1
INTERNAL REGULATION OF JANÁČEK ACADEMY OF MUSIC AND
PERFORMING ARTS IN BRNO
Of 21 August 2017
Rules of the system for the assurance of the quality of educational, creative and related
activities and internal evaluation of the quality of educational, creative and related
activities
The Academic Senate approved upon the proposal of His Magnificence Rector prof. Ing.
MgA. Ivo Medek, Ph.D., this internal regulation of Janáček Academy of Music and
Performing Arts in Brno:
PREAMBLE
The general aim of the quality assurance system is to help Janáček Academy of Music
and Performing Arts in Brno remain a prosperous and open arts university which is able to
responsibly fulfil its educational, artistic, professional as well as social roles. The objective of
the quality assurance system is to develop the quality of educational, artistic and other
creative and related activities and thereby contribute to the fulfilment of the strategic goals
and the expectations of various stakeholders. The goal is also to regularly evaluate the results
of all activities, particularly in comparison with Czech as wells foreign higher education
institutions and other external entities and use the results of the evaluation for the
improvement and development of Janáček Academy of Music and Performing Arts in Brno.
The major stakeholders at Janáček Academy of Music and Performing Arts in Brno are the
applicants, students, employees, graduates, employers, private, public and non-profit sector
institutions (Czech as well as foreign), and in a wider perspective also the general public, the
state and the society.
The assurance of the quality of educational, creative and related activities means the
process of defining a goal, choosing a suitable method for achieving the goal, achievement of
the goal and consideration of improvements. The quality assurance system as a whole has four
basic phases including planning, implementation, evaluation and improvement. Quality
assurance is based on a cyclic repetition of mutually related activities at regular time intervals.
Quality evaluation is an integral part of the quality assurance system and is based on the
comparison of the results achieved with the defined goals, on the monitoring of the fulfilment
of the requirements and the expectations of the stakeholders and monitoring of fulfilment of
basic standards for improvement purposes.
PART ONE
LEGAL PROVISIONS
Article 1
Legal Regulations and System Rules
(1) The rules of the system for the assurance of the quality of educational, creative and
related activities and internal evaluation of the quality of educational, creative and related
activities (hereinafter the “Rules”) and its essentials are provided for primarily by Section 77b
of Act no. 111/1998 Coll., on Higher Education Institutions and on Amendment and
Supplement to Some Other Acts (Act on Universities), as amended by later regulations.
(2) The Rules provide for the assurance of the quality of educational activities and
artistic, scientific, development and innovation or other creative activities (hereinafter only as
2
“creative activities”) and related activities. In accordance with the Act on Universities the
Rules define the competences and the obligations of the bodies, the senior employees and the
members of the bodies of JAMU and its units in the assurance of the quality of educational,
creative and related activities (hereinafter the “Quality Assurance System”) and in internal
evaluation of the quality of educational, creative and related activities (hereinafter as “internal
quality evaluation”) at Janáček Academy of Music and Performing Arts in Brno (hereinafter
abbreviated as “JAMU”).
PART TWO
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article 2
Initial Provisions
(1) The Quality Assurance System and Internal Quality Evaluation are necessary for
due performance of the activities for which JAMU has been established.
(2) JAMU is obligated to maintain and improve the Quality Assurance System and its
Internal Quality Evaluation processes.
Article 3
Purpose
The purpose of the assurance and internal evaluation of quality is to support the
development of JAMU in line with the European conceptualization of the quality of university
education, creative and related activities which contribute to the development of individuals
and their preparation for life in an increasingly more complex society as well as teachers, their
development and collaboration with students in a free academic environment and the
preparation of graduates who will be able to establish themselves on the international labour
market and who will be able to work with the latest discoveries, preserve, propagate and push
forward the results so far achieved by mankind in the domain of arts, research, culture and
society.
Article 4
Definition of Certain Terms
(1) Quality means the fulfilment of the mission and the goals which JAMU has
defined for itself in its activities or improving the usual practices.
(2) Quality assurance means a systematic care for, maintenance and improvement
of the quality of educational, artistic and other creative and thereto related activities.
(3) Quality evaluation means the verification of whether and to what extent JAMU
is able to fulfil its mission and goals which it has defined for itself in its activities.
Article 5
Basis
3
(1) The Quality Assurance System and Internal Quality Evaluation are based on
JAMU Strategic Plan for Educational and Creative Activities (hereinafter the “Strategic
Plan”) and continually respond to the latest developments in academic communities and the
initiatives of the bodies of JAMU and its units.
(2) The Quality Assurance System and Internal Quality Evaluation further rely on
the principles of the European higher education, being based on the Standards and Guidelines
for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area) and take into account other
national or international standards for the activity of higher education institutions.
