Quality of Education Department

Objectives and Assumptions of the Quality of Education Department

The Quality of Education Department (DJK) was established by a resolution of the Senate of the University of Business and Management in Łódź (former name of SAN University) on 5 May 2009 as a central organisational unit.

Its role was defined as supporting the Vice-Rector for Quality of Education in supervising the efficient functioning of the Internal Quality Management System (IQMS) and the implementation of quality enhancement activities. The Department reports directly to the Rector’s Plenipotentiary for Quality of Education, Dr Eng. Zdzisław Szymański.

The main mission of the Department is to initiate and support activities aimed at improving the quality of education at the University.

In particular, the Department supports the Rector, the Rector’s Plenipotentiary for Quality of Education, Deans, and other units involved in the Internal Quality Management System. This cooperation takes place across various areas of university activity and also includes initiatives involving students, graduates, and representatives of the socio-economic environment.

Research conducted by the Quality of Education Department

The main objective of the study on the quality of teaching classes and academic staff performance is to obtain feedback from students regarding the quality of teaching provided by the lecturers with whom they have classes. The results are highly valuable for University authorities and direct supervisors (Institute Directors and Heads of Departments/Chairs). They make it possible to identify irregularities in the teaching and learning process at SAN University and to take actions aimed at eliminating them.

However, the greatest value of the results lies with the evaluated academic staff themselves, as they encourage reflection on their teaching practice and help identify areas for improvement, thereby supporting the development of their teaching skills.

As part of the survey, students assess, among others, lecturers’ preparation for classes, punctuality, ability to engage students, clarity of communication, willingness to answer questions, etc. The principles of this evaluation are defined in procedure P-09 “Evaluation of the quality of teaching classes and academic staff performance conducted by students”.

Dear Students of SAN University, if you are interested in the results of this study, you are welcome to visit the Quality of Education Department. A summary of the results is also available in the Bulletins published on our website.

The study on the adequacy of infrastructure for the teaching process, administrative services, student support, and organisation of the educational process is conducted in accordance with procedure P-07, at least once every two years.

The study covers the following thematic areas:

  • facilities and equipment
  • accessibility of lecturers, university and faculty authorities, information flow, and student support system
  • quality of administrative services
  • library services
  • opportunities for personal development, etc.

The aim of the study is to gather students’ opinions on their satisfaction with these aspects of university functioning. The results help identify irregularities in the organisation of the teaching process and areas of dissatisfaction related to infrastructure and support services.

They form the basis for strategies aimed at improving the organisation of education and the development of teaching facilities, as well as for university management planning.

Dear Students of SAN University, if you are interested in the results of this study, you are welcome to visit the Quality of Education Department. A summary is also available in the Bulletins published on our website.

The main aim of this study is to obtain students’ feedback on their satisfaction with cooperation with thesis supervisors. The results are useful for University authorities and direct supervisors (Institute Directors and Heads of Departments/Chairs), as they allow identification of issues in the thesis preparation and examination process and support corrective actions.

Graduates complete a questionnaire upon submission of their diploma thesis and place it in a designated ballot box. They evaluate, among others, supervisor availability, support in selecting the topic and structure of the thesis, assistance in selecting literature and research materials, regularity of supervision, and usefulness of feedback.

The internal quality assurance procedures at faculty level include the possibility of examining students’ awareness of learning outcomes and their achievement.

The study is usually conducted alongside the evaluation of teaching quality and may also concern courses selected by programme committees. The questionnaire includes assessment of the clarity of learning outcomes and whether lecturers fulfil their responsibilities, such as presenting learning outcomes at the beginning of the course, explaining assessment methods, and defining evaluation criteria.

Students also evaluate whether teaching methods and course content allowed them to achieve the intended learning outcomes.

This study aims to gather employers’ opinions regarding students’ competencies, particularly those acquired during internships. The questionnaire covers key learning outcomes in terms of knowledge, skills, and social competences defined for individual study programmes.

The study of graduates’ career paths is conducted in accordance with procedure P-13 “Tracking graduates’ career paths and monitoring the labour market”.

It consists of two stages. At each stage, graduates complete a questionnaire. Upon submission of their diploma thesis, students are informed about the purpose and process of the study and asked to consent to data processing and receiving survey questionnaires by email.

The first stage is conducted one year after graduation, and the second three years after graduation.

The study covers, among others:

  • employment activity
  • characteristics of employment
  • assessment of competencies acquired at SAN University and their usefulness in professional work
  • competency gap between acquired and required skills
  • level of preparation for professional work
  • satisfaction with studies

The results are used to improve study programmes and verify learning outcomes. Reports are presented to University authorities and discussed within programme committees and the University Quality Assurance Committee.

Quality Policy

SAN University has implemented an Internal Education Quality Management System, which is based on the University’s own experience and achievements in the field of quality assurance, while also taking into account current regulations and quality standards formulated by recognised authorities in this area.

The main objective of the Internal Education Quality Management System is to continuously improve the quality of education in line with the University’s Mission and Strategy. This objective is closely linked to meeting the needs, expectations, and aspirations of students, postgraduate students, and the socio-economic environment.

The Internal Quality Management System is oriented towards cooperation between internal and external stakeholders. Guided by the fundamental principle of student and postgraduate learner orientation, the University undertakes, among others, the following actions:

  • identifying the needs, expectations, and interests of students and postgraduate students
  • analysing the causes of student failure in the learning process, including student deregistration and dropout rates
  • informing students and postgraduate students about their rights and responsibilities within the academic system

 

Internal Education Quality Management System
Objectives and Principles of the Internal Education Quality Management System
Extention: pdf
416 KB
Procedures of the Internal Education Quality Management System
Internal Education Quality Management System – Procedures
Extention: pdf
661 KB

 

Report on the Activities of the Quality of Education Department
University Quality of Education Committee
Extention: pdf
229 KB