System of Quality Assurance

Rules for the System of Quality Assurance of Educational, Creative and Related Activities and of Internal Evaluation of the Quality of Educational, Creative and Related Activities of the Prague University of Economics and Business

The Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports registered pursuant to Section 36 (2) of Act No. 111/1998 Coll., on Hgher Education Institutions and on Amendment to Other Acts (The Higher Education Act) on 18 July 2017 under reference number MSMT-19508/2017 the Rules for the System of Quality Assurance of Educational, Creative and Related Activities and of Internal Evaluation of the Quality of Educational, Creative and Related Activities of the Prague University of Economics and Business.

Amendments to the Rules for the System of Quality Assurance of Educational, Creative and Related Activities and of Internal Evaluation of the Quality of Educational, Creative and Related Activities of the Prague University of Economics and Business were registered by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports pursuant to Section 36 (2) of the Higher Education Act on 10 May 2019 under reference no. MSMT-14827/2019-1, on 11 January 2021 under no. MSMT-836/2021-2, on 31 March 2023 under no. MSMT-8632/2023, and on 15 November 2024 under no. MSMT-19622/2024-4.

……………………………………
Mgr. Vojtěch Tomášek, v.r.
Director of the Department of Higher Education

Part One
General Provisions

Article 1
Introductory Provisions

(1) This internal regulation defines the system of quality assurance and internal evaluation of the quality of educational, creative and related activities of the Prague University of Economics and Business (hereinafter referred to as “VŠE”).

(2) Unless stated otherwise, the term “quality” shall be understood to be the quality of educational, creative and related activities of the VŠE.

(3) For the purpose of this internal regulation, the terms stated below shall mean:

  1. “publishing” – placement in the public section of the VŠE website,
  2. “making accessible” – placement in the non-public section of the VŠE website or other types of placement allowing for remote access of those persons and entities who are to have the access to the issue concerned,
  3. “sending off” – sending via email to a school email address of the recipient; should the sender be an employee or student of the VSE, it shall also be necessary to send from a school email address.

Article 2
Breakdown of the Rules for the System of Quality Assurance of Educational, Creative and Related Activities and of Internal Evaluation of the Quality of Educational, Creative and Related Activities of the Prague University of Economics and Business

(1) The Rules for the System of Quality Assurance and Internal Evaluation of Educational, Creative and Related Activities at the VŠE consist of:

  1. The Rules for Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance,
  2. The Rules for Internal Accreditation,
  3. The Rules for Procedure of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE.

Part Two
The Rules for Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance

Article 3
Parts of the System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance

(1) The System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance at the VŠE consists of assurance and internal evaluation of the quality of:

  1. educational activities and their results,
  2. creative activities and their results,
  3. international relations,
  4. activities of the VŠE employees,
  5. study resources and their availability,
  6. student care and support,
  7. cooperation with practice,
  8. information systems.

(2) The System of Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance includes the provision of public information. The publication of documents is governed by the Act, the Statutes of the VŠE, this internal regulation and other regulations of the VŠE.

(3) The scope, powers and responsibilities within the framework of the system of internal evaluation and quality assurance at the VŠE and in the scope laid down by the Act, the Statutes of the VŠE, this internal regulation and other regulations of the VŠE, are:

  1. the Rector and Vice-Rectors,
  2. the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE,
  3. the Scientific Board of the VŠE,
  4. the Academic Senate of the VŠE,
  5. the Board of Trustees of the VŠE,
  6. the Bursar,
  7. the International Advisory Board,
  8. Directors of other Units of the VŠE pursuant to Article 16 of the Statutes of the VŠE,
  9. Heads of Units of the Rector’s Office pursuant to Article 17 of the Statutes of the VŠE,
  10. Deans and Vice-Deans,
  11. Heads of Departments,
  12. Scientific Boards of Faculties,
  13. Academic Senates of Faculties,
  14. Secretaries of Faculties,
  15. Faculty Accreditation Boards,
  16. Field of Study Boards for doctoral study programmes (hereinafter referred to as “Field of Study Board”),
  17. Supervisor of students in doctoral study programmes,
  18. Guarantors of study programmes,
  19. Supervisors of minor specialisations,
  20. Supervisors of courses.

(4) The system of quality assurance and internal evaluation at the VŠE is based on the international standards of ENQA, EQUIS and AACSB.

Article 4
The Rector and Vice-Rectors

(1) The Rector:

  1. is responsible for implementation of the system of internal evaluation and quality assurance,
  2. issues directives, orders and measures in order to ensure the implementation of the system of quality assurance and internal evaluation within the scope and limits provided for in the Act, other legal provisions and this internal regulation,
  3. initiates changes and supplements to the system of quality assurance and internal evaluation,
  4. evaluates, on an ongoing basis, activities of Vice-Rectors, Deans and Heads of other university units in the area of quality assurance and internal evaluation and conducts annual evaluation interviews with them.

(2) In his/her measures, the Rector specifies the responsibilities of individual Vice-Rectors for the coordination of activities within the framework of the system of quality assurance and internal evaluation.

(3) The Rector’s Directive on the design and implementation of study programmes at the VŠE shall stipulate in particular:

  1. general requirements for the design and implementation of study programmes,
  2. any specific requirements for the design and implementation of study programmes for particular types and forms of study programmes or for particular areas of education,
  3. requirements for the proposal of internal accreditation of a study programme under institutional accreditation,
  4. requirements for the application for lifting the restriction on the internal accreditation of a study programme,
  5. definition of a substantial change in the implementation of a study programme and conditions for its implementation and the manner and requirements for notifying the Rector of this change.

(4) The Rector shall discuss a draft or amendments of the directive under paragraph (3) with the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE before issuing it.

Article 5
Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE

(1) Internal Evaluation Board of the Prague University of Economics and Business:

  1. manages the course of internal quality evaluation,
  2. draws up the Report on Internal Evaluation and Quality Assurance as part of the regular internal quality evaluation conducted once in four years,
  3. performs the scope of activities of the Scientific Board of the VŠE pursuant to Article 10 (7) of the Statutes of the VŠE.

(2) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE may establish working groups and use consultants.

(3) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE acts in accordance with its Rules of Procedure, which are an integral part of this internal regulation.

Article 6
International Advisory Board

(1) The International Advisory Board (hereinafter referred to as the “IAB”) is an international consultancy representing the Rector. The IAB operates in the area of internal evaluation and quality assurance within the scope of matters submitted to the Board for discussion by the Rector.

(2) The Rector appoints and dismisses members of the IAB from among foremost international experts involved in education and from among employers’ representatives; the IAB nor the membership in the IAB are not terminated at the expiry of the Rector´s term of office.

(3) The IAB consists of at least nine members and at most fifteen members.

(4) The IAB expresses its opinion on matters submitted to them for discussion by the Rector.

(5) The IAB has a quorum if the majority of all its members is present.

(6) The IAB meets at least once per academic year. The meeting is chaired by the Rector.

(7) The Rector may, under the conditions set out in Article 36a, allow a remote participation in the meeting. He/she shall inform the IAB of this decision at the beginning of the meeting.