(3) During the assurance and internal evaluation of the quality of its activities
JAMU collaborates with other higher education institutions, public authorities and other
public institutions in the Czech Republic as well as abroad and also avails itself of its
membership in professional associations and communities and its involvement in international
networks.
Article 6
Principles
(1) The assurance and internal evaluation of quality respect the internal culture and
environment of the faculties and other units and the specifics of education in Arts. Where the
subject-matter of the evaluation is the activity of faculties, other units or workplaces of
JAMU, these entities shall always take part in the evaluation and comment on the results.
(2) The evaluation rules and procedures are published in the public section of
JAMU website. Evaluation
a) proceeds in a transparent manner and is based on substantive, professional and ethical
criteria,
b) relies in particular on
1. qualitative data, is always embedded in context and rests in the critical
evaluation of the established facts,
2. the evaluation of artistic and other creative results of education and the
feedback from academic workers, students, graduates and other relevant agents.
(3) An integral part of each evaluation is the recommendations for further
development of the assessed degree programme, faculty or JAMU unit. If any deficiencies are
identified, a time limit for their removal is granted. After the expiry of this time limit a
subsequent evaluation or subsequent review is carried out depending on the nature of the
matter.
Article 7
Basis of Quality Assurance System and Internal Quality Evaluation
The quality assurance system and internal quality evaluation are built on
a) a system of internal regulations and internal standards,
b) a procedural management system which is composed by major, controlling and
auxiliary processes. The details about the creation of the processes and their evaluation
are set out in rector’s directive,
c) internal system of controls consisting of management control and internal audit,
including a risk management system, the aim of which is to create conditions for a
reasonable, efficient and purposeful performance of the activities for which JAMU has
4
been established, including a timely submission of information on the occurrence of
deficiencies and on the measures adopted for their removal. The details on the status
and the competences of the individual components of the internal system of controls are
set out in rector's directive,
d) financial, personnel and information resources earmarked for the implementation and
evaluation of educational, creative and related activities. The manner of reserving,
allocating and assessing the financial, personnel and information resources is defined in
the relevant internal standards.
Article 8
Basis of Evaluation
(1) Internal quality evaluation relies as a rule on:
a) strategic, conceptual, summary, analytical and other documents of JAMU, faculties and
other units,
b) Government Order no. 274/2016 Coll., on Accreditation Standards in Higher Education
(hereinafter as “Accreditation Standards”) and Government Order no. 275/2016 Coll.,
on Fields of Study in Higher Education,
c) data from the information systems of JAMU, faculties or other units or other public
sources, or sources available to JAMU,
d) internal evaluation reports prepared as a rule on the basis of ready-made framework
plan,
e) reporting of the results of artistic and scientific work,
f) artistic and other creative results of education and their evaluation,
g) qualitative semi-structured and non-structured interviews,
h) questionnaire surveys,
i) expert evaluations.
(2) Evaluation further leans on the methodological materials approved by the
Internal Evaluation Board which specify the essentials of and the procedures for the assurance
and internal evaluation of quality.
PART THREE
QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEM AND INTERNAL QUALITY EVALUATION
TITLE I
STRATEGY
Article 9
General Provisions
(1) JAMU strategy of for the purposes of these Rules means the basis, values,
specific, measurable and feasible objectives and their indicators described:
a) in the JAMU strategic plan and the annual plan for the implementation of the JAMU
strategic plan,
b) in the JAMU institutional plan.
5
(2) JAMU strategy for the purposes of these Rules also means the basis, values,
specific, measurable and feasible objectives of faculties and their indicators described in the
Strategic plan for educational and creative activities of a faculty (hereinafter as “faculty
strategic plan”) and the annual plan for the implementation of the faculty strategic plan
prepared in line with the JAMU strategic plan.
(3) The details of the creation and evaluation of the JAMU strategy are set out in a
rector’s directive.
Article 10
Creation of JAMU Strategic Plan
(1) The person responsible to the rector for the creation of the JAMU strategic plan
is the relevant vice-rector who prepares the JAMU strategic plan with the involvement of the
representatives of faculties, the academic senate, students, other members of the academic
community and possibly also other units of JAMU and other persons.
(2) The rector shall discuss the draft of the JAMU strategic plan prior to its
submission to the JAMU Academic Senate (hereinafter only as “JAMU AS”) to:
a) JAMU management composed of the rector, vice-rectors, the bursar and other persons
as the rector may decide (hereinafter as “JAMU management”),
b) the Rector’s Council,
c) JAMU Artistic Board.
(3) After discussion under clause (2) the draft of the JAMU strategic plan is
approved upon rector’s proposal by the JAMU AS. The rector shall make the draft of the
JAMU strategic plan accessible to the members of the academic community at least 7
calendar days before its discussion in the JAMU AS in a manner enabling remote access.
(4) The draft of the JAMU strategic plan after approval by the JAMU AS is further
approved by the JAMU Management Board.
