Higher Polytechnic School of Engineering

Central Campus and Santa Cruz

Quality Assurance System

Civil Engineering Section

Presentation

As established by the Organic Law of Universities (LOU) and the decrees that develop it, the official undergraduate and postgraduate degrees of all universities must undergo an accreditation process by ANECA or, where applicable, by the competent agencies of the Autonomous Communities, both at the time of submitting the proposal for the development of the degree (Verification), and once implemented (Accreditation).

The design of the Quality Assurance System (QAS) of the Higher Technical School of Civil and Industrial Engineering at the University of La Laguna (ULL), developed according to the principles outlined in the accreditation model and based on the AUDIT Program proposal, will be verified by the National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (ANECA) and, once implemented, will undergo a certification process. In this regard, having a certified QAS will facilitate the verification of future university degrees, as it meets the regulatory requirements for the authorization and registration of undergraduate and postgraduate degrees.

You can access the evaluation of the SIGC carried out in January 2011 in the following document: The SIGC of the ETSICI was positively evaluated by ANECA
Quality assurance can be described as the systematic, structured, and continuous attention to quality in terms of its maintenance and improvement. Within the framework of the educational policies and processes developed in universities, quality assurance must allow these institutions to demonstrate that they take the quality of their programs and degrees seriously and that they are committed to implementing the means to ensure and demonstrate that quality.

The development of quality assurance systems requires a proper balance between actions promoted by university institutions and external quality assurance procedures facilitated by evaluation agencies. The combination of both constitutes the Quality Assurance System (QAS) of the benchmark university system.

The system design comprises:

  • To determine the needs and expectations of students, as well as other stakeholders, in relation to the training offered at university institutions.
  • Establish the objectives and scope of the SGIC.
  • Determine the quality assurance criteria.

The SGIC documentation consists of a Internal Quality Assurance System manual, This document defines the general characteristics of the system and includes a Procedures Manual comprised of a series of procedures that are in accordance with the “Criteria and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area,” developed by the European Agency for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA) and adapted by ANECA. The documentation is supplemented by a series of annexes, including the Center's Quality Policy and Objectives and the Process Map.

Those responsible

This section outlines the structure established for the development of the SGIC of the degree, which is organized into two levels: the institutional level of the ULL and the Center level.

Quality Council. The ULL will establish a Quality Council that will be responsible for proposing, promoting, coordinating, evaluating and updating the evaluation and training processes necessary to guarantee the optimal development of teaching, research and administration and services activities leading to the achievement of its goals.

Vice-Rectorate for Faculty and Teaching Quality (VPCD). It supports the implementation and development of Quality Assurance Systems (QAS), as these strengthen quality assurance and continuous improvement of degree programs, facilitating the accreditation process. The Rector's Team provides support through the Quality Assessment and Improvement Unit (QAI), which is responsible for supplying generic documentation and collaborating on the review, implementation planning, and monitoring of QAS. It also provides the necessary information (reports, surveys, etc.) for the ongoing analysis of results. 

Management Team. This body, and in particular its Director, assumes responsibility for establishing the Center's quality policy and objectives proposal, will appoint a Quality Coordinator to represent it in matters relating to the monitoring of the SGIC and will propose to the Center Board the review of the composition and functions of the Center Quality Commission (CCC).

Quality Coordinator (CC). To assist the Director in tasks related to the design, implementation, maintenance, and improvement of the Quality Management System, a Quality Coordinator will be appointed. Their responsibilities include:

  • Ensure the establishment, implementation and maintenance of the processes necessary for the development of the SGIC.
  • Inform the Management Team about the performance of the SGIC and any improvement needs required by the Center.
  • Ensure that awareness of stakeholder accountability is promoted at all levels of the Center.

Center Quality Commission (CCC). It is a body that participates in the planning and monitoring of the Internal Quality Assurance System (SGIC) and acts as one of the internal communication channels for its policies, objectives, plans, programs, responsibilities, and achievements. It is composed of the Director, who acts as Chair, the Quality Coordinator, the Deputy Director with responsibilities in Academic Affairs, one representative from each department that teaches 18 ECTS credits or more, two representatives from the Administrative and Service Staff (an administrator and another), and one student representative (preferably a graduate or final-year student). Up to two members external to the University may also be part of the CCC if their expertise in the subjects covered by the Center's degree programs is deemed necessary for the optimal achievement of the objectives outlined in the SGIC. The Center's Secretary will act as Secretary of the CCC. The functions of the CCC are:

  • Design the SGIC.
  • Receive information from the Director regarding changes to the organizational chart and take a position on them
  • Be informed by the Director regarding the Center's Quality Policy and General Objectives and be responsible for disseminating this information within the Center.
  • Verify the SGIC planning.
  • Monitor the SGIC.
  • Develop processes for reviewing and improving training programs.
  • Monitor the effectiveness of processes through associated indicators.
  • To study and, where appropriate, approve the implementation of the SGIC improvement proposals suggested by the other members of the Center.
  • Control the execution of corrective and/or preventive actions, actions derived from the review of the system, and actions in response to suggestions, complaints and claims.

The CCC will meet at least quarterly, upon the Secretary's call. The Secretary will keep minutes of each meeting, which will be sent to all CCC members, who will have one week to propose corrections. If no corrections are made, the minutes will be considered approved and published. web of the Center so that it is available to the entire university community.

Evaluation and/or improvement committees. Commissions may be created related to the review and improvement of other bodies and/or organizational units, services, etc.

Center Quality Policies and Objectives

The quality policy and objectives of the Civil Section were approved at the meeting of the Center's Quality Commission (CCC) of the Higher Technical School of Civil and Industrial Engineering held on November 11, 2010.

Center Quality Policies and Objectives

Quality Manual

The Quality Manual is the basic document that serves as a reference and from which all the necessary actions emanate to ensure that the teachings provided by the Civil Engineering Section are in accordance with the guidelines that define them and satisfy the needs and expectations of the stakeholders.

The Quality Manual systematically outlines the scope of the Internal Quality Assurance System and, therefore, constitutes its documentary basis.

Quality Manual

Procedures

Reports and results

Student Satisfaction Reports

Teacher/Tutor Satisfaction Reports

Performance reports

Teacher Evaluation Results

Degree Monitoring Reports

Improvement actions

TRENDS
Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering
Goals
Verification
Course
10-11
Course
11-12
Course
12-13
Course
13-14
Course
14-15
Graduation rate >=15% 24,4%
Dropout rate <=30% 13,3% 23,1% 20,6% 39,1%
Efficiency rate >=70% 98,1% 89,9%
Rate of return 53,8% 59,3% 63,3% 63,5% 58,1%
Title success rate 69,0% 80,3% 78,2% 81,8% 77,2%
LEVEL OF SATISFACTION OF STAKEHOLDER GROUPS
Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering Course
12-13
Course
13-14
Course
14-15
Overall student satisfaction with the degree 3,05 2,76 2.87
Level of student satisfaction with the teaching staff 2,83 2,83 2,91
Level of student satisfaction with the resources 2,69 2,72 2,75
Level of teacher satisfaction with the degree 3,20 3,55
Graduate satisfaction level with the degree 2,50 2,92
Employer satisfaction level with the degree 3.71
EVOLUTION OF INDICATORS
Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering Course 10-11 Course 11-12   Course 12-13 Academic Year 13-14 Academic Year 2014-2015
New students 90 99 63 69 78
Average entry grade 7,032 7,093 7,373 6,832 6,546
Total number of enrolled students 110 198 255 283 286
Number of graduating students 25 33
Number of graduating students (excluding adapted students) 21 22
Average duration of studies 3.524 4.273