Quality and Evaluation Board

    From UNITApedia
    Revision as of 15:42, 9 May 2025 by Antonio De Jesus Menchaca Martinez (talk | contribs) (Created page with "== Members == The Quality and Evaluation Board ('''QEB''') is composed of: * one representative of the AP ACPUA * up to five representatives of national QA agencies (one per agency) * six QA experts from the partner institutions * two representatives of the SA == Role == The QEB monitors reports and policies and provides suggestions and feedback to the GB. It is in...")
    (diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

    Members[edit | edit source]

    The Quality and Evaluation Board (QEB) is composed of:

    • one representative of the AP ACPUA
    • up to five representatives of national QA agencies (one per agency)
    • six QA experts from the partner institutions
    • two representatives of the SA

    Role[edit | edit source]

    The QEB monitors reports and policies and provides suggestions and feedback to the GB. It is in charge of the UNITA and its constellation projects’ QA policy, processes and practices through self-assessment and evaluation involving students and external stakeholders. It ensures the implementation, transparency, and fulfillment of the project’s mission statement and long-term vision; carries out monitoring actions (including on indicators and budget); and identifies and shares good practices to pursue continuous improvement.

    Frequency[edit | edit source]

    The QEB meets once every two months. At least once per semester, one meeting is held physically at the same location as the GB meeting, and one by videoconference.

    Responsibilities[edit | edit source]

    • Define and regularly update guidelines for UNITA’s QA, benchmarking against current guidelines in partner universities.
    • Contribute to shared documents defining project quality standards and monitoring rules; publish an annual self‐assessment report on good practices.
    • Monitor cost-benefit assessment and effectiveness via a Quality Review Checklist, tracking objective achievement against time, cost, and stakeholder satisfaction; synthesize findings in a biannual Quality Review Report.
    • Provide a comprehensive analysis of UNITA’s modus operandi and summarize it in an overall Self-Assessment Report on Good Practices, published and disseminated at international higher-education conferences and among associated members and sister Romance-language universities in the EU and overseas.