(5) After approval by the JAMU Management Board the rector discusses the draft
of the JAMU strategic plan with the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (hereinafter the
“Ministry”) within the time limits prescribed by the minister of education, youth and sports
(hereinafter the “Minister”).
(6) The JAMU strategic plan is published by the relevant vice-rector within the
deadline and in the form defined by the Minister.
(7) This procedure similarly applies to the preparation of the annual plan for the
implementation of the JAMU strategic plan.
Article 11
Creation of JAMU Institutional Plan
(1) The person responsible to the rector for the creation of the JAMU institutional
plan is the relevant vice-rector who prepares a draft of the JAMU institutional plan in line
with the conditions of the institutional programme for public universities announced by the
Ministry.
(2) Prior to the submission of the draft of the JAMU institutional plan to the
Ministry the rector shall discuss the draft with:
a) JAMU management,
6
b) the Rector’s Council,
c) JAMU AS.
Article 12
Creation of Faculty Strategic Plan
(1) The person responsible to the rector for the creation of a faculty strategic plan
is the dean.
(2) The dean prepares the faculty strategic plan in a manner similar to the
preparation of the JAMU strategic plan.
(3) The dean discusses the draft of the faculty strategic plan with the rector. The
dean handles rector’s objections.
(4) After discussion of the draft of the faculty strategic plan with the rector and
prior to its submission to JAMU AS the dean shall discuss it with
a) the faculty management composed of the dean, vice-deans, the secretary and other
persons as the dean may decide (hereinafter as “faculty management”),
b) the Dean’s Council,
c) the Faculty Artistic Board.
(5) After discussion under clause (4) the draft of the faculty strategic plan is
approved upon dean’s proposal by the faculty academic senate. The dean shall make the draft
of the faculty strategic plan accessible to the members of the academic community at least 7
calendar days before its discussion in the faculty academic senate in a manner enabling
remote access.
(6) This procedure similarly applies to the preparation of the annual plan for the
implementation of the faculty strategic plan.
TITLE II
STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION
Article 13
General Provisions
(1) Strategy implementation evaluation means for the purposes of these Rules a
regular evaluation as to whether the basis, values, specific, measurable and feasible objectives
and their indicators defined in the documents under Article 9 clause (1) and (2) are achieved.
(2) Strategy implementation evaluation involves:
a) evaluation of the implementation of the JAMU Strategic Plan and the annual plan for its
implementation,
b) evaluation of the implementation of the JAMU Institutional Plan,
c) evaluation of the implementation of the faculty strategic plans and the annual plans for
their implementation.
(3) Strategy implementation evaluation further involves:
a) annual report on JAMU activities,
7
b) annual report on JAMU management,
c) annual reports on faculty activities,
d) annual report on faculty management.
Article 14
JAMU Strategic Plan and JAMU Institutional Plan Implementation Evaluation
(1) The evaluation of the implementation of JAMU Strategic Plan and JAMU
Institutional Plan takes place on continual and summary basis.
(2) Continual evaluation is performed by the rector on the basis of materials
provided by the relevant vice-rector after discussion with JAMU management at least once in
a year. The rector shall take the results of the evaluation into account when preparing the
annual plan for the implementation of the JAMU Strategic Plan and the annual update of the
JAMU Institutional Plan.
(3) The rector performs the summary evaluation by assessing on the basis of
materials provided by the relevant vice-rector the implementation of the JAMU Strategic Plan
and the JAMU Institutional Plan for the previous period and shall take the results of the
evaluation into account when preparing a new JAMU Strategic Plan and a new JAMU
Institutional Plan.
Article 15
Faculty Strategic Plan Implementation Evaluation
(1) The evaluation of the implementation of the faculty strategic plan and the
annual plan of its implementation takes place on continual and summary basis.
(2) Continual evaluation is performed by the dean at least once in a year. After
discussion with the rector the dean shall take the results of the evaluation into account when
preparing the annual plan for the implementation of the faculty strategic plan.
(3) The dean performs the summary evaluation by assessing the implementation of
the faculty strategic plan and the annual plan of its implementation and, after discussion with
the rector, shall take the results of the evaluation into account when preparing a new faculty
strategic plan.
Article 16
Preparation of Annual Report on JAMU Activity
(1) The person responsible to the rector for the preparation of the annual report on
JAMU activity is the relevant vice-rector who prepares the draft of the annual report on
JAMU activity in compliance with and with the essentials defined by law and the Ministry.
(2) The rector shall discuss the draft of the annual report on JAMU activity prior to
its submission to the JAMU AS with:
a) JAMU management,
b) the Rector’s Council,
c) JAMU Artistic Board.
(3) After discussion under clause (2) the draft of the annual report on JAMU
activity is approved upon rector’s proposal by the JAMU AS. The rector shall make the draft
8
of the annual report on JAMU activity accessible to the members of the academic community
at least 7 calendar days before its discussion in the JAMU AS in a manner enabling remote
access.
