Every six years, as part of the university-wide review cycle.

Contact the Quality Assurance Office:

• Allison Mlitwa (Quality Assurance Advisor): [email protected]
• Merrewyn Feucht (Quality Assurance Officer): [email protected]

At least four weeks before the site visit.

For the peer review panel:

• Self-Evaluation Report (SER)
• Portfolio of Evidence (PoE)

For the Quality Committee:

• Core Stats
• Dean/RC Head Report
• Department/Division Response Report
• Peer Review Report
• Self-Evaluation Report
• Two-year Follow-up Report

Focus on 5-10 priority recommendations agreed with the Dean/RC Head and formally accepted by the Quality Committee and the EC(S).

A Self-Evaluation Report is a reflective document that provides an honest assessment of an environment’s strengths, challenges and areas for improvement. It supports continuous quality enhancement and shows how the environment contributes to SU’s strategic priorities.

All academic and professional support environments participate in a formal evaluation every six years as part of SU’s institutional review cycle.

For guidance, contact the Quality Assurance Advisor, Allison Mlitwa ([email protected]), or the Quality Assurance Officer, Merrewyn Feucht ([email protected]).

The process enables environments to reflect on teaching, research, support services and social impact, including how they advance transformation, inclusivity, curriculum renewal and strategic alignment.

A Self-Evaluation Committee (SEC), appointed by the Chair/Director or RC Head, leads and compiles the SER. It typically includes academic staff, PASS staff, and undergraduate and postgraduate students.

Members should represent a range of roles and perspectives and be able to contribute constructively. Diversity ensures balanced reflection and broad participation.

Begin by reviewing previous recommendations and SERs, gathering relevant evidence, and consulting the Themes and Guiding Questions. This helps establish context and ensures forward-looking reflection.

The SER should include quality judgements, commendations, identified gaps, improvement actions, timelines, resource needs, and analysis of teaching, learning, research, support services, transformation and alignment with SU priorities.

Engage stakeholders, draw on reliable data, analyse evidence critically, and seek review from the Dean/RC Head and the Quality Assurance Office before finalising.

Challenges often include gathering evidence, time constraints, coordinating contributions and finding a balance between honesty, reflection and constructive analysis.

The Chair/Director and SEC nominate panel members. The Dean/RC Head approves the nominations and issues formal invitations with support from the Quality Assurance Office.

The final SER and PoE must be submitted to the panel at least four weeks before the site visit.

The PoE contains supporting documents such as prior review recommendations, strategic plans, student feedback, internal reports, policies and evidence linked to the guiding questions.

The visit allows the panel to validate the SER, engage with staff and students, review evidence and provide constructive feedback, commendations and recommendations.

The SER, PoE, QA policies, peer panel roles and responsibilities, and logistical information such as schedules, travel and accommodation.

Most site visits last two to three days, depending on the size and complexity of the environment.

A quiet workspace, interview room(s), reliable Wi-Fi, access to SU platforms, stationery, relevant documentation and optional refreshments.

Environments engage with all recommendations but prioritise 5-10 key items, agreed with the Dean/RC Head and approved by the Quality Committee.

Through an Improvement Plan that includes timelines, responsibilities and resource needs. This plan becomes part of ongoing strategic and operational planning.

After the site visit, the SER, peer review report and departmental/divisional response are compiled and submitted to the Quality Committee for review and recommendations.