Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697750762805.pdf (Georgia)
Rule for evaluating the implementation of educational programs at the university This rule defines the internal and external mechanisms for evaluating the implementation of educational programs in the university.

Eastern European University Article 1 General Provisions 1.

This rule defines the internal and external mechanisms for evaluating the implementation of educational programs at the University of Eastern Europe (hereinafter - the University).

2.
2.

The rule is based on the Law of Georgia on Higher Education, the Law of Georgia on the Development of the Quality of Education, approved by the Order N65 / ნ, May 4, 2011of the Minister of Education and Science “Regulation on Accreditation of Educational Programs of Educational Institutions" and "Regulation on Authorization of Educational Institutions" approved by the Order N99 / ნ, October 1, 2010 of the Minister of Education and Science of Georgia.

Article 2.
Article 2.

Internal mechanisms for evaluating the implementation of the educational program 1.

The purpose of the internal evaluation of the implementation of educational programs is to determine whether the program is in line with the set goals and to what extent it responds to the needs and requirements of students and the community.

2.
2.

The internal program implementation evaluation mechanism refers to the periodic evaluation and monitoring of the implementation of educational programs by the University, which serves the development of programs and their continuous improvement.

3.
The internal evaluation mechanism for the implementation of the educational program includes:  Analysis and revision of the content of the educational program taking into account the latest trends in the given field;  Analysis of the changing needs of society and the labor market;  Analysis of student academic achievement, program completion rate and quantification data from the program; Analyzing and evaluating the effectiveness of teaching-learning and assessment processes; RULE FOR EVALUATING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AT THE UNIVERSITY 1  Analyze the expectations and needs of students, alumni and other stakeholders in relation to the educational program;  Assess the compliance of the learning environment, resources, and student support services with the objectives of the program.
4.

The following tools and methods are used in the internal evaluation of the implementation of educational programs:  Student Survey on Satisfaction with the Program / Program Components;  Graduate Survey on Program Satisfaction and Employment;  Focus group/ interview / survey of employers and partners about the program and its graduates.

5.

Additional tools and methods may be used for internal evaluation of the implementation of the program; 6.
The university educational process management system is used to provide internal mechanisms for the implementation of the program, on the basis of which electronic questionnaires are provided for each student, students' academic achievement rates and other relevant data are collected.

Anonymity is protected when surveying students with these tools and methods.

7.
7.

The data collected through internal assessment tools are reflected in the annual internal self-assessment report of educational programs (Appendix N1) 8.

The internal self-assessment report includes the strengths and weaknesses identified during the reporting period and the strategy to address the identified deficiencies - appropriate actions and timelines.

9.
9.

In the preparation of the internal evaluation report of the educational program following persons are participating: RULE FOR EVALUATING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AT THE UNIVERSITY 2  Program Head / Program Development Committee;  Quality Assurance Service Representative / Responsible Coordinator; 10.

The completed internal self-assessment report will be submitted to the Faculty Board for consideration by the Program Head.

11.
11.

The Faculty / Representative Council makes decision about program changes based on the program improvement strategy presented in the internal self-assessment.

12.

Changes to the program can be made on the basis of an internal self-assessment report, also independently of the report, based on the results and findings identified using the internal evaluation mechanisms set out in this rule, at different intervals.

13.
13.

Procedures for making relevant changes in the program are defined in the "Rules and procedures for the development, approval, modification and cancellation of the educational program."

Article 3.

External mechanisms for evaluating the implementation of the educational program 1.
External mechanisms for evaluating the implementation of the educational program are based on the "Regulation on the Accreditation of Educational Programs for Educational Institutions" and the "Regulation on the Authorization of Educational Institutions".

2.

The accreditation self-assessment report of each educational program implemented by the University is submitted to the LEPL - National Center for Education Quality Enhancement in compliance with the relevant deadlines and submission forms.
3.Information about each educational program implemented by the University in the form of an authorization self-assessment report is submitted to the LEPL - National Center for Education Quality Enhancement in accordance with the relevant deadlines and submission forms.

4.

The University is authorized to invite foreign / local experts for external evaluation and to ensure the evaluation of programs and the consistent implementation of evaluation results.
Representatives of partner universities may also be involved in the external evaluation process, if there is a relevant agreement with them.

This method is used by the University before submitting the relevant self-assessment report to the LEPL - National Center for Education Quality Enhancement.

RULE FOR EVALUATING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AT THE UNIVERSITY 3 Article 4.

Final and Transitional Provisions 1.

This rule is approved by the Representatives Board of the University 2.
Amendments to this rule are made by the University Representative Board.
This Rule is accompanied by Annex N1: Form of Annual Internal Self-Assessment Report for the Educational Program RULE FOR EVALUATING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AT THE UNIVERSITY 4 Eastern European University Ltd. პროექტი Internal self-assessment report on the implementation of the university program This annual internal self-assessment report of these programs is an internal quality development tool, which serves to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the programs implemented at the university and to plan targeted activities based on the data obtained to develop and improve the program.
It is an appendix to the rules for evaluating the implementation of educational programs at the University and is an integral part of it.

Foreword Internal self-assessment of a university education program is an ongoing process.

The reporting period includes one academic year for data collection and analysis and the following semester - to submit a report and make relevant informed decisions.
In order to improve the quality of the educational program, target scores for the learning outcomes of the program should be defined in relation to students' academic achievement and employment.

The program may also specify targets for it as a priority with respect to any other parameter.