(4) After approval by the JAMU AS the rector discusses the draft of the annual
report on JAMU activity with the JAMU Management Board.
(5) Annual report on JAMU activity is published by the relevant vice-rector
immediately after its approval under clause (3) and after its discussion under clause (4) in the
public section of the JAMU website.
Article 17
Preparation of Annual Report on JAMU Management
(1) The person responsible to the rector for the preparation of the annual report on
JAMU management is the bursar.
(2) The dean shall discuss the draft of the annual report on JAMU management
prior to its submission to the JAMU AS with:
a) JAMU management,
b) the Rector’s Council.
(3) After discussion under clause (2) the draft of the annual report on JAMU
management is approved upon rector’s proposal by the JAMU AS. The rector shall make the
draft of the annual report on JAMU management accessible to the members of the academic
community at least 7 calendar days before its discussion in the JAMU AS in a manner
enabling remote access.
(4) After approval of the annual report on JAMU management by the JAMU AS
the rector discusses the annual report on JAMU management with the JAMU Management
Board.
(5) Annual report on JAMU management is published by the bursar immediately
after its approval under clause (3) and after its discussion under clause (4) in the public
section of the JAMU website.
Article 18
Preparation of Annual Report on Faculty Activity
(1) The person responsible to the rector for the preparation of the annual report on
faculty activity is the dean.
(2) The dean shall discuss the draft of the annual report on faculty activity prior to
its submission to the faculty academic senate with:
a) the faculty management,
b) the Dean’s Council.
(3) After discussion under clause (2) the draft of the annual report on faculty
activity is approved upon dean’s proposal by the faculty academic senate. The dean shall
make the draft of the annual activity report accessible to the members of the academic
community at least 7 calendar days before its discussion in the faculty academic senate in a
manner enabling remote access.
Article 19
9
Preparation of Annual Report on Faculty Management
(1) The person responsible to the rector for the preparation of the annual report on
faculty management is the dean.
(2) The dean shall discuss the draft of the annual report on faculty management
prior to its submission to the faculty academic senate with:
a) the faculty management,
b) the Dean’s Council.
(3) After discussion under clause (2) the draft of the annual report on faculty
management is approved upon dean’s proposal by the faculty academic senate. The dean shall
make the draft of the annual report of faculty management accessible to the members of the
academic community at least 7 calendar days before its discussion in the faculty academic
senate in a manner enabling remote access.
TITLE III
EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY QUALITY ASSURANCE AND EVALUATION
Division 1
Assurance of Quality of Degree Programme
Section 1
General Provisions
Article 20
(1) JAMU implements Bachelor’s, Master’s and doctoral degree programmes
(hereinafter as “degree programme”).
(2) A degree programme may be implemented
a) on the basis of the accreditation granted by the National Accreditation Office for Higher
Education (hereinafter the “Accreditation Office”), or
b) on the basis of the approval of the degree programme by the Artistic Board, if JAMU
implements the degree programme in a field of study for which it holds institutional
accreditation.
(3) The procedure leading to the granting of a degree programme accreditation
under clause (2)a) is specified in Articles 23 to 29.
(4) The procedure leading to the approval of a degree programme under clause
(2)b) is specified in Articles 35 to 41.
Section 2
Organizational Measures to Secure Degree Programme
Article 21
Guaranteeing Workplace
(1) The guaranteeing workplace is responsible for assurance of the qualify of a
concrete course which is part of a degree programme, in particular for the fulfilment of the
prescribed results of education, for its personnel, financial, material and other aspects.
10
(2) To fulfil this task the dean shall appoint after discussion with the head of the
guaranteeing workplace a guarantor of the course.
Article 22
Degree Programme Guarantor
(1) A degree programme guarantor in particular:
a) coordinates the preparation of the content of the degree programme,
b) supervises the quality of its implementation,
c) assessed and develops the degree programme,
d) prepares the degree programme quality evaluation report and supplement to this report,
e) participates in the internal evaluation of the assurance of the quality of the degree
programme.
(2) The degree programme guarantor is appointed and dismissed by the dean of the
relevant faculty in compliance with the requirements laid down by law and accreditation
standards after discussion in the Artistic Board.
Section 3
Objective of Application for Accreditation of Degree Programme Implemented at
Faculty
Article 23
Annotation of Objective of Degree Programme Accreditation Application
(1) The annotation of the objective of a degree programme accreditation
application (hereinafter as "annotation") is prepared by the dean of the relevant faculty.