Article 7
Dean and Vice-Deans

(1) Dean:

  1. is responsible for the implementation of the system of quality assurance and internal evaluation within the faculty concerned,
  2. decides, on the proposal of the Accreditation Board of the Faculty, or the Field of Study Board, on granting, significantly changing or removing accreditation of courses of bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral study programmes implemented by individual departments, and decides on granting, significantly changing or removing accreditation of a minor specialisation implemented by the faculty concerned and on significantly changing accreditation of a study programme; should the Dean not uphold the proposal of the Accreditation Board or the Field of Study Board of the Faculty he/she is obliged to duly justify such decision,
  3. issues faculty-binding directives, orders and measures, within the scope and limits laid down in this internal regulation, in order to ensure the implementation of the system of quality assurance and internal evaluation is implemented at the faculty concerned,
  4. evaluates, on an ongoing basis, the activities of Vice-Deans, heads of departments and guarantors of study programmes in the field of quality assurance and internal evaluation, and creates conditions for the development of their educational and creative activities and conducts annual evaluation interviews with them.

(2) The Dean specifies the responsibilities of individual Vice-Deans for coordinating activities within the framework of the system of quality assurance and internal evaluation.

Article 8
Heads of Department

(1) Heads of Department:

  1. are responsible for teaching and evaluating the quality of courses supervised by their departments,
  2. are responsible for the focus and organization of the creative activities of their departments,
  3. appoint and dismiss supervisors of courses of bachelor’s and master’s degree programmes; the same applies to doctoral degree programmes, however, only with the prior consent of the guarantor of the given doctoral degree programme,
  4. conduct assessment interviews with academic staff working in their department,
  5. submit proposals to the Dean on improvements and solutions to the problems arising from educational, creative and related activities,
  6. actively create conditions for academic staff working in their department with the aim to support their professional growth, enhance their qualifications, improve educational and creative activities, encourage participation in domestic and international projects and/or support their participation in international educational activities,
  7. resolve complaints/suggestions of students concerning the quality of educational activities provided by the department concerned.

(2) The provisions of paragraph (1) apply mutatis mutandis to the heads of scientific-pedagogical units being treated as departments.

Article 9
Faculty Accreditation Boards

(1) A measure issued by the relevant Dean specifies which of the Dean’s advisory bodies will assume the role of the Faculty Accreditation Board, unless the Faculty Accreditation Board has already been established as an advisory body to the Dean. The measure of the Dean defines, in particular, the method of appointing the Chair and members of the Faculty Accreditation Board and the rules for its meetings.

(2) The Faculty Accreditation Board:

  1. discusses proposals to grant, prolong, extend or remove accreditation of bachelor’s or master’s degree programmes prior to their submission to the Scientific Board of the Faculty and proposals to significantly change the accreditation of bachelor’s or master’s degree programmes,
  2. discusses proposals to grant, change or remove accreditation of a minor specialisation implemented by the faculty,
  3. discusses proposals of heads of departments to grant, significantly change or remove accreditation of a course of a given bachelor’s or master’s degree programme supervised by a department of the faculty concerned; it may recommend removing accreditation of a course even without a proposal of the relevant head of department,
  4. assesses, when discussing regular evaluation reports under letters (e) and (f), bachelor’s and master’s degree programmes implemented by the given faculty in terms of their up-to-dateness and relevance in relation to requirements of practice, experience of graduates and initiatives of students, also assesses, on an ongoing basis, the strengths and weaknesses of degree programmes with regard to external opportunities and threats and suggests corrective measures,
  5. approves regular evaluation reports submitted by guarantors of bachelor’s and master’s degree programmes,
  6. discusses the regular evaluation report on the employability of graduates prepared at the VŠE level,
  7. expresses opinions on other documents submitted to it by the Dean or its Chair.

(3) The Faculty Accreditation Board is obliged to comply with the Act, the internal regulations of the VŠE and the given faculty, standards applying to accreditation of study programmes, opinions of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE as well as the results of external evaluations.

(4) The Accreditation Board usually meets once per semester; the meeting is chaired by the chair of the Accreditation Board. The minutes of the meeting of the Accreditation Board shall be taken and submitted without undue delay to the Dean of the Faculty, the Vice-Dean designated pursuant to Article 7(2) and the Vice-Rector designated pursuant to Article 4(2). The Vice-Dean designated pursuant to Article 7(2) shall provide organisational and administrative support to the Accreditation Board and coordinate its activities in a methodical manner.

(5) In its activities, the Faculty Accreditation Board uses documentation concerning degree programmes, minor specialisations and subjects.

(6) A proposal for a significant change in the accreditation of a bachelor’s or master’s degree programme cannot be approved by the Faculty Accreditation Board without the consent of the guarantor of the study programme whose substantial change is in question. The guarantor may express his/her agreement or disagreement directly at the meeting of the Faculty Accreditation Board or send it in writing in advance upon request of the Chair of the Faculty Accreditation Board.

(7) Guarantors of study programmes, minor specialisations or courses, and heads of departments are entitled to participate in meetings of the Faculty Accreditation Board and to express their opinions on issues concerning relevant study programmes, minor specialisations or courses.

(8) Activities of the Faculty Accreditation Board do not apply to doctoral degree programmes.

Article 10
Field of Study Board

(1) Field of Study Boards shall monitor and evaluate studies with doctoral degree programmes. The Field of Study Board is accountable to the Dean for its activities.

(2) A doctoral degree programme guarantor shall be the Chair of the relevant Field of Study Board; other members of the Field of Study Board are appointed and dismissed by the Dean after prior discussion in the Scientific Board of the Faculty. If a joint Field of Study Board is established for study programmes in the same field of study, the members of the Field of Study Board are the guarantors of all these programmes. The Chair of the joint Field of Study Board is appointed from among the guarantors of these programmes and dismissed by the Dean.

(3) The Field of Study Board shall have at least seven members, where at least two of them are not academic or scientific staff of the VŠE. Members of the doctoral study programme board may be only those who have carried out high-quality creative work in the last five years that corresponds to the field or fields of education within which the doctoral study programme is to be carried out. Compliance with the above conditions shall be assessed by the Dean when appointing a member of the Board of Studies.

(4) The Field of Study Board shall have quorum if the majority of its members is present. Resolutions shall be adopted by the simple majority of all members present. Under the conditions set out in Article 36a, the Chair of the Field of Study Board may allow a remote participation in the meeting. He/she shall inform about this decision at the beginning of the Field of Study Board meeting.

(5) The Field of Study Board meets at least once per academic year, and the meeting is chaired by the Chair of the Field of Study Board. Minutes of the meetings of the Field of Study Board shall be taken and submitted without undue delay to the Dean of the faculty at which the study programme is accredited, the Vice-Dean designated pursuant to Article 7(2) and the Vice-Rector designated pursuant to Article 4(2). The Vice-Dean designated pursuant to Article 7(2) shall provide organisational and administrative support to the Field of Study Board and shall methodically coordinate the activities of the Field of Study Board at the faculty.

