Comment due to recent articles on SvD debate.
The Swedish National Union of Students welcomes the debate on quality in higher education. Higher education is in need of quality development and effective quality work.
Neither the higher education institutions nor the University Chancellor's Office (UKÄ) benefit from trying appear as good, but in reality deteriorates. In the long run, no one can live on having come out well from UKÄ's evaluations. It is necessary to be able to measure quality in some way, but comparability is not an end in itself. Then the work that is now done to be in line with the goals in the European Standards and Guidelines (ESG) becomes all the more important. It will hopefully mean that Sweden will really return to European quality assurance work. There we can then capture international perspectives and implement the lessons learned in higher education in Sweden.
Ulf Danielsson writes that “The focus should be on how subject content and subject depth stand in comparison with corresponding educations at foreign internationally prominent universities” (SvD 15 Nov 2016). The focus must rather be on the students getting the best possible conditions to achieve the learning objectives. Focusing solely on subject content and subject depth simplifies and makes it easy for us to overlook the work with abilities, as well as the importance of higher education pedagogy and high-quality teaching.
It is also problematic to compare Swedish higher education institutions with what Danielsson calls "outstanding higher education institutions", since a "prominent" international higher education institution may have a budget corresponding to several Swedish universities. Christopher Lagerqvist's and Josefin Holmström's debate article (SvD 12 Nov 2016) talks about how it is possible to move a course from Oxford to Uppsala without increased cost and still maintain quality. This may be true, but does not provide solutions to the system development that needs to take place - and that also takes place - in Sweden.
On the other hand, we agree with Lagerqvist and Holmström that there is a lack of self-confidence regarding quality assurance work in higher education in Sweden today. It should be a matter of course that the higher education institutions work to develop quality and also look to international guidelines. It is even prescribed in the Higher Education Act that the education must be of high quality. The fact that a new system or more reviews from UKÄ is then required for this to come into focus shows that we have a long way to go for Sweden to become a knowledge nation with world-class expertise.
Charlotta Tjärdahl, Vice President of the Swedish National Union of Students
The debate articles mentioned in the text
Christopher Lagerqvist's and Josefin Holmström's debate article, SvD 12 Nov 2016: http://www.svd.se/harrison-har-ratt–kraven-allt-lagre-pa-universitetet/om/debatten-om-hogskolan
Ulf Danielsson's debate article, SvD 15 Nov 2016: http://www.svd.se/vagar-uka-ga-pa-djupet-for-att-granska-kvalitet/om/debatten-om-hogskolan