Annotation contains in particular:
a) the name of the unit,
b) the name of the degree programme,
c) classification of the degree programme in a field of study,
d) degree programme type,
e) awarded academic degree,
f) degree programme profile,
g) graduate profile,
h) form of studies,
i) standard time of studies,
j) language of studies,
k) proposal for degree programme guarantor,
l) goal of degree programme,
m) justification of need for the degree programme,
n) financial backing,
o) estimated number of accepted applicants,
p) estimated inter-faculty cooperation, its description and manner of arrangement,
q) planned cooperation with other legal entities, their full name, description of cooperation
and manner of its arrangement,
r) compliance with the JAMU strategy.
(2) The dean shall discuss the annotation in the faculty academic senate and the
faculty artistic board. After discussion the dean shall submit the annotation to the rector.
11
Article 24
Approval of Accreditation Application Objective Annotation
(1) Once the rector has received the annotation from the dean, the rector shall
assess through the relevant vice-rector whether the proposed degree programme guarantor
meets the requirements laid down for guarantors by law and the accreditation standards and
shall submit the annotation together with his or her statement to the Rector’s Council.
(2) The Rector’s Council approves the annotation, otherwise the entire procedure
is repeated.
Article 25
Preparation of Objective
(1) After the approval of the annotation the dean shall appoint the guarantor of the
degree programme.
(2) The degree programme guarantor shall prepare the objective of the degree
programme accreditation application (hereinafter the “objective”) in a manner ensuring that
the objective is prepared in accordance with the approved annotation and in line with the
JAMU strategy and in compliance with the requirements imposed on the degree programme
by law, the accreditation standards, these Rules and the applicable internal standards of
JAMU.
Article 26
Approval of Objective by Faculty
(1) The dean submits the objective for approval to the faculty academic senate. If
the faculty academic senate recommends the approval of the objective, the dean shall submit
the objective to the faculty artistic board for approval.
(2) The faculty artistic board approves the objective, otherwise the entire
procedure is repeated. The approved objective is forwarded by the faculty artistic board via
the rector for approval to the JAMU Artistic Board.
Article 27
Approval of Objective by JAMU Artistic Board
(1) The objective is approved by the JAMU Artistic Board. Upon approval, the
objective becomes an application for accreditation of a degree programme (hereinafter the
“accreditation application”).
(2) If the JAMU Artistic Board does not approve the objective, the procedure
under Articles 23 to 26 is repeated.
Article 28
Submission of Accreditation Application
(1) The accreditation application is submitted by the rector.
(2) Once the rector has received from the Accreditation Office the proposal for the
members of the evaluation committee, the rector shall request the relevant artistic board to
give a statement on this proposal.
12
(3) The Accreditation Office is informed on the negative statement on the proposal
for member(s) of the evaluation committee by the rector.
(4) The rector shall inform the dean on the accreditation decision as soon as the
rector has received it.
(5) The decision on the appeal against the Accreditation Office’s decision not to
grant accreditation to a degree programme is made by the rector after discussion with the dean
of the relevant faculty.
Section 4
Objective of Extension of Accreditation of Degree Programme and Objective of
Prolongation of Accreditation of Degree Programme Implemented at Faculty
Article 29
Articles 23 to 28 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the objective of extension of
accreditation of a degree programme and the objective of prolongation of accreditation of
degree programme implemented at faculty.
Section 5
Objective of Institutional Accreditation Application
Article 30
Preparation of the Objective of Institutional Accreditation Application for Field of
Study
(1) The objective of an institutional accreditation application for a field of study
(hereinafter as “institutional accreditation application objective”) is prepared by the rector.
(2) The institutional accreditation application objective is prepared by the
competent vice-rector in a manner ensuring that the institutional accreditation application
objective is prepared in line with the JAMU strategy and in accordance with the requirements
imposed on the institutional accreditation by law, the accreditation standards, these Rules and
the applicable internal standards of JAMU.
Article 31
Evaluation of the Institutional Accreditation Application Objective by Faculty and
Internal Evaluation Board
The institutional accreditation application objective is successively assessed by the
relevant faculty bodies competent to implement the degree programme and subsequently is
submitted by the rector for evaluation to the Internal Evaluation Board. Objectives are
processed by the competent vice-rector.
Article 32
Approval of the Institutional Accreditation Application Objective by JAMU Artistic
Board
(1) The rector shall submit the institutional accreditation application objective for
approval to the JAMU Artistic Board which approves the institutional accreditation objective,
in the opposite case the evaluation of the institutional accreditation objective is repeated.
13
(2) Upon approval of the institutional accreditation objective by JAMU Artistic
Board the institutional accreditation application objective becomes the application for
institutional accreditation (hereinafter as “institutional accreditation application”).
Article 33
Submission of Institutional Accreditation Application
(1) The institutional accreditation application is submitted to the Accreditation
Office by the rector.