(6) In particular, the Field of Study Board:

  1. discusses proposals to grant, prolong, extend or remove accreditation of a doctoral study programme before submitting it to the Scientific Council of the Faculty for its approval and proposals to significantly change the accreditation of a doctoral study programme,
  2. takes care of the updating and development of the accredited doctoral study programme, initiates proposals for modification of existing study programmes,
  3. discusses the proposal of heads of departments for granting, significantly changing and removing accreditation of courses of the doctoral study programme,
  4. ensures internal quality evaluation of the doctoral study programme,
  5. approves regular evaluation reports of the guarantors of doctoral study programmes,
  6. monitors and assesses current studies within the given doctoral study programme,
  7. expresses its opinion on the proposal and significant changes to the content of the state doctoral examination,
  8. solves professional and organisational aspects of the given doctoral study programme in cooperation with the guarantor of the relevant doctoral study programme and with individual doctoral dissertation theses supervisors.

(7) A proposal for a significant change in the accreditation of a doctoral study programme cannot be approved by the Field of Study Board without the consent of the guarantor of the study programme whose substantial change is in question. The guarantor of the study programme may express his/her agreement or disagreement directly at the meeting of the Field of Study Board or send it in writing in advance at the request of the Chair, if the guarantor is not the Chair.

Article 11
Study Programme Guarantor

(1) With previous approval by the relevant Faculty Scientific Board, the Dean may appoint and remove a study programme guarantor. The change of the guarantor shall be made by the Dean of the Faculty only after discussion in the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE and shall inform the Rector of his/her decision without undue delay. The guarantor of a master’s degree programme can only be an associate professor, professor or extraordinary professor according to Section 70(2), sentence one of the Act, who is an academic staff member of the VŠE,  whose specialization corresponds to the given study program or a closely related or similar program, and who has conducted high-quality scientific research in the last five years that corresponds to the field or fields of education within which the study program is to be implemented. Should it be a study programme held at the faculty, the guarantor of such study programme may be merely an academic staff member working at the relevant faculty.

(2) The guarantor of a study programme held at the VŠE is appointed and removed by the Rector from among members of the academic staff of the VŠE, with the previous consent of the VŠE Scientific Board.

(3) A study programme guarantor is responsible for the quality and due implementation of the study programme for which he/she is a guarantor.

(4) A guarantor of bachelor’s and master’s degree programmes:

  1. is responsible for maintaining the profile of a graduate as it is defined in the accreditation of the study programme within the scope of professional knowledge and skills corresponding with the objectives and focus of studies, and for defining the content and scope of the state final examination and its parts so that it is in accordance with the focus of studies and the profile of a graduate,
  2. takes care of the development of knowledge within the framework of the study programme he/she guarantees,
  3. is responsible for maintaining documentation concerning the relevant study programme, including information recorded in the VŠE Information System,
  4. submits the degree programme guarantor´s evaluation report to the Accreditation Board of the relevant faculty,
  5. regularly evaluates information on the employability of graduates of the given degree programme,
  6. is responsible for the content of entrance examinations to the degree programme of which he/she is a guarantor,
  7. organise a meeting, at least once an academic year, with students of the study programme where he/she shall gather their comments concerning the given degree programme; he/she shall report on the meeting’s results to the Faculty Accreditation Board concerned; comments of students may be, with the assent of the Faculty Accreditation of Board, collected using a different suitable method.

(5) A doctoral degree programme guarantor:

  1. is responsible for professional development of the study programme, in particular he/she coordinates preparation of the content of the study programme and its significant changes, supervises the quality of its implementation, evaluates and develops the study programme as a whole,
  2. solves, in cooperation with the relevant Field of Study Board and supervisors, professional and organizational issues of the study programme,
  3. is responsible for maintaining documentation of the study programme, including information recorded in the VŠE Information System,
  4. submits a regular evaluation report of the study programme guarantor to the relevant Field of Study Board,
  5. provides methodical guidance to the professional activities of supervisors,
  6. is responsible for the content of entrance examinations to the study programme he/she guarantees,
  7. approves individual study plan of a student and submits it to the Dean for signature.

Article 12
Minor specialisation supervisor

(1) After previous approval of the relevant Faculty Accreditation Board, the Dean appoints and removes a minor specialisation supervisor. In accordance with Section 70(2), sentence one of the Act, a supervisor of a secondary specialisation may only be an associate professor, a professor or an extraordinary professor who is an academic employee of the VŠE.

(2) Minor specialisation supervisor:

  1. is responsible for defining and maintaining the profile of the graduate of the minor specialisation in the scope of professional knowledge and skills corresponding with the objectives and focus of a minor specialisation, and for defining the content and scope of the state final or comprehensive examination and its parts so that it is in accordance with the focus of studies and the profile of a graduate of the minor specialisation,
  2. takes care of the development of knowledge within his/her minor specialisation,
  3. is responsible for maintaining documentation of the minor specialisation, including information recorded in the VŠE Information System,
  4. submits regular evaluation reports of the supervisor of the minor specialisation to the Faculty Accreditation Board,
  5. expresses his/her opinion on proposals to grant, significantly change or remove accreditation of a faculty’s course which is a part of a study plan of the minor specialisation guaranteed by him/her, he/she initiates creation of new courses.

Article 13
Course supervisor

(1) The Dean, on the proposal of the Head of Department that provides the teaching of the course appoints and dismisses a course supervisor with the prior approval of the Accreditation Board of the faculty:

  1. from academic staff appointed as professor or associate professor in a field corresponding to the field or fields of education within which the master’s degree programme is to be implemented or in a related field for the basic theoretical study course of the profiling basis of the master’s degree programme,
  2. from academic staff appointed as professor or associate professor for doctoral programme courses; and
  3. from professors, associate professors or assistant professors with a scientific degree or Ph.D. for other courses.

If more than one department is involved in the provision of teaching, the course supervisor is appointed and dismissed by the Dean in consultation with the heads of the given departments.

(2) The course supervisor may only be an academic staff member of the VŠE who has the majority of the academic staff member’s working time within the VŠE at the faculty that accredits the course. The course supervisor is a major contributor to the teaching, design and feedback evaluation of the course. One full-time academic supervisor can simultaneously supervise a maximum of 6 courses of the profiling basis (profiling basis courses and theoretical basic courses of the profiling basis) of the Bachelor’s and Master’s programmes taught in a given academic year. Courses of state final examinations, defences and comprehensive examinations are not included in the limit. Courses that are taught every semester in an academic year will be counted only once. The maximum number of courses is reduced proportionally if the supervisor has a lower working time. Compliance with the above conditions is assessed by the Accreditation Board of the faculty when granting or substantially changing the accreditation of a course, or at the initiative of the Dean.

(3) Course supervisor:

  1. is responsible for the content, level and development of the given course,
  2. takes care of the development of knowledge and updating of study literature within the guaranteed course, develops creative activities in the field of the guaranteed course,
  3. is responsible for the content and development of the course to the head of the department; he/she consults with the head of the department and the supervisor of the study programmes within which the course is taught as required and coordinates its development with regard to the development of the study programme,
  4. processes the course characteristics, learning outcomes, content and teaching methods and literature recommended for study; ensures completeness of information in the course accreditation file in the VŠE Information System,
  5. regularly updates the course content; the proposal for a significant change is submitted to the Faculty Accreditation Board after discussion with the head of the department,
  6. discusses with the head of the department, with the supervisors of other courses and with the supervisor of the study programme the effective interconnection, continuity of courses and limitations for course enrolment,
  7. before each semester in which the course is taught, coordinates individual teachers of the course, especially in terms of teaching methods and student requirements, and provides them with methodological guidance during the semester,
  8. initiates research projects, publications and other creative activities of lecturers and seminar instructors in order to capture the latest state of knowledge in the course,
  9. is responsible for the comparability of student assessments in a given course,
  10. is responsible for periodic evaluation of student course-level assessments and for the design and implementation of corrective actions.

