Chair of the Course Council and Quality Management and Review Group

For each Degree Program (CdS), responsibility for the educational offering and its quality lies with the Chairman of the Course Council (CCS), supported by the Quality Assurance and Review Group, which assists in the preparation of the Review Reports.

Each CdS must ensure a continuous commitment to improvement, understood as the ability to aim for increasingly higher-value results by setting educational objectives aligned with the best national and international standards.

It is the task of each CdS (in coordination with the Department) to define and implement the procedures necessary to achieve these objectives and to carry out the required monitoring.

It is the responsibility and duty of the Chairman of the Course Council to prepare:

the Annual Study Programme Form (SUA-CdS)
the Annual Monitoring Form (SMA)
the Cyclical Review Report (RCR)

Annual Study Programme Form (SUA-CdS)

The SUA-CdS is an online public form where each study programme collects information on its activities.
The SUA-CdS must:

state the content and teaching methods
set clear expectations about learning outcomes and the programme’s ability to achieve them
create a public space where stakeholders can access information and form an informed judgment.

The Quality Assurance Committee (PQA), through its Support Unit, makes sure all necessary data are available for completing the SUA-CdS.

Annual Monitoring Form (SMA)

The SMA replaces the Annual Review Report (RAR) and contains the indicators provided by ANVUR to universities by the end of June.

The annual monitoring is a key step in the Quality Assurance (QA) process. Its purpose is to verify the adequacy of the learning objectives set by the Course Council (CdS), the alignment between those objectives and the results achieved, and the overall effectiveness of the programme, including graduate employment outcomes.

Analyzing the indicators and comparing them with national and regional benchmarks helps identify potential critical issues.
The CdS must determine the causes, implement corrective and improvement actions, and then evaluate their effectiveness.

Annual Review Report (RAR) until 2016

The RAR resulted from a structured, periodic process designed to check the adequacy and alignment of learning objectives and the effectiveness of CdS management.

The RAR documented, analyzed, and critically assessed in detail:

the effects of corrective actions announced in previous RARs
strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement identified in the academic year under review
corrective actions on critical issues, necessary changes, and measures to consolidate and improve existing practices

The RAR was the central QA tool for each CdS.
It was prepared and discussed collectively by the Review Group, including student representatives.
It was presented, discussed, and approved by the Course Council (CdS) or equivalent body.

The RAR had to include a critical review of the data provided by the Quality Assurance Committee (PQA) and consider the report from the Teachers–Students Joint Committee (CPDS), as well as feedback from faculty and students.

Corrective actions outlined in the RAR had to be concrete, and the CdS was responsible for implementing them within a defined timeframe.
The PQA, with the support of the Department Quality Manager for Education (RQDF), monitored these actions, while the CPDS evaluated their effectiveness.

Cyclical Review Report (RCR)

The RCR is prepared periodically, depending on the duration of the Course Council (CdS) programme, and always in preparation for a scheduled accreditation visit.
Its purpose is to evaluate the validity of the learning objectives and the management system used by the CdS.

It examines:

the relevance of the educational demand underlying the CdS
the target professional profiles and their required skills
the alignment of learning outcomes expected by the CdS as a whole and by individual courses
the effectiveness of the CdS management system

For each of these elements, the RCR documents, analyzes, and comments on:

the effects of corrective actions announced in previous RCRs
strengths and areas for improvement identified during the period under review and in the outlook for the following period
corrective actions addressing critical issues, necessary changes, and measures aimed at achieving improvements

Chairs of Degree Programs

Bachelor’s Degree in Applied Physics

Antonio Pietro Grassi - presidente.triennale.fisica@uniupo.it

Bachelor’s Degree in Computer Science

Stefania Montani - presidente.triennale.informatica@uniupo.it

Bachelor’s Degree in Chemistry

Katia Sparnacci - presidente.triennale.chimica@uniupo.it

Bachelor’s Degree in Biological Sciences

Maria Angela Masini - presidente.triennale.scienzebiologiche@uniupo.it

Master’s Degree in Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation

Alessio Bottrighi - presidente.magistrale.intelligenzaartificiale@uniupo.it

Master’s Degree in Chemical Sciences

Maurizio Cossi - presidente.magistrale.scienzechimiche@uniupo.it

Master’s Degree in Biology

Elisa Gamalero - presidente.magistrale.biologia@uniupo.it