(2) Once the rector has received from the Accreditation Office the proposal for the
members of the evaluation committee, the rector shall request the faculty competent to
implement the degree program and the JAMU Artistic Board to give a statement on this
proposal. The Accreditation Office is informed on a negative statement on the proposal for
member(s) of the evaluation committee by the rector.
(3) The rector shall inform the dean on the accreditation decision as soon as the
rector has received it.
(4) The decision on the appeal against Accreditation Office’s decision not to grant
institutional accreditation to a programme is made by the rector after discussion with the dean
of the relevant faculty.
Section 6
Objective of Extension of Institutional Accreditation
Article 34
Articles 30 to 33 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the objective of extension of
institutional accreditation.
Section 7
Approval of Degree Programme Implemented at Faculty
Article 35
Annotation of Degree Programme Proposal
(1) The annotation of a degree programme proposal is prepared by the dean of the
relevant faculty; Article 23 clause (1) applies mutatis mutandis to the content of the
annotation.
(2) The dean shall discuss the annotation of a degree programme proposal in the
faculty academic senate and the faculty artistic board. After discussion the dean shall submit
the annotation to the rector.
Article 36
Approval of Annotation of Degree Programme Proposal
(1) Once the rector has received the annotation of the degree programme proposal
from the dean, the rector shall assess through the relevant vice-rector whether the proposed
degree programme guarantor meets the requirements laid down for degree programme
guarantors by law and the accreditation standards and shall submit the degree programme
annotation together with his or her statement to the Rector’s Council.
14
(2) The Rector’s Council approves the degree programme annotation, otherwise
the entire procedure is repeated.
Article 37
Preparation of Degree Programme Proposal
(1) After the approval of a degree programme annotation the dean shall appoint the
guarantor of the degree programme.
(2) The degree programme guarantor shall prepare the proposal for the degree
programme in a manner ensuring that the degree programme proposal is prepared in
accordance with the approved annotation of the degree program, in line with the JAMU
strategy and in compliance with the requirements imposed on the degree programme by law,
the accreditation standards, these Rules and the applicable internal standards of JAMU.
Article 38
Approval of Degree Programme Proposal by Faculty
(1) The dean submits the degree programme proposal for approval to the faculty
academic senate.
(2) If the faculty academic senate recommends the approval of the degree
programme proposal, the dean shall submit the degree programme proposal to the faculty
artistic board for approval. The faculty artistic board approves the degree programme
proposal, otherwise the approval of the degree programme proposal is repeated.
(3) The approved degree programme proposal is forwarded by the faculty artistic
board via the rector for approval to the JAMU Artistic Board.
Article 39
Approval of Degree Programme by JAMU Artistic Board
(1) The degree programme is approved by the JAMU Artistic Boards.
(2) If the degree programme is not approved, the procedure under Articles 35 to 38
is repeated.
Article 40
Degree Programme Approval Validity Period
(1) As a rule, a degree programme is approved by the JAMU Artistic Boards for
the period of 10 years.
(2) The JAMU Artistic Board may approve a shorter period if:
a) the given degree programme is approved for the first time,
b) the validity period of the degree programme is approved with regard to the satisfaction
of the need to give students the chance to complete their studies,
c) the degree programme’s 10-year approval period does not give sufficient guarantee of
due assurance and development of the study programme in terms of personnel, finance
and material,
d) as specified in the proposal for the degree programme.
Section 8
15
Approval of Extension of Degree Programme and Approval of Prolongation of Degree
Programme Implemented at Faculty
Article 41
Articles 35 to 40 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the approval of extension of a degree
programme and the approval of prolongation of a degree programme implemented at faculty.
Division 2
Degree Programme Quality Evaluation
Article 42
General Provisions
(1) Evaluation of the quality of a degree programme is an inseparable part of the
systematic assurance of the quality of educational activities.
(2) Degree programme quality evaluation reflects the requirements of various
stakeholders, takes into account demographic and economic conditions and the requirements
imposed on graduates by potential employers.
(3) Degree programme quality evaluation is performed on continual and summary
basis and is based in particular on the monitoring and evaluation of
a) compliance of the implemented degree programme with the JAMU strategy,
b) fulfilment of the declared objectives of the degree programme, including results of
learning,
c) application of the principle of student-focused education and evaluation which takes
into account the expectations of students, satisfaction of their needs and their
satisfaction with the form, content and organization of the studies, the information and
technological conditions as well as auxiliary services,
d) assurance of equal evaluation of students in the course of studies on the basis of predefined
criteria and the manner of their evaluation,
e) the conditions, the progress and the result of the admission procedure and the students’
progress in their studies,
f) the results of the evaluation of qualification works and qualification results and projects,
g) the success rate in the admission procedure, studies failure rate, due completion rate and
the prospects of the graduates of a degree programme,
h) pedagogical, material and technical conditions of a study programme,
i) definition of the weaknesses and strengths, the risks and opportunities for further
development of a degree programme,
j) quality of teachers,
k) evaluation of the international scope of a degree programme,
l) information and technical conditions of studies and auxiliary services for students,
m) information on professional opportunities for graduates,
n) the manner of publication of information on the progress of implemented degree
programmes.
