Funding Suggestion HAHE 2023 (GR)

Funding Suggestion HAHE 2022 (GR)

Funding Suggestion HAHE 2021 (GR)

Funding Suggestion HAHE 2020 (GR)

The quality indicators which have been developed present the performance of academic units in 5 areas:

1. Teaching work
2. Research and innovation
3. Funding
4. Human resources
5. Infrastructure and services

More specifically, the NISQA through two subsystems (quality data & BI) performs the following operations:

• Collects quantitative data annually (526 data fields: Institution 179, Department 157, Undergraduate Study Program 132, Postgraduate Study Program 40 and Ph.D. program 18) from all HEIs of the country for each academic/calendar year
• Calculates 263 KPI's through the BI platform: Institution (130), Department (55), Undergraduate Study Program (51), Postgraduate Study Program (18) and Ph.D. Program (9).
• Is accessible to any Institution through its QAU, which has full responsibility for the collection and submission of data. Each QAU has NISQA management rights and the ability to create internal users for the academic quality assurance units (OMEA). Currently, HAHE collaborates with the Institutions and supports around 1,200 users, answers questions (about 1,200 to date) to clarify the definition and significance of the data, and publishes related reports. The system collects data from 2015-2016 till today.
• Produces a detailed and concise overview of Institutions, Departments and study programs for all HEIs in the country (through KPI’s indicators performed by BI system), used in studies, the HAHEs annual quality report, the development of a Quality Assurance Strategy, the proposal for a national strategy on higher education, expert training, etc.
• Provides QAUs with structured reports to facilitate the Institutional quality planning, the IQAS monitoring and the preparation of internal evaluation reports and more generally to support decision-making in HEIs.
• Provides structured reports to the Accreditation Panels for their information during the external evaluation process.
• Enables the management of the experts` registry

The quality data of institutions entered into NISQA was classified and grouped by academic entity/unit (Institution, Department, Undergraduate Study Programme, Postgraduate Study Programmes, Ph.D Study Programme) and subsequently by thematic field, as shown in the following Table.

As part of ΗΑΗΕ’s responsibilities and in accordance with its institutional framework, the Authority, in 2015 developed the National Information System for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (NISQA), which is structured in 5 subsystems: a) Data of Quality of Higher Education, b) Business Intelligence, c) Register of Experts, d) Accreditation Management, e) Internal Operation.

QDATA

National Information System for Quality Assurance - NISQA

Το enter the Quality Data Management System, please click here

The Registry of Experts is used by the HAHE mainly for setting up IQAS and Study Programme Accreditation Panels and for supporting any quality assurance process.

Τhe members of the Accreditation Panel are committed to:

• act with integrity, objectivity and confidentiality;
• thoroughly examine the information and background data submitted;
• take into account the context of the Higher Education Institution;
• follow the guidelines of HAHE and adhere to the philosophy of quality assurance and continuous improvement;
• avoid conflicts of interest; the members of the Panel should inform HAHE of any association with the host Institution (currently, or during the past five years) and of any scheduled engagement or affiliation, so that their impartiality may not be questioned. Associations which may cause a conflict of interest are, for example, close family relationship, professional or research collaborations with senior members of the Institution, special awards received by the Institution in question, and any other official relationship (HAHE will consider each case separately);
• work closely as a team, under the guidance of the Chair of the Panel and adhere to the defined deadlines;
• take into consideration that the accreditation process is oriented to improvement, rather than just identifying areas of weakness; it must not be used as means for a potential growth of personal interests. All those who have been members of Accreditation Panels should avoid using information related to the evaluations for financial profit (e.g. by serving as consultants for Higher Education Institutions that they have reviewed), without the permission of HAHE;
• base their assessments on the evidence gathered;
• mention in their final report external interferences, if any, which have hindered their work.

Furthermore:

The Chair of the Panel is mainly the person who organises and coordinates the discussions and takes care for averting or releasing any tension that may come up during the entire review process. In addition, the Chair is responsible for the timely submission of the written report, and serves as a contact between the HAHE and the Panel.