Article 14
Supervisor of students in the doctoral study programme

(1) The supervisor of doctoral students (hereinafter referred to as “supervisor”) is appointed and dismissed by the Dean on the basis of a proposal from the study programme guarantor. The supervisor may be a professor, associate professor or extraordinary professor and, in exceptional cases, another distinguished expert with a scientific rank or the academic title of Ph.D. approved by the relevant Scientific Board, who has, within the last five years, carried out high-quality creative activity corresponding to the field or fields of education within which the doctoral programme is to be carried out. The supervisors of students in the doctoral programme are involved or have been involved in the last ten years in scientific projects in the Czech Republic or abroad which are professionally relevant to the field or fields of education to which the programme of study for which accreditation is sought belongs. Compliance with these conditions is assessed by the Dean when appointing a supervisor ..

(2) In particular, the supervisor:

  1. draws up the student’s individual study plan in cooperation with the student and confirms this plan in the VŠE Information System,
  2. takes care of the student’s professional development, i.e., recommends literature for study, cooperates in the preparation of scientific publications, includes the student in the scientific tasks of the department and other projects, helps in establishing contacts with foreign departments and monitors the fulfilment of the individual study plan,
  3. annually checks the fulfilment of the individual study plan and prepares a Report on the course of study in the VŠE Information System.

Article 15
Documentation of a study programme

(1) To ensure comparability and standardisation of the quality assurance and internal evaluation processes, study programme documentation is maintained; the study programme guarantor is responsible for its content, maintenance and continuous updating.

(2) Study programme documentation is stored in the VŠE Information System and is accessible to all persons and bodies involved in the process of quality assurance and internal evaluation at the VŠE:

  1. the application for accreditation, the decision on its granting, changing or removing,
  2. documentation of required and elective courses of the study programme,
  3. a model curriculum,
  4. in the case of a master’s degree programme, a list of minor specialisations, one of which the student may choose as a required elective part of the study plan according to the accreditation of the study programme,
  5. regular evaluation reports of the study programme guarantor,
  6. other parts of the study programme as defined in Section 44(2) of the Act which are not part of the documentation referred to in (a) to (d).

Article 16
Documentation of a minor specialisation

(1) In order to ensure comparability and standardisation of quality assurance and internal evaluation processes, documentation of minor specialisations is maintained; the supervisor of a minor specialisation is responsible for its content, maintenance and continuous updating.

(2) The documentation of a minor specialisation is stored in the VŠE Information System and is accessible to all persons and bodies involved in the process of quality assurance and internal evaluation at the VŠE. The documentation of a minor specialisation includes:

  1. a proposal for the accreditation of a minor specialisation, a decision on its granting, changing or removing,
  2. documentation of required and elective courses of the study programme,
  3. a model curriculum,
  4. regular evaluation reports of the supervisor of the minor specialisation.

Article 17
Documentation of a course

(1) To ensure comparability and standardization of the quality assurance and internal evaluation processes, documentation of a course is maintained; the course supervisor is responsible for its content, maintenance and continuous updating.

(2) A course documentation is stored in the VŠE Information System and is accessible to all persons and bodies involved in quality assurance and internal evaluation at the VŠE.

(3) The documentation of a course consists of:

  1. an accreditation file for the course that includes a comprehensive course description with the following required items:
    1. identification marking,
    2. name in the language in which the study obligation is implemented and in Czech and English,
    3. name, surname and title of the supervisor,
    4. credit allocation if the degree programme is in the credit system,
    5. the way the teaching is implemented,
    6. language of teaching,
    7. content,
    8. learning outcomes,
    9. teaching methods,
    10. specific conditions and method of classification,
    11. list of required and recommended literature,
  2. results of the course student survey and the resulting actions,
  3. other components of the course evaluation according to in Article 18(4) and (5) and the resulting measures.

Article 18
Evaluation of courses

(1) Course evaluation is carried out by students, the course supervisor and the head of the relevant department, and in the case of a doctoral programme also by the Chair of the Field of Study Board.

(2) Students evaluate courses in a student survey conducted each semester via the VŠE Information System. The Vice-Rector designated under Article 4, paragraph 2 is responsible for the implementation of the student survey.

(3) The evaluation of the course student survey is part of the course documentation. The course-level evaluation is carried out by the course supervisor, the department-level evaluation is carried out by the head of the department. The course supervisor proposes and implements corrective measures for quality improvement in cooperation with the head of the department, or with the study programme guarantor and, in the case of a doctoral study programme, with the Chair of the Field of Study Board.

(4) The Dean and through the Dean also the study programme guarantor in the case of a study programme guaranteed by him/her or the Faculty Accreditation Board may request a report from the head of the department on the corrective measures taken and implemented in relation to the courses of the relevant department. In the case of a doctoral degree programme, the report referred to in the first sentence may also be requested from the guarantor of that degree programme and from the course supervisor.

(5) The head of the department conducts course “hospitation” at his/her discretion. He/she may delegate this duty to the supervisors of the relevant courses or to the deputy head of the department. A record of these visits to lectures is prepared, which may include a statement of the lecturer.

Article 19
Evaluation of graduate employability

(1) Sources of information on graduate employment include:

  1. alumni surveys at graduation ceremonies,
  2. regular surveys of graduates and employers carried out at the level of the VŠE or faculties,
  3. information from external sources.

(2) A study programme guarantor is responsible for the evaluation of the information referred to in paragraph (1) at the level of the study programme. The Rector’s Office and the Dean’s Office of the faculty where the study programme is implemented shall provide the study programme guarantor with the necessary information and cooperation.

Article 20
Ensuring the quality of staff competences

(1) Academic staff actively pursue continuous personal development and career growth in their educational and creative activities. At the same time, they shall systematically contribute to the building of the reputation of the VŠE, take advantage of opportunities to present their expertise to the public and strive to increase their visibility within the meaning of Article 21(2).

(2) A comprehensive evaluation of an academic staff member is carried out by the head of a department according to the criteria set out in Article 21, paragraphs 1 to 3.

(3) A comprehensive evaluation of a non-academic staff member is carried out by his/her immediate superior in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 21(4).

(4) A comprehensive evaluation of an executive officer is carried out by his/her immediate superior in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 21(5).

(5) The frequency of individual comprehensive evaluations shall be determined by a Rector’s measure. Comprehensive evaluations shall take place at least once every four years.

Article 21
Criteria for assessing the quality of staff activities

(1) The criteria for evaluating the quality of an academic staff member’s educational and creative activities are:

  1. scope and quality of educational activities, including how students’ knowledge is tested and assessed,
  2. scope and quality of the results of creative activity,
  3. activity and success in grant competitions, including those outside of the VŠE, as well as the implementation of the plan for the solution of the obtained grant projects and the results of the evaluation of completed grant projects.

