Audit of the University of Turku

The Finnish Education Evaluation Centre (FINEEC) has conducted an audit of the University of Turku. The work of FINEEC is based on the principle of enhancement-led evaluation and producing impactful information that contributes to the enhancement of education.

The purpose of the FINEEC audit framework is:

• to evaluate whether the quality work in the HEI meets European quality assurance standards,
• to assess whether the quality system produces relevant information for the implementation of the strategy and the continuous development of the HEI’s activities, and whether it results in effective enhancement activities,
• to encourage internationalisation, experimenting and a creative atmosphere at HEIs, and
• to accumulate open and transparent information on quality work at Finnish HEIs.

The principles of the audit framework are described in the audit manual.

Implementation of the audit

A four-member audit team carried out the audit. The members of the audit team were:

• Milena Žic Fuchs, Professor, University of Zagreb, Croatia (Chair of the audit team)
• Sebastian Neufeld, Student, University of Freiburg, Germany
• Mikael Pentikäinen, CEO, Federation of Finnish Enterprises, Finland
• Marijk van der Wende, Professor, Utrecht University, the Netherlands.

Sirpa Moitus from the Finnish Education Evaluation Centre was the audit’s project manager, and Mira Huusko was the backup project manager.

The audit is based on the material submitted by the higher education institution, a self-assessment report, additional material requested by the audit team and the audit team’s visit to the University of Turku between 3–4 May 2023. The audit team also had access to essential digital materials and systems. The main stages and timetable of the audit were:

Evaluation criteria

Evaluation areas I–III are each assessed as one entity using the scale excellent, good, insufficient.

The level excellent means that the HEI shows evidence of long-term and effective enhancement work. The HEI’s enhancement activities also create substantial added value for the HEI, its stakeholders, or both. The HEI presents compelling examples of successful enhancement activities.

The level good for evaluation areas I–III is described in appendix 1.

The level insufficient means that the HEI shows an absence of or major shortcomings in systematic, functioning and participatory procedures in the evaluation area (I–III). There is no clear evidence of the impact of quality management in the enhancement of activities.

In order for the HEI to pass the audit, evaluation areas I–III should reach at least the level good.