When preparing information on this subject, entities must remember that the evaluation team conducts the evaluation according to the following detailed evaluation criteria that are specified in §2.5 of the ordinance of the Polish Minister of Education and Science of 27 September 2021 on the evaluation of the quality of education at doctoral schools:
- methods and criteria of appointing and changing supervisors and auxiliary supervisors (hereinafter jointly described as ‘supervisors’);
- methods for ensuring high-quality collaboration between doctoral students and supervisors, including strategies for resolving conflicts between them;
- methods for providing doctoral students—including those who have disabilities and those who are parents—with appropriate conditions and support in pursuing their education programme and individual research plans, and in preparing doctoral dissertations, ensuring access to necessary infrastructure;
- the involvement of renowned specialists from outside the entity in supporting doctoral students’ scientific activities, including the provision of scientific or artistic guidance to doctoral students;
- the reliability of reviews and evaluations of the work of supervisors, as well as measures taken by the entity to enhance the quality of their work.
Entities should provide comprehensive information that enables the evaluation team to conduct a thorough assessment of the quality of scientific or artistic guidance offered to doctoral students at the doctoral school. To achieve this, entities must specify the areas to which the criteria mentioned above apply.
Entities are required to describe the method and criteria for appointing or changing supervisors. Descriptions should justify whether the measures adopted ensure that doctoral students are paired with supervisors who possess sufficiently high supervisory competencies, and whether optimal supervisors are assigned to the research issues that are central to their doctoral theses. Descriptions should also specify whether these measures contribute to greater scientific and artistic potential that emerges from the collaboration between supervisors and doctoral students. Special consideration should be given to the circumstances that permit the replacement of supervisors, the implemented solutions in addressing such situations, and their ramifications.
Entities should specify the requirements imposed on supervisors regarding the guidance of doctoral students and the support of their scientific and artistic development. Descriptions should also include information on the nature and scope of scientific and artistic guidance that supervisors provide to doctoral students, how such guidance enhances the students’ scientific and artistic development, including transversal skills, and how it supports their integration into the academic community.
The report must specify how entities analyse the work of supervisors, how they identify areas of scientific and artistic guidance that require improvement or modification, and what solutions they implement to enhance and maintain the quality of guidance.
In addition, entities should describe doctoral schools’ methods of resolving conflicts between doctoral students and supervisors, specify to what extent all parties involved in the educational process are aware of such solutions, and evaluate the potential effects.
Entities must describe the conditions, such as access to necessary infrastructure, and the type of support provided to doctoral students to enable them to pursue their education programme and individual research plans, and to prepare high-quality doctoral dissertations. This issue should also be described in relation to doctoral students who have disabilities and those who are parents or legal guardians.
Entities should describe whether they invite renowned experts from other institutions to collaborate in providing scientific and artistic guidance or to engage in activities that support doctoral students in their research endeavours, as well as to what extent such experts enhance the potential of particular doctoral schools. If there is no collaboration or if its scope is limited, entities must describe and justify the reasons behind such circumstances.
The information presented by an entity can be supported with quantitative data and relevant commentaries. Entities may also provide other information that they deem relevant to the evaluation of the quality of scientific and artistic guidance provided to students at their doctoral schools.
The entities’ descriptions should conclude with self-evaluations.