Institutional Evaluation – 2024 Wave

Context and national programmes

As part of the implementation of the action plan of the National Agency for the Evaluation and Quality Assurance of Higher Education and Scientific Research (ANEAQ) for the year 2024, approved by its Board of Directors, and in accordance with Indicator No. 1 of the Program to Support Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Mobility “ESRIM”, the Agency scheduled the institutional evaluation of 46 higher education institutions in 2024, concerned by the following two national programs:

• The program for training primary and secondary school teachers by 2025
• The program for strengthening the density of health personnel by 2030

In this context, letters from the Secretary General of the Ministry of Higher Education, Scientific Research and Innovation (MESRI) were sent to the various heads of the institutions concerned by the Agency’s evaluation for the 2024 session.

Preparation, training and follow-up meetings

participate fully in this quality assurance process, the Agency asked these institutions to appoint individuals responsible for coordinating the self-evaluation process and ensuring smooth communication within each institution, with a view to participating in the various training and support meetings organized by the Agency, namely:

• A training meeting for the heads of self-evaluation committees (online, on April 16, 2024)
• The first support meeting for self-evaluation committees (in person, on June 10, 2024)
• The second support meeting for self-evaluation committees (online, on July 5, 2024)

The Agency organized the second meeting for monitoring the institutional evaluation of higher education institutions – 2024 session, whose aim was to focus on the progress made in preparing the self-evaluation reports.

Participation in these meetings is of great importance in the self-evaluation process, as they provide participants with the tools and guidance needed to carry out this quality assurance approach successfully. By understanding the Agency’s requirements and expectations, the members of the self-evaluation committees became better equipped to coordinate the work effectively within their institutions. These occasions also allowed participants to exchange good practices, share experiences and open prospects for cooperation.

These training and support meetings are a decisive stage in ensuring the success of the self-evaluation.

Self-evaluation documents provided

The Agency made available to the heads of institutions and the heads of self-evaluation committees the working documents needed for the self-evaluation, namely:

• Référentiel_ANEAQ_2020_Fr
• Référentiel_ANEAQ_2020_Ar
• Annexe_Preuves_Référentiel_ANEAQ_Fr
• Annexe_Preuves_Référentiel_ANEAQ_Ar
• Guide_Autoévaluation_ANEAQ_Fr
• Guide_Autoévaluation_ANEAQ_Ar
• The self-evaluation report template

After the training and support meetings, the Agency organized a coordination meeting, on September 26, 2024, with the experts mobilized for this institutional evaluation session, with the aim of unifying the working method and sharing good practices among the experts.

The two stages of institutional evaluation

It should be recalled that the process of evaluating a higher education institution goes through two stages:

1. Self-evaluation

Self-evaluation is the first stage of the quality assurance procedure and its main foundation. In general, the self-evaluation report pursues at least three main objectives:

• To present a concise yet analytical and comprehensive diagnosis of the institution’s view of its activities
• To provide quantitative and qualitative data supporting this analysis
• To provide a basis on which the institution can be evaluated

A successful self-evaluation leads the institution to identify its strengths and weaknesses and to propose an action plan. In this regard, it is necessary and useful to give particular attention to the self-evaluation approach, which will be based on collective reflection with a view to improving the institution’s practices.

The self-evaluation phase has two aspects that are equally important:

• The self-evaluation process is a collective institutional reflection and an opportunity to improve the quality of all aspects of the institution
• The self-evaluation report is the outcome of this process, and conveys information to the external evaluation committee, with an emphasis on strategic steering activities and on the institution’s quality approach

2. External evaluation

External evaluation is the second stage of the quality assurance procedure. It aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an institution and its general functioning. This external evaluation is carried out by a committee of experts, which aims to:

• First, validate the conclusions drawn from the self-evaluation
• Visit the institution, which is a key moment that allows the evaluators to gather information and to interview the actors inside the institution, and sometimes outside it
• Finally, this committee of experts prepares an external evaluation report, reflecting an assessment by persons from outside the institution, with an emphasis on the strengths to be built on and reinforced, as well as the weaknesses and areas for improvement, in the form of recommendations

The Agency received 46 self-evaluation reports for the 46 institutions scheduled. The Agency organized the site visits in consultation with the experts on the one hand and the heads of institutions on the other, between October and December 2024. The external evaluations carried out by the Agency’s experts relied on the study of the self-evaluation reports, the examination of the documents annexed to those reports and made available to them, the discussions held with the main internal and external stakeholders of the evaluated institutions, as well as visits to the various facilities of the institutions.

This evaluation operation was designed as a collective moment for sharing institutional achievements and the improvements to be undertaken. We note with great satisfaction the positive and calm atmosphere in which this operation took place, and we also note the strong involvement shown by all the actors in the evaluated institutions, in particular the presidents of the universities concerned.

The evaluation took place in a friendly atmosphere, based on an interactive methodology benefiting from group work. Collective work, with the sharing of information and opinions within the institutional framework, essentially aims to seize the opportunity to improve the existing situation through good practices in the management, governance and running of a higher education institution.

Institutions covered

Public institutions — Education and training (13)

Public institutions — Health sciences (8)

Private institutions — Health sciences (25)

Statistics on the evaluation of institutions