Accreditation is a quality label for degree programmes. Just as your car needs to be inspected each year, our degree programmes also need to be assessed (‘accredited’) every six years by an inspection authority. The current accreditation for all legal degree programmes offered at our faculty will expire on 31 January 2025, with the exception of the accreditation for the Law & Society master’s programme, which will expire on 1 October 2025.

The entire review process, from preparation to oversight, is conducted by the Education Board (comprising the Vice Dean for Education and Programme Directors) and the Education Policy department. If you have a question about the review, send an email to VisitatieJuridischeOpleidingen2024@law.leidenuniv.nl.

The independent accreditation body Accreditation Organisation of the Netherlands and Flanders (NVAO) was established by law in mid-2002 for the specific purpose of accrediting higher education programmes. Members of this body are appointed and dismissed by the Dutch Minister of Education, Science and Culture.

No, an independent panel of experts will conduct the official review of our degree programmes between 10 and 12 June 2024. Over these three days, the Review Committee will talk to students, lecturers, Programme Boards, the Board of Examiners and alumni. It will then set out its findings in an assessment report. Through the Executive Board, the report will be sent to the NVAO, which will subsequently assess both the findings set out in the report and the method used by the Review Committee to conduct its assessment. If both components are found to be satisfactory, accreditation will be granted.

The Assessment Framework (the NVAO’s ‘assessment framework for limited programme assessment’) sets out the requirements that the degree programmes need to satisfy. Degree programmes are assessed using four criteria: 1) intended learning outcomes; 2) teaching environment; 3) testing and assessment; and 4) learning outcomes achieved. For each criterion, the degree programme is rated ‘satisfactory’, ‘partially satisfactory’ or ‘unsatisfactory’. The programme is then given a final rating of ‘positive’, ‘positive subject to conditions’ or ‘negative’. ‘Positive subject to conditions’ means that the degree programme has up to two years to make changes as part of an improvement plan.

The implications are serious. Failing to achieve accreditation means that a degree programme will lose its right to receive funding, its right to accept first-year students and its right to issue degrees and certificates. Furthermore, if a student is doing a degree programme that is not accredited, they will lose their right to student finance.

Prior to the review, the degree programmes will complete a self-assessment in which they describe the programme and analyse its strengths and areas for improvement. The programmes need to show that they are open to developments in the outside world, as well as feedback from students and lecturers, and make changes where necessary.

Afterwards, panels (18, in this case) will need to be put together that will have discussions with the committee between 10 and 12 June. All involved parties will need to be informed and all practical matters will need to be arranged over the remaining days that the committee is here.

The committee will examine the self-assessments we have supplied and, during its review, assess whether what is demonstrated in the self-assessments is also reflected in its discussions with the involved parties. For a selection of courses, it will also look at the teaching materials used, examination assignments including the relevant course assessment matrix and model answers, course descriptions and Brightspace environments. It will also look at a number of sample theses to assess whether the level of the work submitted is high enough.

Preparations for the review have now been underway for a long time. Following discussions in various participation bodies, the self-assessments have been finalised and submitted to the Review Committee. Currently, the panels are being put together and provided with information. Once the review has taken place in June, most of our work is done. We will receive the committee’s draft report at the end of the summer. On the last day of the review, the committee will give us public verbal feedback on its findings.

The review and accreditation will inevitably result in work for us, as does our compliance with all of the criteria set out in the NVAO framework. This process allows us to account for how we spend education funding and gives us an opportunity to reflect together every few years on the objectives we aim to achieve through our programmes, our educational vision for our programmes and the quality and implementation of our teaching and education. Due to our many other work commitments, it would be easy to let this opportunity pass us by. Nevertheless, the review and accreditation process does involve a lot of administration and other work. Though we endeavour to ease the burden put on academic staff and students through this whole process, our staff and students are crucial in providing a complete, honest picture of the programmes and courses offered at our faculty.

Needless to say, we will be doing all we can at our faculty to help get our legal degree programmes and Law & Society reaccredited. If we continue to make a collective effort to achieve this over the coming months, we can look ahead to the committee’s final decision with full confidence.