All required information and data should be fully presented in the program self-assessment periodic report.
In order to identify program development dynamics and trends, the self-assessment report submitted for each subsequent reporting period should compare the results with the data of the previous reporting period.

1.

General Information Program Title Qualification / qualifications to be awarded: Language of instruction: Program Head / Contact Information Dean of the Faculty / Contact Information Quality Assurance Service Representative / Contact Information 2.
Consideration of the assessment of the results of previous self-assessment of the educational program In this part of the report, evaluate and reflect, whether the results of the previous self-assessment of the educational program are taken into account, summarize briefly the weaknesses identified during the previous self-assessment period of the program and the measures taken to improve them, indicating the appropriate timelines.
If the results of the previous self-assessment are not taken into account, state the reason / s for this.

3.

Program Overview For program reviews in this part of the report, indicate: Year of program implementation; The objective of the program; Program learning outcomes; Local and international partners involved in program development, implementation and / or improvement; Program structure.

N Courses / components Status (com., com./elec.)

Lecturer Prerequisite .


s r H t c a t n o C S T C E Semesters Autu mn Sprin g Map of program learning outcomes and compliance of courses / components (In the form of the map presented below, present the relevance of the learning outcomes identified by the program to the courses / components of the program so that each learning outcome of the program is linked to a specific course or component.

Indicate for each learning outcome / competency in which reporting period its assessment is planned) Table N2.
Map of program learning outcomes and compliance of courses / components Learning Outcome / Competence Program Course / Component Reporting period Assessment of program learning outcomes and relevant courses / components can be done in stages so that all learning outcomes / competencies defined by the program are assessed before the end of the teaching cycle provided by the program.
In particular, in the case of an undergraduate program, the evaluation of all learning outcomes / competencies defined by the program can be carried out within three reporting periods.

In the case of a one-cycle program of a certified physician within five reporting periods.

In the case of a master's program within one reporting period.

4.

Program Indicators In this part of the report, indicate the total number of active students in the program and their distribution by semesters.

Table N4.1.
Table N4.1.

Number of active students for the bachelor program Semester Number of Students I II III IV V VI VII VIII > VIII Total Table N4.2.

Number of active students for the master's degree program Semester Number of Students I II III IV > IV Total Table N 4.3.
Number of active students for a one-cycle program of a certified physician Semester I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII > XII Tot al Number of Students Student Academic Achievement Ratios (Student academic achievement data should be collected according to the courses / components Whose assessment is taken into account during the reporting period.

Based on the data obtained, the program should determine the target performance of these courses / components for the next evaluation phase.)
Results of the Student Survey on Satisfaction with the Program (This survey is conducted with the participation of graduating semester students.

Statistics should be presented in the form of graphs or tables) Leaving rates from the program (internal and external mobility, termination of status) Table N 4.4Leaving rates for the Bachelor program Leaving Factor Internal Mobility External Mobility Termination of Status I II III IV V VI VII VII > VIII Total Table N 4.5.
Leaving rates for the one-cycle program of a certified physician I II II IV V V V VII IX X XII > XII Total Leaving Factor Internal Mobility External Mobility Termination of Status Table N 4.6.
Leaving rates for the master's program Leaving Factor Internal Mobility External Mobility Termination of Status I II III IV >IV Total International student mobility indicators; Student academic achievement rates by program and direction; Program completion rates (in the planned period, one year after the planned, two years after the planned, two years later than planned) Table N4.7.

Bachelor program completion rates by years Number of graduates 4 years 5 years 6 years > 6 years Table N 4.8.
Completion rates for the one-cycle program of a certified physician by years Number of graduates 6 years 7 years 8 years > 8 years Table N 4.9.
Master program completion rates by years Number of graduates 2 years 3 years 4 years > 4 years F e e d b a c k f r o m e m p l o y e r s / (Employers' feedback on learning outcomes should be provided every 5 years for the undergraduate program; Once every 7 years - for the one-cycle program of a certified physician and once every 3 years for a master's program).
Take into account the latest trends in the field in the content of the program (briefly describe what the latest trends in the field and how they were taken into account in the program) Ratios: Students and academic staff; Students and invited staff; Students and administrative staff; Academic and invited staff; Students and material resources required for the program (Eg labs, computer classes, etc.)

5.
Admission to the program In this part of the report, you should evaluate: Prerequisites for admission to the program; Acceptance indicators (depending on the specifics of the program level, enter the relevant data from the categories below): Number of vacancies and applications announced for the program; Number of students enrolled in the program; Enrollment of students on entrance exams (Unified National / Master's exams); Enrollment of students in entrance exams (without Unified National / Master's exams); 6.
Advising and supporting students Orientation meetings (student survey data; faculty / education department advising students on program administration issues (student survey data); Results (data) of monitoring conducted in the learning process management e-program on Responding to Student Messages from Lecturers; Student survey data.

7.

Program Outcomes Student employment rates; Table N7.1.
Student employment rates by employment Within the internship By specialty By non-specialization Number of students Graduate employment rates (including by specialty) for one year after completion of the program, for two years after completion of the program, for more than two years after completion of the program.

(Based on the data obtained, the program should determine the target benchmarks for the next evaluation phase).

Table N7.

2.
Table N7.

2.

Graduate employment rates by employment Number of graduates Within the internship By specialty By non-specialization  Alumni survey data on program satisfaction 8.

Self-assessment results In this part of the report, describe the strengths identified during the program self-assessment period; Weaknesses identified during the program self-assessment period; Program Improvement Strategy-Targeted Measures and timelines to eliminate identified deficiencies.