DEVELOPMENT OF THE LIST OF MAJOR DRAWBACKS AS AN ELEMENT OF STUDY PROGRAMME EVALUATION IN LINE WITH THE ESG 2015 STANDARDS

Abstract

The article explores the initial stage in forming a model for establishing the correspondence of study programme evaluation criteria to the key parameters of the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG 2015) and Ukrainian legislation – namely, the development of the List of Major Drawbacks as an element of study programme evaluation. The period of formation of a new paradigm in the national higher education quality assurance system, together with the evidence accumulated as a result of analysing the functioning of the external quality assurance system of higher education, has highlighted the need for a clearly structured, unambiguous, and standardised list of drawback formulations that are comprehensible to all participants in the accreditation process. In particular, it was deemed necessary to identify typical manifestations of drawbacks for each criterion, to develop detailed clarifications on describing levels of compliance with the criteria and providing appropriate justifications, and to prepare methodological recommendations ensuring the proper substantiation of identified drawbacks in expert panel reports and sectoral expert council conclusions. The purpose of this article is therefore to examine the development of the List of Major Drawbacks as an element of study programme evaluation in line with ESG 2015 standards. It has been established that the List of Major Drawbacks enables participants in both external and internal quality assurance processes to identify areas for further improvement. The List is not designed to function as a checklist for detecting drawbacks but serves as a tool for precise formulation of expert conclusions. An expert first conducts a comprehensive analysis of the programme’s compliance with established requirements, identifying the essence of the problem, its causes, and potential consequences. Only after confirming the fact of non-compliance does the expert select the appropriate formulation from the List for recording. Furthermore, the article highlights the potential application of the List in internal evaluations of study programmes and in assessing the effectiveness of institutional quality assurance systems, presenting it as a clearly structured tool with a proven and tested methodology.