Umeå University's logo

The Finnish Education Evaluation Council has conducted an audit of Lahti university of Applied Sciences. Based on the international audit team’s recommendation and the audit report, the Higher Education Evaluation Committee has decided to require the institution to undergo a re-audit. In its current state the quality system of Lahti University of Applied Sciences does not fulfil the national criteria set for the quality management of higher education institutions, and thus the system cannot be said to correspond to the European quality assurance principles and recommendations for higher education institutions.

The object of the audit was the quality system that Lahti University of Applied Sciences has developed based on its own needs and goals. The optional audit target chosen by the institution was the Student entrepreneurship.

The following were regarded as key strengths of the quality system:

• People’s enthusiasm and commitment to immediate improvements are strong at all levels of the organisation and this makes a solid foundation for the future improvement.
• A strong common quality culture is based on open and transparent information. The quality culture has substantially improved since the first audit.
• The relationship between students and teachers appeared to be close, cooperative and open, which reflects the core value of the system: “We are all quality makers,” while the learning atmosphere is relaxed and positive.

Among other things, the following recommendations were made for Lahti University of Applied Sciences:

• The roles and responsibilities in some parts of the quality system are complex and need clarifying. For example, in RDI-functions the decision making on quality issues is divided between five actors in the organisation. The problems and challenges faced at the operational level (e.g. evidenced by teacher-student informal exchanges) could be documented more systematically to form an aggregated picture of operations.
• The volume of information produced by the system poses challenges in the analysis phase. Procedures for systematic information gathering, communication and use should be improved. Information about quality issues is available, but not necessarily perceived as relevant or easily accessible for internal and external stakeholders.
• The current quality system is only partially in use at the degree programme level and that has enabled the continuance of problems in some programmes. Developing the layer of the quality system underneath the faculties with concrete elements would help to increase the engagement of the staff and students to the system as a whole.

The re-audit will concentrate on the quality system’s link with the quality system’s link with strategic management emphasizing the involvement of all institutional levels and units, and the quality system as a whole.