(2) The criteria for the visibility of an academic staff member outside the VŠE are:

  1. extent and results of involvement in international educational activities,
  2. extent and quality of participation in domestic and international conferences,
  3. extent and quality of activities worthy of consideration (ensuring the agendas of the department and faculty, work in grant agencies, editorial, executive boards of journals, field of study, scientific and academic boards, etc.),
  4. extent and quality of collaboration with practice,
  5. extent and quality of media coverage.

(3) Other criteria for the comprehensive evaluation of an academic staff member are:

  1. fulfilment of a qualification development plan;
  2. academic staff member’s contribution to the educational, creative and related activities of the department;
  3. accuracy and quality of performance of tasks continuously assigned by the head department;
  4. compliance with the Code of Ethics of the VŠE, based on the resolution of the Ethics Committee of the VŠE,

(4) The criteria for evaluating the quality of a non-academic staff member’s activities include:

  1. scope and quality of the agenda,
  2. endeavour to improve qualifications,
  3. contribution to the quality of the internal environment of the faculty and the VŠE,
  4. student evaluations, if available.

(5) The quality criteria for an executive officer are in particular:

  1. ability to determine the concept of the overall development of the department, unit or section and its successful implementation,
  2. fulfilment of the strategic plan of the educational and creative activities of the VŠE, or of the faculty if it is a faculty department.

Article 22
Cooperation with practice

(1) The Rector, Vice-Rectors, Deans, Vice-Deans, guarantors of study programmes and heads of departments shall create conditions for cooperation with practice, especially in the form of:

  1. accredited internships and apprenticeships for students,
  2. supervising qualification work in collaboration with and for practice,
  3. hosting experts from practice in the courses,
  4. development and application of case studies in teaching,
  5. contract research,
  6. professional events held at the VŠE.

(2) In the framework of cooperation with practice, special attention is paid to cooperation with graduates.

(3) All activities within the framework of cooperation with practice are recorded at the faculty level by the Vice-Dean designated pursuant to Article 7, paragraph 2, and at the university level by the Vice-Rector designated pursuant to Article 4, paragraph 2.

Article 23
Regular evaluation reports and data analytics of the VŠE

(1) Within the framework of internal quality evaluation, decisions at the level of the VŠE and its units are made on the basis of data analysis, which is provided to the bodies and faculties by the Rector’s Office of the VŠE for the purposes of data analytics.

(2) The data analytics of the VŠE regularly processes and presents data in the following areas, which form the framework of the annual quality assurance process:

  1. data on the admission procedure at the VŠE,
  2. data and inputs on the implemented study programmes, minor specialisations, study results and study success rates at the VŠE,
  3. data on the results of student surveys at the VŠE,
  4. data on employability of VŠE graduates,
  5. data on scientific research and other creative activities of the VŠE and on their results,
  6. data on international relations of the VŠE.

(3) The outputs referred to in paragraph (2) shall be made available to the faculties for the purposes of decision-making and the preparation of the reports referred to in paragraphs (6) and (7).

(4) Once a year, the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE discusses an executive summary of the outputs of the data analytics of the VŠE, according to the areas listed in paragraph (2).

(5) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE discusses a regular evaluation report on the audit activities at the VŠE once a year.

(6) As part of the internal quality evaluation at the VŠE, a regular evaluation report on the educational, creative and related activities of the faculty is prepared at the faculty level.

(7) As part of the internal quality evaluation at the VŠE, the following regular evaluation reports are prepared at the level of the study programme and at the level of the minor specialisation:

  1. Regular evaluation report on the implementation of the study programme,
  2. Regular evaluation report on the implementation of the minor specialisation.

(8) The regular evaluation reports referred to in paragraphs (6) and (7) shall be prepared once every four years.

(9) The Vice-Rectors designated in accordance with Article 4(2) shall be responsible for the preparation of the executive summaries referred to in paragraph (4) and the evaluation report referred to in paragraph (5). The Rector may submit them to one or more of the bodies defined in Article 8(3) and (4) of the VŠE Statutes for consideration before submitting them to the Internal Evaluation Board for approval.

(10) Periodic evaluation reports and executive summaries as defined in this Article shall contain mandatory “Key conclusions” and “Proposed actions” sections. These sections shall be published in the public section of the website of the VŠE.

Article 24
Regular evaluation report on the implementation of the study programme

(1) The regular evaluation report on the implementation of the study programme is prepared by the guarantor of the study programme and submitted for approval to the Faculty Accreditation Board in the case of a bachelor’s or master’s study programme and to the Field of Study Board in the case of a doctoral study programme.

(2) The regular evaluation report on the implementation of the study programme shall contain at least the following sections:

  1. a summary of the development of the study programme over the last four years,
  2. a summary of the measures taken on the basis of the results of the student surveys, including an evaluation of the effectiveness of these measures over the last four years,
  3. a summary of the results of all parts of the state final examination over the last four years,
  4. assessment of the achievement of professional knowledge and skills relevant to the objectives and focus of the study,
  5. proposals for changes to the curriculum design and learning outcomes for the next period.

(3) The Dean, the Faculty Accreditation Board in the case of a bachelor’s or master’s degree programme, or the Field of Study Board in the case of a doctoral degree programme may request the submission of an extraordinary evaluation report on the implementation of the degree programme.

Article 25
Regular evaluation report on the implementation of the minor specialisation

(1) The regular evaluation report on the implementation of the minor specialisation is prepared by the supervisor of the minor specialisation and submitted to the Faculty Accreditation Board for approval.

(2) The regular evaluation report of the supervisor of the minor specialisation shall contain at least the following parts:

  1. a summary of the development of the minor specialisation over the last four years,
  2. a summary of the results of student surveys and the measures taken on the basis of them, including an evaluation of the effectiveness of these measures, over the last four years,
  3. a summary of the results of all parts of the final state or comprehensive examination over the last four years,
  4. assessment of the achievement of professional knowledge and skills relevant to the objectives and focus of the study,
  5. proposals for changes to the design of the minor specialisation and learning outcomes for the next period.

(3) The Dean or the Faculty Accreditation Board may request the submission of an extraordinary evaluation report on the implementation of the minor specialisation.

Article 26
Regular evaluation report on the educational, creative and related activities of the faculty

(1) The regular evaluation report on the faculty’s educational, creative and related activities is submitted by the Dean to the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE for approval.

(2) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE, or a working group established by it, may request additional information from the Dean on the submitted report.

(3) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE, when discussing the regular evaluation report, shall decide in one of the following ways:

  1. to approve the regular evaluation report of the faculty without reservation,
  2. to approve the regular evaluation report of the faculty with reservations concerning one or more degree programmes or one or more minor specialisations carried out by the faculty; or
  3. not to approve the regular evaluation report of the faculty.

(4) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE does not approve the regular evaluation report of a faculty if it finds serious deficiencies in the implementation of study programmes or minor specialisations.

(5) The result of the discussion of the regular evaluation report of the faculty is the basis for the decision of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE on the internal accreditation of the faculty’s study programmes.

(6) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE may request the submission of an extraordinary evaluation report of the faculty.

