Računalništvo in informatika

A group of experts conducted an evaluation of the self-evaluation of the Computer and Information Science study program at the Faculty of Computer and Information Science, University of Ljubljana. The review focused on five standards that are crucial for assessing the program's quality. Regarding the first standard, which pertains to self-evaluation, the group of experts found that the program is carefully focused on maintaining the relevance and quality of the educational environment. Self-evaluation is conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the University of Ljubljana and serves as the central mechanism for the program's quality development. They also noted that students are relatively poorly informed about the importance and process of self-evaluation, recommending improved communication and awareness among students regarding this matter. In addition to self-evaluation, the institution also emphasizes collaboration with external stakeholders, such as the alumni club and external experts, to gather additional information on necessary program changes. They identified the need to improve communication with external stakeholders and to formalize the process of informing them about the measures taken based on the findings of self-evaluation. The group of experts highlighted some shortcomings and provided suggestions for improvements. They emphasized the need for greater transparency and depth in the content of self-evaluation and better integration of self-evaluation findings with accreditation and evaluation requirements for study programs. They also expressed a desire for greater presentation of student survey results and the collection of information on students' employability after completing their studies. The group of experts also pointed out shortcomings in gathering information and proposals for program changes, as well as informing stakeholders about the findings of self-evaluation. Regarding the second standard, which concerns the measures taken based on the findings of self-evaluation, the group of experts emphasized the importance of adopting and monitoring the implementation of these measures. They observed that the measures are reflected in the implementation of the study program, which students directly observe. However, they expressed a desire for a more formalized process of informing about the measures that have been adopted. The group of experts identified two issues faced by the institution. The first issue relates to the overload of doctoral student assistants who have excessive additional teaching duties. They found that the institution itself cannot address this problem as it depends on the work distribution at the faculty level and the capacity to hire new assistants. The group of experts proposed relieving the students and involving them in project work that aligns with their doctoral studies. The second issue pertains to the lack of courses in certain areas of computer science and informatics. The institution plans to propose new measures for the next period to address this issue by actively offering new courses tailored to market needs. Additionally, there is a problem of declining interest in doctoral studies at UL FRI. Therefore, the institution 30 proposes the establishment of a special fund to finance students and implement more intensive marketing and promotion of doctoral studies. Regarding the third standard, which concerns the doctoral study scheme, the group of experts found that the program underwent significant changes in 2015, with the most important change being the transition to a four-year study. Despite the changes, the program remains substantively complete as has been accredited. The group emphasized that the field of computer science and informatics is highly dynamic, requiring constant updating of course content. The institution strives to ensure that the content of applied subjects is aligned with the latest trends. The group of experts positively assessed this approach. The collaboration between course instructors and students in research and development work was also highlighted. Most instructors in the doctoral study program are researchers who work in areas covered by applied subjects. The group observed that most doctoral students are involved in research work on projects or in laboratories, which enhances the connection between doctoral studies and research work at the faculty. The group of experts welcomed this practice and suggested even more active involvement of students in research work, which would also alleviate their teaching workload. Regarding the fourth standard, which concerns the flexibility of doctoral studies, the group of experts found that the program allows for flexibility, accommodating approximately ten students per year, enabling individualized and tailored implementation of the study process. Students have the option to adjust examination dates and course content, and they are evenly distributed throughout the academic year. The availability of study materials in electronic and physical formats, as well as access to important collections of scientific articles and datasets, is also noted. The group of experts recommended improving communication among instructors regarding teaching methods and providing students with more diverse sources of literature. Regarding the fifth standard, which concerns students' progression, the group of experts found that students are well aware of the rules for progression and adhere to them. However, they highlighted the need for improved communication and awareness among students regarding the appeals process and opportunities to obtain additional information. They also emphasized the importance of informing stakeholders, including graduates, employers, and the alumni club, and suggested improving communication and involving these stakeholders in the faculty's work. The group of experts concluded that the Computer Science study program at the Faculty of Computer and Information Science, University of Ljubljana, is of high quality and relevance. However, there are still some shortcomings that need to be addressed. They proposed improvements, including greater transparency of content, better student communication, the relief of assistants, the expansion of the course offering, improved stakeholder communication, and greater integration of doctoral studies with research work. The group of experts expressed support for the proposed solutions and recommended effective monitoring of the implementation of measures, along with the use of quantitative indicators to evaluate them.