AUC’s Liberal Arts and Sciences programme has been accredited by the NVAO (the Accreditation Organisation of the Netherlands and Flanders), based on an assessment report of an international expert committee. The NVAO formally re-accredited the AUC programme on 15 July 2019. Findings, consideration and conclusions of the accreditation committee were brought together in a report, which concluded that “AUC brings the research strengths of the two parent institutions together by realising a distinctive residential teaching-learning environment that addresses real world challenges through a flexible approach to learning and development”, and “AUC delivers graduates of a high standard who easily find their way in top-ranked university programme”.

Instruments and Structures for Quality Assurance 

Quality at AUC is foremost based on the quality of its faculty in terms of their qualifications, experience, motivation and commitment to AUC and the framework of responsibilities in which they are expected to perform. Furthermore, AUC recognises the importance of feedback, such as through course evaluations, and follow-up to this feedback. Student participation is a key element for AUC quality assurance and to strengthen the AUC community at large. Over the past years, proposals from students (Student Council, AUCSA, Student Panels, Focus Groups, individual student requests) and alumni were adopted and implemented.    

AUC runs approximately 250 different courses each year, which means that well over 1,000 assessments are taken by our student population. Recognising that it is not practically feasible for a single committee to review each assessment, AUC designed a three-level approach to guarantee the quality of assessments, and particularly of written exams. The first level is that AUC carefully selects its lecturers, based on their qualifications (Basic Teaching Qualification or higher) and experience. The Heads of Studies introduce new lecturers to AUC and to AUC’s assessment policy. The second level is our peer review system. Using the peer review system makes sure that the quality assurance cycle of course and assessments evaluations is lecturer-led, while at the same time the in-depth procedure offers a tool for dynamic curriculum improvement. The third level is an independent analysis of a sample of tests to ensure technical compliance. The Director of Education (DoE) draws samples for external testing to check and control quality, and the Assessment Committee of the Board of Examiners check the quality care process and assure quality.  

The UvA stipulates use of the PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Act) cycle outlined by the UvA Quality Assurance Framework as its foundational structure for determining quality control, quality assurance and quality improvement. To ensure quality improvement within this level of the institution, the full cycle must be implemented, and in a manner which corresponds to the central policy frameworks established by the institution. 

Course evaluations 

AUC greatly values the input of its students, staff and teachers and conducts frequent evaluations of the programme. Below you will find information on the various types of evaluations and ways to get involved.

Mid-term evaluations

Halfway during the teaching period, lecturers are requested to conduct evaluations of their courses with their students. The value of this informal mid-term evaluation is that it facilitates discussion between the class and the teacher, providing both with a moment to ‘check in’ with each other.

AUC suggests lecturers to conduct the midterm evaluation through a combination of in-class discussion and an evaluation form that can be completed by students anonymously.

• Class representative discussion (common for 16-week courses)
  Each class will appoint two student representatives to lead a 15-minute discussion on the strengths and areas for improvement of the course. After the discussion, the representatives can meet with the lecturer to share the main points raised by the class. The Class Representative Guidelines and Steps document outlines the process and timeline in more detail. The timeline is flexible and can be adjusted to fit your course schedule.

• Lecture-led conversation (recommended for 4-week period): Lecturers organise a conversation with students on topics relevant to their course, to obtain insight into how students have experienced the course thus far.

Midterm evaluation forms

These will be distributed digitally or in hard copy to collect feedback. By giving students the opportunity to complete the form individually and anonymously, additional opportunities are created for all students to provide feedback, including those who may not feel comfortable sharing their views in the classroom.

Lecturers and course coordinators may choose the midterm course evaluation format that best suits their course, provided that it enables students to give feedback.

Resources 

• Class Representative Guidelines and Steps (Spring 2026)
• Download the Midterm Course Evaluation Form

Final Course Evaluations

Towards the end of each term, an online questionnaire is made available for students, asking for (anonymous) feedback on the course. Questions are related to the design of the course, the teaching methods, how much you have learned, the assessment and the knowledge and skills of the lecturer. Most questions can be answered on a 1-5 scale, with a few open questions to make suggestions for the lecturer or to share your experiences. Lecturers are asked to allow some time to complete the questionnaire during one of the final course meetings if the class schedule allows for this. If this is not possible, the course evaluations can still be completed one week after the end of the term via a link that is emailed to the students.

Once the online evaluations are closed the lecturer will be able to see the course evaluation results within Evalytics, the student feedback system. They will see answers to the general course questions, and teacher related questions (specific to the lecturer only) and a report can be downloaded. Your survey answers are anonymous. The lecturer can't see who provided which answer, and the results are processed and reported anonymously. By completing the survey, you give lecturers a starting point for improving their course and teaching, if needed. In this way, you're contributing to the quality assurance of your own study programme. Your feedback mainly serves to improve the quality of education for future students, just as students in previous years have done for you. For further quality assurance discussions, the course evaluations are also shared with the course coordinator, the Board of Studies and the Head of Studies.

Twice per year, AUC’s Educational Quality Officer analyses course evaluation data and composes a report for the Heads of Studies and Director of Education. This report discusses response rates, trends in grading, and items students felt particularly satisfied or dissatisfied with. The Heads of Studies and Director of Education use these findings to then compose a biannual quality report, for discussion with AUC’s Board of Studies. In addition, each year, Board of Studies’ members meet with Heads of Studies and the Director of Education to discuss the quality of courses and curriculum. Finally, after reviewing departmental plans, course evaluation and peer review data, the Board of Studies publishes an annual headlines memo to share their written reflections on the quality of the AUC programme.

NSE (National Student Survey)

The National Student Survey (NSE; Nationale Studenten Enquête) is a nationwide survey researching students’ satisfaction with the higher education course they’re pursuing. Every year, almost all students in Dutch higher education are invited to participate. And every NVAO-certified course programme and degree programme at a university or university of applied sciences can be a part of the Survey. In recent years, massive numbers of students have participated in the NSE, including a significant portion of AUC students.

The National Student Survey (NSE) consists of a questionnaire asking students to rate the following aspects of their course programme and institution:

• Content of the study programme
• Skills acquired
• Preparation for a professional career
• Teachers and lecturers
• Information provided
• Study facilities
• Testing and assessment
• Programme schedules
• Study load
• Academic guidance/counselling

All of these ratings are published annually and are searchable by course programme at Studiekeuze123.nl.