Article 27
Extraordinary evaluation of a study programme by the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE

(1) If the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE approves the regular evaluation report of the faculty with reservations concerning any of the study programmes or minor specialisations, or if it does not approve the regular evaluation report of the faculty, it shall recommend to the Dean the adoption of corrective measures and shall set a reasonable deadline for their implementation and for the submission of an extraordinary evaluation report of the faculty.

(2) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE verifies the implementation of corrective measures on the basis of the submission of an extraordinary evaluation report of the study programme or minor specialisation to which the reservation relates.

(3) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE may request the submission of an extraordinary evaluation report of a study programme or a minor specialisation if it has serious doubts about its implementation. Article 26 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the further procedure.

Article 28
Report on the internal evaluation of the quality

(1) The report on the internal evaluation of the quality shall be prepared once every four years.

(2) The report on the internal evaluation of the quality shall normally contain the following sections:

  1. a summary of the outputs of the data analytics of the VŠE for the last four years, broken down according to Article 23(2),
  2. a report on the development of human resources at the VŠE,
  3. a report on the availability and relevance of study resources at the VŠE,
  4. a report on the support and care of the students of the VŠE,
  5. a report on cooperation with practice,
  6. a report on the development of the information systems of the VŠE.

(3) The annual addendum to the report on the internal evaluation of the quality shall describe changes made to the system of quality assurance in the previous year and the measures taken.

(4) The report on the internal evaluation of the quality shall include a list of all study programmes, study programmes with suspended internal accreditation and study programmes with removed accreditation in a given year.

(5) The Rector is responsible for the preparation of the report on the internal evaluation of the quality. The process of discussing and approving the report on the internal evaluation of the quality is defined by the Act, other legal regulations and internal regulations of the VŠE.

Part Three
Internal Accreditation Rules

Article 29
Internal accreditation of a study programme

(1) Internal accreditation of a study programme within the framework of institutional accreditation means the authorisation to implement a study programme pursuant to section 78(2) of the Act.

(2) Internal accreditation of a study programme within the framework of institutional accreditation is approved by the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE on the proposal of the Scientific Board of the Faculty.

(3) The Academic Senate of the Faculty shall express its opinion on the proposal for internal accreditation of a study programme before the proposal is submitted to the Scientific Board of the Faculty.

(4) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE may interrupt the discussion of the proposal under paragraph (2) and return the proposal to the Scientific Board of the Faculty for completion or for elimination of deficiencies. In such a case, it shall set a reasonable deadline for completion of the proposal or for removal of deficiencies. At the request of the Dean, the deadline may be extended repeatedly. If the modification of the proposal is not a significant change to the internal accreditation, such modification is within the authority of the Dean.

(5) When assessing a proposal under paragraph (2), the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE shall assess the compliance of the proposal with the Act, the standards for accreditation in higher education, the internal regulations of the VŠE and the standards defined in the Rector’s Directive issued pursuant to Article 4(3).

(6) The proposal for internal accreditation of a study programme shall be commented on by the working group of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE for the field of education within which the study programme is to be accredited, if a working group for the field of education is established.

(7) The proposal for internal accreditation is usually discussed at least twice by the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE, with the first meeting assessing the basic parameters of the proposal, determining the evaluator and discussing the opinion of the working group, if one is established for the given field of education. At the second meeting, a decision on internal accreditation may be taken on the basis of the evaluator’s opinion and an assessment of the proposal in the light of the standards and rules for the design of study programmes.

(8) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE shall decide on granting the internal accreditation of a study programme within 90 days of the first meeting pursuant to paragraph (7).

Article 30
Decision on internal accreditation of a study programme

(1) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE grants the faculty internal accreditation of a study programme for a period of 10 years. Internal accreditation of a degree programme may be granted for a period shorter than 10 years if:

  1. it is a study programme that has not been implemented at the faculty so far,
  2. the degree programme is granted or extended accreditation to meet the need to ensure that enrolled students are able to complete their degree; or
  3. the study programme does not provide sufficient guarantees of proper security and development, especially in terms of staffing and meeting the standards defined by the government regulation and the Rector’s Directive under Article 4(3) for a period of 10 years.

(2) The validity of internal accreditation may be repeatedly prolonged. The provisions of Article 29 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the procedure for prolonging the internal accreditation.

(3) The decision of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE on granting internal accreditation to a study programme shall include the name and type of the study programme, the standard period of study, the profile of the study programme in the case of a bachelor’s or master’s degree programme, the field of education to which the programme belongs and also the share of the fields of education in the teaching in the case of a combined study programme, the name of the faculty and the language in which the study programme is implemented.

(4) In the event of a decision to grant internal accreditation under paragraph (1)(c), the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE may impose preventive measures.

(5) The decision on granting or extending internal accreditation of a study programme shall be published by the VŠE and notified to the National Accreditation Bureau for Higher Education (hereinafter referred to as “NAB”) within 30 days of the decision of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE, including information on the date of approval.

(6) If the proposal for internal accreditation of a study programme does not comply with the Act or the internal regulations of the VŠE, if it does not meet the standards contained in the Rector’s Directive issued pursuant to Article 4(3), or if the deficiencies have not been remedied within the time limit referred to in Article 29(4), the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE shall not grant internal accreditation to the study programme and shall inform the Dean of the reasons for its decision.

Article 31
Extension of internal accreditation of a study programme

(1) During the validity of the accreditation of a study programme, the Scientific Board of the Faculty may request the extension of the internal accreditation of a study programme to include another form of study, a curriculum for a new specialisation or the addition of another place of study.

(2) Articles 29 and 30 apply mutatis mutandis to the decision of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE on a proposal to extend the internal accreditation of a study programme.

(3) The decision on the extension of the internal accreditation of a study programme shall be published by the VŠE and notified to the NAB within 30 days of the decision of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE, including information on the date of approval.

Article 32
Restriction and removal of internal accreditation of a study programme

(1) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE may decide to restrict or remove the internal accreditation of a study programme if it has not approved a regular or extraordinary evaluation report on the educational, creative and related activities of the faculty, if it has approved it with reservations for the study programme or if it has found serious deficiencies in the implementation of the study programme as part of an extraordinary evaluation of the study programme.

(2) Before making a decision under paragraph (1), the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE shall give the faculty a reasonable period of time to remedy the deficiencies.

(3) No new applicants may be admitted to a study programme with restricted internal accreditation. A study programme with removed internal accreditation cannot be implemented.

(4) Violation of the provisions of paragraph (3) by the Dean shall be deemed to be serious damage to the interests of the VŠE and shall constitute grounds for proceeding under section 28(3) of the Act.

(5) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE may lift the restriction on the internal accreditation of a study programme. The requisites for a request to lift the restriction on the internal accreditation of a study programme shall be laid down in the Rector’s Directive.

(6) The approval or cancellation of a corrective measure for deficiencies in the implementation of a study programme consisting in a prohibition to admit other applicants to study the given study programme shall be notified by the VŠE within 30 days of the decision of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE to the NAB, including the effective date of the corrective measure or the date on which the corrective measure was cancelled.

Article 33
Termination of internal accreditation of a study programme

(1) The internal accreditation of a study programme shall cease by:

  1. removal of internal accreditation pursuant to Article 32(1),
  2. expiry of the period for which the internal accreditation was granted, or
  3. the faculty’s notification of the cancellation of the study programme to the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE; the notification is submitted by the Scientific Board of the Faculty; the Academic Senate of the Faculty expresses its opinion on it.

