It may be a revolutionary spring for higher education in Sweden and the system UKÄ has implemented in recent years to review the higher education institutions' quality assurance systems and specific educations. The results from the first round of university reviews and evaluation of pre-school and primary school teacher education are scheduled to be presented in the coming months.. Apart from postgraduate evaluations, these are the first results we will see from the “new” quality assurance system. Previously, only pilots were made and those who then failed got a new chance by ending up in the regular reviews.
It is important that we let the system go through an entire process. In cases where the higher education institutions' quality assurance systems or educations fail, the higher education institutions must be given the chance 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 guidelines. It is only after the whole process is completed that we can see if the system is sharp enough.
Based on the conditions that education has today, after more than 25 years of erosion, we can probably expect educations (and perhaps higher education institutions) that will not be approved. The educations cannot be better than the conditions they are given. We can also expect political action on the results. Here it is required that both politics and the universities take their responsibility.
Politicians can no longer duck to talk about the compensation per student if they at the same time want high quality, more teacher-led time and reforms in teacher education that actually lead somewhere. The resource allocation per student has been eroded for more than 25 years; it is no longer possible to expect high quality in higher education to be solved by hard-working students and teachers unless the economic conditions are given. When it comes to the quality assurance system, politicians need to handle the results carefully and be patient. The possibility of correcting any errors can be significantly distinguished and political proposals 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 an entire process before we change or even worse decide on new quality assurance systems.
The higher education institutions must take their responsibility and either implement the measures needed for the educations that are not of high quality, or close down the educations. All higher education must be of high quality and unless the conditions are provided through sufficient resources from the state and the opportunity for complete environments, the education must be discontinued. It will be difficult decisions but they will have to be made; students must be able to 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 needs to be done in a responsible way 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 just wait for the results.