practice and students. The appointment is made by the Presidential Board.

The faculty has the right to nominate the representatives of the academic discipline and professional practice (impartiality criteria must be taken into account here); the student assessors are recruited via the student accreditation pool or relevant faculties. The Department of Student and Academic Services is responsible for supervising and training the external assessors.

In the QM system, the external experts are involved in the decentralised procedure and then draw up an expert opinion for each degree programme using a questionnaire. The involvement takes place at least once per accreditation cycle at cluster level. The reports are included in the centralised procedure for the internal accreditation decision.

The functionality review is an instrument at the level of the University's QM system and a regular review (currently every 6 years) by the Coordinating Committee for Quality in Student and Academic Services (KASL) as to whether the decentralised quality management of the faculties fulfils the intended functions and whether the control loops are closed. The findings from the dQM documents, the perspective discussions and the internal accreditation procedures are included in the review if these have provided possible critical indications regarding the functionality of the dQM.

Is the (internal) accreditation of a newly established study programme.

Internal accreditation confirms that a degree programme fulfils the requirements of the Lower Saxony Study Accreditation Ordinance (Nds. StudAkkVO) and the university's internal quality assurance standards. The Presidential Board decides on the internal accreditation on the basis of the evaluation reports of the evaluation commission (including the extract of the external expert reports) and the faculty's statement on the evaluation reports. In addition, the results of the dQM and other documents may be consulted. With a positive decision, the seal of the Accreditation Council is awarded.

These discussions, which take place every two years between the member of the Executive Board responsible for Student and Academic Services and the faculties, serve to strategically manage the quality development of the QM system and to reflect on the effectiveness of the dQM. They can lead to target agreements and the implementation of corresponding measures.

The QMO-SL is the regulation on the quality management system in Student and Academic Services and the evaluation of teaching at the University of Göttingen and regulates everything about our evaluations and our QM system - control loops, responsibilities, etc. pp.

are the core element of decentralised quality management (dQM) for the systematic evaluation and further development of degree programmes. They take place at least every two years and bring together teaching staff, students and other stakeholders to discuss the quality and further development of study programmes on the basis of evaluation results, performance data and programme monitoring.

The quality rounds are structured and data-based and serve to identify strengths and weaknesses in Student and Academic Services and derive proposals for measures. Depending on the faculty, they can be organised in different formats. External experts are involved at least once per accreditation cycle to ensure an independent perspective.

The definition and implementation of measures is then initiated and monitored by the faculty. The faculty members are informed regularly.

Is the (internal) accreditation of existing study programmes in clusters.

Significant changes to a degree programme can be the result of a quality review and subsequent referral to the faculty committees. If significant changes are planned independently of the dQM, a quality review must be carried out in addition to the regular schedule. Significant changes include, in particular, the renaming of a degree programme or the introduction and discontinuation of specialisations. When planning significant changes, the corresponding implementation deadlines must be taken into account. In the course of implementation, the impact on (internal) accreditation will also be examined.

Report prepared by the Student and Academic Services Department based on survey and behavioural data from various sources, including student and examination administration data and evaluation results, which is used for the quality rounds in the dQM and the central evaluation and made available once a semester via the document management system d.3. In order to fulfil the various target groups and requirements, there are different versions in accordance with the rights concept in d.3, which, for example, have already been checked for data protection and can be used in the quality rounds.

System accreditation confirms that a university's quality management system in Student and Academic Services is suitable for continuously ensuring and further developing the quality of the study programmes. It is audited by an external accreditation agency and awarded by the Accreditation Council. Successful system accreditation gives the university the right to award the seal of the Accreditation Council itself for the study programmes it has audited and thus to independently fulfil the accreditation obligation for its study programmes.

This is the procedure in which the university proves that its quality management system in Student and Academic Services is suitable for ensuring and further developing the quality of its study programmes. Successful system accreditation entitles the University to award the seal of the Accreditation Council itself for the study programmes it has examined (internal accreditation).

The University was admitted to the main procedure in November 2019. Information on the current status of the procedure can be found here.

Faculty target agreements for the targeted further development of Student and Academic Services are drawn up on the basis of the perspective discussions between the member of the Presidential Board responsible for Student Affairs and Teaching and the faculties. These are to be adopted by the Presidential Board and the respective Faculty Council or the highest body of the central institute based on groups. The Presidential Board informs the Senate of the conclusion of a target agreement. The target agreements must be implemented by means of suitable measures.

In the course of the target agreements, targets can also be set that relate to the internal accreditation of a degree programme if it is already apparent that it will not be adequately assessed in a central procedure.

Furthermore, target agreements can be used as an alternative to requirements within the scope of the functionality review if this or the perspective review itself has identified a need for development in the dQM.