(4) The results of the continual and summary evaluation of degree programme
quality are reflected in the JAMU strategy.
16
(5) Reports on the continual and summary evaluation of degree programme quality
are sent by the competent persons or bodies to the Internal Evaluation Board for information
purposes.
Article 43
Continual and Summary Evaluation
(1) Continual evaluation of degree programme quality is performed once a year.
(2) Summary evaluation of degree programme quality is performed once in five
years.
(3) Continual and summary evaluation of degree programme quality is performed
by the Internal Evaluation Board.
(4) The basis of the continual and summary evaluation of degree programme
quality is the degree programme quality evaluation report which is prepared by the degree
programme guarantor for each degree programme.
(5) Based on the degree programme quality evaluation report the Internal
Evaluation Board stipulates measures to remove deficiencies, if any, and informs the degree
programme guarantor on their adoption.
Article 44
Corrective Measures
The Internal Evaluation Board may, in relation to a degree programme approved under
Article 39 in the event that the measures for the removal of deficiencies are not fulfilled or on
the basis of its own findings depending on the nature of the matter, prohibit:
a) the admission of additional applicants to studies in a given degree programme, or
b) the implementation of a given degree programme.
Division 3
Lifelong Learning Programme Quality Assurance and Evaluation
Article 45
Preparation of Lifelong Learning Programme
(1) Lifelong learning is implemented within the lifelong learning programme.
(2) The lifelong learning programme is subject to the approval by the faculty
artistic board to which it is submitted by the dean after its approval by the faculty
management.
(3) More detailed conditions of the lifelong learning programme are set out in the
Statutes.
Article 46
Lifelong Learning Programme Quality Evaluation
The evaluation of the quality of lifelong learning programmes involves as a rule:
a) feedback from the participants and the graduates regarding the quality of the education,
the organization and the conditions of the lifelong learning programme,
b) monitoring and evaluation of the data collected in particular during the preparation of
the annual report on JAMU activities.
17
TITLE IV
ASSURANCE AND EVALUATION OF QUALITY OF HABILITATION
PROCEDURE AND PROFESSOR APPOINTMENT PROCEDURE
Section 1
Assurance of Quality of Habilitation Procedure and Professor Appointment Procedure
Article 47
Draft of Objective of Application for Accreditation of Habilitation Procedure and
Professor Appointment Procedure
(1) The right to implement habilitation procedure and professor appointment
procedure is subject to accreditation which is granted by the Accreditation Office.
(2) The draft of the objective of the application for accreditation of habilitation
procedure and professor appointment procedure at a faculty is prepared by a person who is
appointed and removed by the dean of the relevant faculty from among the persons meeting
the conditions laid down in part three, section B, chapter II, points 4 to 6 and in part four,
section B, chapter II, point 4 of the accreditation standards.
(3) The draft of the objective of the application for accreditation of habilitation
procedure and professor appointment procedure is prepared in the structure defined in Section
82(2) of Act on Universities, in accordance with accreditation standards and these Rules by
the person under clause (2).
(4) The person under clause (2) submits the draft of the objective of the application
for accreditation of habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure to the dean
who decides on the submission of the draft of the objective of the application for accreditation
of habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure to the faculty artistic board. If
the dean does not agree with the draft of the objective of the application for accreditation of
habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure, he or she shall specify how the
draft of the objective of the application for accreditation of habilitation procedure and
professor appointment procedure is to be reworked, in the opposite case the dean shall submit
the draft of the objective of the application for accreditation of habilitation procedure and
professor appointment procedure to the faculty artistic board.
(5) If the faculty artistic board does not agree with the draft of the objective of the
application for accreditation of habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure,
the procedure specified in clauses (2) and (4) is repeated, in the opposite case the faculty
artistic board shall submit the draft of the objective of the application for accreditation of
habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure to the rector.
Article 48
Approval of Objective of Application for Accreditation of Habilitation Procedure and
Professor Appointment Procedure
(1) The objective of the application for accreditation of habilitation procedure and
professor appointment procedure is submitted to the JAMU Artistic Board by the rector on the
basis of a proposal by faculty artistic board.
(2) If the JAMU Artistic Board does not approve the objective of the application
for accreditation of habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure, the rector
shall return the objective of the application for accreditation of habilitation procedure and
professor appointment procedure to the faculty for reworking. The faculty shall rework the
18
objective of the application for accreditation of habilitation procedure and professor
appointment procedure in accordance with the objections of the JAMU Artistic Board.