(2) The decision to terminate a study programme shall be published by the VŠE and notified to the NAB within 30 days of the decision of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE, including the date by which the study programme is to be terminated.

Article 34
Intention to submit an application for accreditation to the National Accreditation Bureau for Higher Education

(1) The provisions of this Article shall apply to the accreditation of a study programme which does not belong to the field or fields of education for which the VŠE has valid institutional accreditation, and to the accreditation of habilitation or professor appointment procedures.

(2) The intention to submit an application for accreditation of a study programme or an application for accreditation of a habilitation procedure or a procedure for professor appointment at the NAB is approved by the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE on the proposal of the Scientific Board of the Faculty.

(3) The Academic Senate of the Faculty shall comment on the proposal before it is approved by the Scientific Board of the Faculty.

(4) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE may interrupt the discussion of the proposal under paragraph (2) and return the proposal to the Scientific Board of the Faculty for completion or for the elimination of deficiencies. In such a case, it shall set a reasonable deadline for completion of the proposal or for removal of the deficiencies. At the request of the Dean, the deadline may be extended repeatedly.

(5) When assessing a proposal under paragraph (2), the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE shall assess the compliance of the proposal with the Act, other regulations, the internal regulations of the VŠE and the standards defined in the Rector’s Directive issued pursuant to Article 4(3).

(6) The proposal under paragraph (2) shall be commented on by the working group of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE for the field of education in which the study programme is partially included, if a working group for the field of education is established.

(7) The Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE decides on the intention to submit an application for accreditation of a study programme or an application for accreditation of a habilitation procedure or a procedure for professor appointment within 90 days from the submission of the application. The months of July and August and the period of interruption of the review process pursuant to paragraph (4) shall not be included in the time limit referred to in the first sentence.

(8) The provisions of paragraphs (2) to (6) shall apply mutatis mutandis to the intention to submit an application for extension or prolongation of the period of validity of the accreditation of a study programme. The accreditation may be extended by adding a legal entity with which the study programme is to be carried out in cooperation pursuant to Section 81 of the Act, by adding a curriculum for a new specialisation or an additional form of study, or by adding an additional place of implementation of the study programme.

(9) The accreditation of a study programme shall cease by:

  1. removal of accreditation,
  2. expiry of the period for which the accreditation was granted, or
  3. notification of the termination of the degree programme to the NAB. The decision to terminate a study programme is taken by the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE on the basis of a proposal from the Scientific Board of the Faculty; the Academic Senate of the Faculty expresses its opinion on the proposal.

(10) The accreditation of the habilitation procedure or the procedure for professor appointment shall cease by:

  1. removal of accreditation,
  2. expiry of the period for which the accreditation was granted, or
  3. notification by the university to the NAB that the university is relinquishing accreditation. The decision to relinquish accreditation is made by the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE on the basis of a proposal from the Scientific Board of the Faculty; the Academic Senate of the Faculty expresses its opinion on the proposal.

(11) The details of the procedure for the preparation, submission and consideration of applications for accreditation of habilitation procedure or procedure for professor appointment and amendments thereto are set out in the Rector’s Directive. The Rector shall discuss the draft or amendments of the directive with the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE before issuing it.

Article 35
Review of the decisions of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE

(1) The person submitting a proposal under Article 39(1) may, within 30 days of the decision of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE in matters defined in Articles 29 to 34, request the Rector to review the decision, stating the reasons why the review is requested.

(2) The Rector shall assess the compliance of the contested decision of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE with the Act, other legal regulations, the internal regulations of the VŠE and the standards defined in the Rector’s Directive issued pursuant to Article 29(8), and subsequently either confirm the contested decision or return it to the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE for reconsideration. In the event that the Rector upholds the decision of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE, his decision shall be final.

(3) Before making a decision under paragraph (2), the Rector may request the opinion of the Scientific Board of the VŠE.

Part Four
Rules of Procedure of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE

Article 36
General provisions

(1) The Chairman of the Internal Evaluation Board of the VŠE (hereinafter referred to as “the Board”) manages its activities, chairs its meetings and represents it externally.

(2) The Vice-Chairman of the Board shall represent the Chairman of the Board to the extent determined by him.

(3) In the event that neither the Chairman nor the Vice-Chairman of the Board is able to attend a meeting of the Board, the meeting of the Board shall be chaired by a member of the Board who has been delegated to do so by the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Board, as the case may be.

(4) Meetings of the Board and its working groups under Article 37 shall not be public unless the Board or the working group decides otherwise. The members of the Board, the consultants referred to in Article 38 and invited guests shall be bound to observe confidentiality in relation to the matters discussed by them in the course of the work of the Board or its working groups.

(5) In terms of administration, methodological and material aspects, the Board’s activities are ensured by the Quality Assurance Department, whose status and scope of activities are determined by the Organisational Regulations of the VŠE and other measures of the Rector of a methodological nature. The Head of the Quality Assurance Department attends the Board meetings.

(6) The Quality Assurance Department comments on proposals for Board meetings in terms of standards and rules for the development of study programmes, registers accreditation files of study programmes and data whose changes are subject to Board approval or information obligations towards the NAB, maintains a list of consultants and manages the Board’s information system, which contains minutes and materials from meetings of the Board and its working groups pursuant to Article 37.

(7) Applications for accreditation of habilitation and appointment procedures and data whose changes are subject to approval by the Board or information obligations to the NAB are recorded by the Office for Science and Research.

(8) The Rector appoints and dismisses the Secretary of the Board. The Secretary attends the meetings of the Board and takes minutes of the meetings. In the absence of the Secretary from a meeting of the Board, the minutes shall be taken by a person delegated to do so by the Chairman of the Board.

Article 36a
Conditions for participation in meetings by distance mode

Distance participation in a meeting may be permitted only if the following conditions are met:

  1. distance participation must be in real time sessions,
  2. the identity of the member participating in the meeting remotely is proven; and
  3. the member attending the meeting remotely may participate in the discussion, make proposals and vote.

Article 37
Working groups of the Board

(1) The Board shall establish and dissolve permanent or temporary working groups composed of members of the Board and consultants as defined in Article 38 and shall appoint and remove their chairpersons and other members.

(2) The Board may, pursuant to paragraph (1), establish a permanent working group of at least five members for the area of education in which the VŠE has institutional accreditation or for which it plans to apply for institutional accreditation.

(3) Meetings of the working group shall be convened and chaired by the chairperson of the working group; in justified cases, the chairperson of the working group may delegate another member of the working group to represent him or her. The chairperson may, under the conditions set out in Article 36a, authorise participation in a meeting by distance means. He/she shall inform the working group of this decision at the beginning of the meeting.

(4) Resolutions of the working groups are usually adopted at a meeting of the working group by an absolute majority of the members present. The working party shall have quorum if majority of its members is present.

(5) In justified cases, the chairperson of the working party may decide to vote outside the working party meeting (hereinafter referred to as “per rollam voting”); the provisions of Article 41 shall apply mutatis mutandis to such voting.

(6) Article 36(4) shall apply mutatis mutandis to the activities of the members of the working group.

