About the review process

NOKUT is reviewing all higher education institutions in Norway between 2017 and 2024. Below you can read more about the procedure for periodic reviews.

Procedure for periodic reviews

Procedure for periodic reviews

  • NOKUT informs the respective institution in due time about the review and ensures that the institution receives all necessary information about the review process.

    NOKUT arranges an information meeting for the institutions about how the review is conducted, the documentation requirements, the site visit, as well as important milestones in the review process.

    Thereafter NOKUT sends out the documentation requirements with a deadline for submission. Every institution assigns one liaison officer as a point of contact between NOKUT and the institution.

  • NOKUT requests documentation about quality assurance practices on an institutional level and from selected study programmes at the institution.

    Documentation on an institutional level is meant to provide the expert committees with a general overview of the institution’s systematic quality work. This documentation includes, amongst other things, a selection of the institution’s most central documents for its quality work.

    Documentation on study programme level is meant to provide the expert committees with insights about their quality work in practice. This documentation includes, amongst other things, examples of the institution’s daily routines and practices in its quality work.
    In addition, the expert committee receives two documents with background information for the review:

    1. A voluntary statement from the highest acting student body at the institution
    2. A summary from the leadership about institutional characteristics in the institution’s quality work

  • The expert committees conduct interviews with central institutional actors on a two-to-three-day site visit at the institution. The overall purpose of the site visit is to examine and clarify issues in the institution’s quality work that remain unclear from the submitted documentation. The underlying rationale for the interviews is to acquire information about the institution’s compliance with existing rules and regulations.

    The site visit opens and concludes with meetings between the expert committee and the institution’s leadership. The expert committee further decides on which other actors from the institutions they want to interview. Relevant actors are representatives from selected study programmes, faculty leadership, board members, lecturers, student representatives, ordinary students, PhD candidates and/or representatives of PhD programmes, study programme committees, etc.

  • During review, NOKUT and the institution’s liaison officer are in permanent contact. The expert committee sends a draft of its final report to the institution, which has the possibility to comment on incorrect factual information stemming from the report. After that, the institution has the possibility to comment on the committee’s conclusions. These comments are publicly available and is always included in the final report.

    The review report includes an assessment of the institution’s systematic quality work against existing rules and regulations. The purpose of the reviews is also to highlight strengths and good practices in the institution’s systematic quality work, and to point out areas for improvement. The committee will enclose its recommendations for areas of improvements, independently of whether the institution meets the formal requirements or not. These recommendations go beyond the minimum requirements for systematic quality work as stipulated in the rules and regulations.

    NOKUT’s intention is that the results and information stemming from the periodic reviews are used by the institutions to further develop their quality work, as well as exchanged with other institutions. For this reason, NOKUT arranges a follow-up seminar around two years after a periodic review has been conducted and publishes aggregated information on quality work on its website.

  • The institution can comment publicly on the committee’s report after a review has been conducted. The public note is part of the final report that is sent to NOKUT’s Board for approval. The Board’s decision on the committee’s assessment can lead to three outcomes:

    Satisfactory: all requirements in the rules and regulations are approved. The periodic review in this round is concluded, and a new periodic review will be initiated in six to eight years.

    Partially compliant: One or more requirements do not fulfill the minimum requirements. Dependent on the extent of partial compliance, the institution must introduce measures to enhance their mechanisms for securing educational quality within three to twelve months. After that a new assessment will be made by the committee and addressed in a new Board meeting at NOKUT.

    Non-compliance: One or more requirements do not fulfill the minimum requirements. Dependent on the extent of non-compliance, the institution must introduce comprehensive measures to enhance their mechanisms for securing educational quality within twelve months. After that a new review will be initiated and addressed in a new Board meeting at NOKUT.

    Appeals procedures

    The institution can appeal the Board’s decision but cannot appeal on the content of the decision itself. The appeal must be filed within three weeks after the decision by the Board has been made. The institution must justify on which grounds the appeal is made. If NOKUT does not find reasonable doubt for changing its decision, the case will be brought forth to NOKUT’s appeal board for final decision.

    NOKUT’s appeal board can assess whether NOKUT has conducted formal mistakes in the review process, legal failures, an abuse of public power, unprofessional conduct, or other violations of bureaucratic principles. The appeal board cannot overrule the professional conclusions made by NOKUT’s experts.

    Read more about NOKUT’s appeal board.

    Dialogue after a review process

    After the NOKUT Board has decided, an institution may contact NOKUT for a dialogue. If an institution does not want to make a formal appeal, but still have questions or feedback for NOKUT, these are its options:

    • NOKUT distributes a survey to institutions after a review has been conducted. Through the survey the institutions can give NOKUT feedback on the review experience.
    • NOKUT carries out guidance meetings with institutions after a review if there is a need for clarifying questions or a need for guidance in general. The institutions must ask NOKUT for such meetings.

  • After the NOKUT’s Board second decision there are to potential outcomes:

    Satisfactory: all requirements in the rules and regulations are approved. The periodic review in this round is concluded, and a new periodic review will be initiated in six to eight years.

    Non-satisfactory: Institutions with self-accrediting rights lose their right to establish new study programmes. Institutions which do not have self-accrediting right lose the possibility to apply for the establishment of new study programmes. One year after the decision is made, the institutions can demand from NOKUT to initiate a new review. This review can result in re-installing the institution’s self-accreditation rights or that the former decision will be sustained.

    For more information on the procedures concerning complaints, follow link above, under “First decision by NOKUT’s board, its consequences, and complaints and appeals procedures”.

  • After the periodic reviews have been conducted a survey will be sent to institutions about how the institutions experienced the review. In addition, a survey will be sent to the experts. The information stemming from these surveys is used in NOKUT’s internal quality assurance and enhancement practices and form the basis for future reviews and the development of NOKUT’s review methodology.

  • NOKUT provides the institutions with the opportunity to exchange experiences and good practices with each other, by organizing institutions under review into projects. The information meeting arranged by NOKUT is one arena for discussions and networking. The institutions can then discuss and calibrate before the review, for example on submitting documentation. In the information meeting NOKUT is also sharing experiences from earlier reviews. Two years after a review is conducted, NOKUT arranges a follow-up seminar.