It could be a transformative spring for higher education in Sweden and the system UKÄ has implemented in recent years to review higher education institutions' quality assurance systems and specific programs. The results from the first round of university reviews and evaluation of preschool and primary school teacher training programs are scheduled to be presented in the coming months.. Apart from doctoral education evaluations, these are the first results we will see from the “new” quality assurance system. Previously, only pilots have been conducted and those who failed then were given a second chance by being included in the regular reviews.
It is important that we allow the system to go through a full process. In cases where the quality assurance systems or programmes of higher education institutions are failed, the higher education institutions must be given the opportunity to rectify the errors. The higher education institutions need to be given the time that is planned for each process and as described in the guidelinesIt is only after the entire process is completed that we can see if the system is sharp enough.
Based on the conditions education has today, after more than 25 years of erosion, we can probably expect programs (and perhaps universities) that are not approved. The programs cannot be better than the conditions they are given. We can also expect political statements about the results. This requires both politics and universities to take their responsibility.
Politicians can no longer duck to talk about per-student compensation if they also want high quality, more teacher-led time and reforms in teacher education that actually lead somewhere. The allocation of resources per student has been eroded for more than 25 years; it is no longer possible to expect that high quality in higher education will be achieved through hard-working students and teachers unless the economic conditions are met. When it comes to the quality assurance system, politicians need to handle the results carefully and be patient. The ability to correct any errors can vary considerably and political actions should therefore be made with caution and based on a good understanding of the system. It is also important that we let the system complete at least one full process before we change or, worse, decide on new quality assurance systems.
The higher education institutions must take their responsibility and either implement the necessary measures for the education that is not of high quality, or close the education. All higher education should be of high quality and if the conditions are not provided through sufficient resources from the state and the possibility of complete environments, the education must be closed. These will be difficult decisions but they will have to be made; students must be guaranteed a high-quality education.
We can most likely expect a spring with a lot of discussion about the quality of higher education. This is good, but it needs to be done in a responsible way that is based on facts and knowledge about both higher education and the system that ensures its quality. It will also require both action and patience on several levels.
Now we just have to wait for the results.