(7) The chairperson of the working group may invite guests to the working group meeting.

Article 38
Consultants to the Board

(1) The Board may appoint and remove consultants competent in a particular field of education to ensure its activities. The Board shall remove a consultant on his/her request.

(2) An employee of the VŠE, an employee of another higher education institution or public research institution, an eminent practitioner or a student of the VŠE may be appointed as a consultant on the proposal of the bodies or persons referred to in Article 3(3)(a) to (p) or on the proposal of a member of the Board.

(3) The consultant is appointed for the period until the end of the term of office of the members of the Board as defined in Article 10, paragraph 6 of the Statutes of the VŠE. A consultant appointed from among the students of the VŠE shall cease to be a consultant on the day following the date of graduation.

(4) A list of consultants indicating the field of education according to paragraph (1) shall be published by the VŠE.

Article 39
Submission of material for Board meetings

(1) A proposal for a Board meeting may be submitted by a member of the Board, by a body or person referred to in Article 3(3) or by the Board of Trustees of the VŠE. The provisions of Part Three of this internal regulation shall not be affected.

(2) A proposal for a Board meeting shall be submitted electronically by sending it to the Secretary of the Board. The Secretary of the Board shall make the submitted proposal available to the Rector without undue delay.

(3) A proposal for a Board meeting shall include at least a definition of the matter to be discussed by the Board and, as a rule, also a proposal for a Board resolution and, if necessary, supporting documents for the assessment of the proposal in terms of standards and rules of curriculum development. If the proposal does not contain the necessary supporting documents, the Rector may return the proposal to the proposing person or body for completion or for elimination of deficiencies. In such a case, he/she shall set a reasonable time limit for completion of the information or for removal of the deficiencies.

(4) A proposal for a Board meeting to be included on the agenda of a Board meeting must be submitted in the manner referred to in paragraph (2) at least 14 calendar days before the Board meeting at which it is to be discussed. In justified cases, the Chairman of the Board may shorten this time limit to up to 7 days; the time limit may not be shortened if the proposal concerns a matter pursuant to Article 10(7) of the Statutes of the VŠE.

(5) No later than 7 calendar days before the Board meeting, the Secretary of the Board shall make the draft submitted pursuant to paragraph (2) available to the members of the Board in the Board’s information system.

Article 40
Principles of Board deliberations

(1) Meetings of the Board shall be held at least four times during the academic year.

(2) The Chairman of the Board shall convene a meeting if so provided by the Act, this internal regulation or if at least one-third of all members of the Board so request.

(3) The invitation to the Board meeting, including the draft agenda approved by the Chairman of the Board, must be sent to the Board members by the Secretary of the Board or an authorised employee of the Quality Assurance Department at least 14 days before the date of the Board meeting; in justified cases, the Chairman of the Board may shorten this period to 7 days. The Board shall decide on the agenda.

(4) The Chairman may, under the conditions set out in Article 36a, permit participation in a meeting by distance means. He/she shall inform the Board of this decision at the beginning of the meeting.

(5) The minutes of the Board meeting shall contain the adopted resolutions and decisions on which a vote was taken, in the verbatim text of the proposal and with the result of the vote (number of votes in favour, against, abstentions). The Secretary of the Board, or the person who took the minutes, shall make the minutes available in electronic form to all members of the Board without undue delay, who may add any comments to the minutes within 3 calendar days. The Chairman of the Board, in cooperation with the Secretary of the Board, shall deal with the comments and inform the commenting Board members of the outcome. The final version of the Board minutes shall be published within 7 calendar days of the minutes being made available.

Article 41
Voting provisions

(1) The Board shall have a quorum if an absolute majority of all members of the Board is present at a meeting, with the exception of discussions on matters pursuant to Article 10(7) of the Statutes of the VŠE, where the presence of at least two-thirds of the members of the Board are required for a quorum.

(2) Unless the Board decides otherwise, voting shall be conducted in public. A proposal for a secret ballot shall be decided in public.

(3) Members of the Board shall vote either “for the proposal” or “against the proposal”. A different expression of will shall mean that the Board member is abstained from voting.

(4) Proposals shall be voted on in the order in which they are submitted, except for a proposal for a secret ballot under paragraph (2), which shall have priority.

(5) In the case of a public vote, the vote is taken by a show of hands or via an application in the VŠE Information System. In the case of a secret ballot, the vote shall be cast via an application in the VŠE Information System.

(6) Voting via the application in the VŠE Information System takes place at a time set by the Chairman. At the end of the voting session, the Chairman shall inform the voters of the result of the voting, which he/she shall also confirm by signing the protocol on the result of the voting.

(7) Any member of the Board may object to the conduct or result of a vote during or immediately after the vote. The Board shall decide on such objection; if it sustains the objection, the vote shall be repeated.

(8) Unless otherwise provided by the Act or these Rules of Procedure, a proposal shall be approved if a majority of the members of the Board present and voting are in favour of it.

(9) A proposal in a matter pursuant to Article 10(7) of the Statutes of the VŠE shall be approved if an absolute majority of all members of the Board vote in favour of it.

(10) A member of the Board shall not take part in a vote on a matter pursuant to Article 10(7) of the Statutes of the VŠE if he/she is the Chair of the Scientific Board submitting the proposal or is the guarantor of the study programme to which the vote relates.

(11) In justified cases, the Chairman of the Board may decide on a per rollam vote. A per rollam vote cannot be taken on proposals referred to in Article 10(7) of the Statutes of the VŠE and in Part Three of this internal regulation. Per rollam voting shall take place via an application in the VŠE Information System and under the following conditions:

  1. Per rollam voting takes place via an application in the VŠE Information System.
  2. The Chairman of the Board shall send all members of the Board a draft resolution on the matter, including the relevant supporting documents, and shall give them a deadline within which the members of the Board may discuss the draft
  3. A resolution shall be approved if a majority of those voting in favour of the proposal and a majority of all members of the Board are present.
  4. The Chairman of the Board shall announce the result of the per rollam vote at the next Board meeting or shall announce it electronically to all Board members. He/she shall also confirm the result of the vote by signing the protocol on the result of the vote.

Part Five
Final Provisions

Article 42
Final Provisions

(1) This internal regulation was approved pursuant to Section 9(1)(b)(3) of the AS VŠE Act on 19 June 2017.

(2) This internal regulation shall enter into force on the date of registration by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports and shall come into force on 1 September 2017.

***

Amendments to the Rules for the System of Quality Assurance of Educational, Creative and Related Activities and Internal Evaluation of the Quality of Educational, Creative and Related Activities of the Prague University of Economics and Business (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”) were approved pursuant to Section 9(1)(b) of the Act No. 111/1998 Coll., on Higher Education Institutions and on Amendment to Other Acts (the Higher Education Act), as amended, by the Academic Senate of the Prague University of Economics and Business on 25 March 2019, 23 November 2020 and 12 December 2022.

Amendments to the Rules come into force pursuant to Section 36(4) of the Higher Education Act on the date of registration by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports.

Ing. Marek Stříteský, Ph.D. v. r.
Chairman of the AS VŠE

doc. Ing. Petr Dvořák, Ph.D. v. r.
Rector of the VŠE