Experts – study programmes at PhD level

When we receive applications for accreditation of study programmes at PhD level, we first make an administrative assessment of whether the formal requirements have been met. Applications are then submitted for assessment by expert committees.

The Expert committee

Based on the application and a two-day site visit, the experts make a professional assessment of the application against NOKUT's requirements (see the Regulation on Supervision of Educational Quality). This results in a joint evaluation where the experts conclude whether they recommend accreditation or not. See the accreditation process for more information.

Generally, we appoint four academic experts to assess each accreditation application. Institutions applying for accreditation may suggest experts and comment on proposals, but it is NOKUT that decides which experts will be used.

Requirements for the experts’ qualifications

The Regulation on Supervision of Educational Quality sets requirements for the experts’ qualifications at PhD level:

  • The experts must have competence in and experience with conducting similar or equivalent study programmes.
  • One PhD research fellow must be part of the committee.
  • Usually we only use professors, in addition to the PhD research fellow.
  • At least one of the experts must have relevant international competence and is therefore usually recruited from an institution abroad.

It is also important that the experts do not have roles at the institution or in the programme they are evaluating, or other affiliations that would make them disqualified. The experts must not comment publicly on the case before a decision has been made.

The experts provide recommendations to NOKUT in accreditation cases, but NOKUT is responsible for the final decision. The expert evaluation cannot be appealed by the applicant.

About being an expert

  • Being an expert involves preparing a written assessment and possibly a shorter additional assessment (see below), based on the assessment of an application for accreditation of a new study programme. There are usually three experts on each application. For applications for accreditation of studies at bachelor's and master's level, institutional visits are not included, but the experts meet at a (digital) kick-off meeting under the auspices of NOKUT, where our case managers go through the criteria the experts will assess.

    Each expert is paid a fee when a decision is made in the case. We also pay for travel and any accommodation in connection with the kick-off meeting.

  • The experts’ assessments are based on the application for accreditation of a PhD study programme submitted by the institution to NOKUT. In this application, the institution describes and substantiates how they believe they meet the requirements (see the application guide). During the visit to the institution, the experts elaborate on the impression they have received from the application, and have the opportunity to ask questions to employees and students at the institution.

    The experts must assess whether the institution, through the application and study plan, has demonstrated that the programme meets NOKUT’s minimum quality requirements, as well as requirements in other relevant laws and regulations. At the same time, the experts may provide advice for further development of the programme.

  • The experts must present their views in a joint written evaluation. This evaluation is typically around 10–15 pages long and follows a template provided by NOKUT. For each criterion (see the application guide), the experts must summarize key elements from the institution’s response, provide their assessment, and conclude whether the institution has demonstrated that the programme meets NOKUT’s minimum quality requirements.

    If the conclusion is positive, the experts may include suggestions for how the institution can further develop the quality of the programme. If the conclusion is negative, the experts must state what the institution needs to do to meet the relevant requirements, along with any additional advice for further development.

    In cases where the conclusion is negative, the institution is given the opportunity to comment on the experts’ evaluation. After receiving the comment, NOKUT may ask the experts to write a supplementary evaluation based on the institution’s feedback, confirming whether they maintain or revise their conclusion. The supplementary evaluation is usually significantly shorter than the initial one.

  • The assignment begins with the experts reading through the application they are to assess. Each expert committee then meets at a writing session at NOKUT. In this session, which lasts about one working day, our case managers go through the criteria the experts will assess, and the experts are given time to work on the report and prepare questions for the visit to the institution.

    The site visit lasts two working days. Usually we collect our thoughts and impressions over a shared dinner. One or more of NOKUT's case workers are present during the visit and also maintain contact by email or telephone while the experts continue working on the report.

  • It is important that experts do not have roles at the institution or in the programme they are evaluating, or other affiliations that would make them disqualified. This is established by law and regulation and is essential for maintaining public trust in the evaluations. There is no definitive answer to what constitutes a disqualifying affiliation, and experts are encouraged to discuss any concerns about impartiality with NOKUT’s case officers.

  • Together with academic staff, students are among the most important stakeholders in higher education. The use of students as experts strengthens the opportunity to include student perspectives in the evaluations on their own terms.

    A student expert is an equal member of the expert committee, which otherwise consists of academic staff and, in some cases, representatives from the labour market. A student expert receives the same training prior to the assignment and participates in the evaluation and report writing along with the rest of the committee.

    As with other experts, it is important that student experts are impartial. This means they must not have roles at the institution or in the programme they are evaluating, or other affiliations that could undermine public trust in their evaluation.