(3) If the JAMU Artistic Board approves the objective of the application for
accreditation of habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure, the objective of
the application for accreditation of habilitation procedure and professor appointment
procedure becomes an application for accreditation of habilitation procedure and professor
appointment procedure.
Article 49
Submission of Habilitation Procedure and Professor Appointment Procedure
Accreditation Application
(1) The habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure accreditation
application is submitted to the Accreditation Office by the rector.
(2) Once the rector has received from the Accreditation Office the proposal for the
members of the evaluation committee, the rector shall request the relevant dean to give a
statement on this proposal.
(3) The Accreditation Office is informed on a negative statement on the proposal
for member(s) of the evaluation committee by the rector.
(4) The rector shall inform the dean on the accreditation decision as soon as the
rector has received it.
(5) The decision on the appeal against Accreditation Office’s decision not to grant
accreditation to the habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure is made by
the rector after discussion with the dean of the relevant faculty.
Section 2
Habilitation Procedure and Professor Appointment Procedure Quality Evaluation
Article 50
(1) The evaluation of the quality of the habilitation procedure and professor
appointment procedure is performed by the JAMU Artistic Board.
(2) The basis for the habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure
quality evaluation is the report on habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure
quality evaluation which is prepared for each field of habilitation procedure and each field of
processor appointment procedure once in five years by the dean of the relevant faculty. The
report on habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure quality evaluation
includes the summary of all completed habilitation procedures and professor appointment
procedures together with the materials on the progress of the said procedures.
(3) Based on the report on habilitation procedure and professor appointment
procedure quality evaluation the JAMU Artistic Board in particular evaluates whether the
habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure are performed in compliance with
the Habilitation Procedure and Professor Appointment Procedure Regulations, which is an
internal regulation of JAMU, and whether the prerequisites for an objective evaluation of the
pedagogical, artistic and scientific qualifications of the applicant for associate professor and
professor appointments have been ensured.
(4) On the basis of the evaluation under clause (3) the JAMU Artistic Board
stipulates measures to remove deficiencies, if any, and informs the dean of the relevant
faculty on their adoption and monitors their fulfilment.
19
(5) The report on habilitation procedure and professor appointment procedure
quality evaluation, including the measures for removal of deficiencies, is sent by the JAMU
Artistic Board to the Internal Evaluation Board for information purposes.
TITLE V
ASSURANCE AND EVALUATION OF QUALITY OF ARTISTIC AND OTHER
CREATIVE ACTIVITIES
Section 1
Assurance of Quality of Artistic and Other Creative Activities
Article 51
General Provisions
(1) JAMU implements artistic and other creative activities in combination with
educational activities, in international context, applying contemporary methods of creative
activities and with the involvement of its students and in cooperation with partners in
professional circles.
(2) The assurance of the quality of artistic and other creative activities involves:
a) project activities,
b) internal grant scheme,
c) grant support of student activities,
d) mobility of academic and scientific, research and development employees,
e) publishing activities,
f) reporting of the results of artistic and other creative activities,
g) cooperation with partners in professional circles.
Article 52
Project Activities
(1) Project activities involve the identification, preparation and implementation of
projects on national and international level.
(2) The project pre-approval procedure, project post-approval procedure, project
evaluation including the powers and competencies in the management of projects and the
project management and administration database are defined by rector’s directive.
Article 53
Internal Grant Scheme
(1) The internal grant scheme includes the support of:
a) student grant competition,
b) educational and artistic activities,
c) scientific and research activities,
d) publishing activities.
(2) The student grant competition means the competition of student research
projects carried out during the implementation of doctoral or Master's degree programmes
which are directly linked to their education.
20
(3) The support of educational and artistic activities means the support of the
achievement of the results of pedagogical and creative activities of JAMU students and
teachers.
(4) The support of scientific and research activities involves the support of
teachers during the development of their universal scientific and research activities.
(5) Publishing activity means in particular the publishing of periodic or nonperiodic
publications in the physical or electronic form which are reserved primarily for
educational and creative activities.
Article 54
Reporting of Results of Artistic and Other Creative Activities
Reporting of the results of artistic and other creative activities means in particular their
transfer via the registers stipulated by law for the field of the artistic activities as well as the
field of scientific and research activities.
Section 2
Evaluation of Quality of Artistic and Other Creative Activity
Article 55
Internal Evaluation of Quality of Artistic and Other Creative Activity
(1) The evaluation of artistic and other creative activities at JAMU is performed
based on the implemented degree programmes and their specializations.
(2) The evaluation of creative activities respects the different nature of artistic and
other creative results of the individual specializations.
(3) The evaluation of artistic and other creative activities also involves the
evaluation of whether a given artistic specialization is excellent in national or international
comparison.
(4) As a rule, the evaluation of artistic and other creative activities at JAMU relies
on:
a) internal evaluation report on the artistic and other creative activities of faculties
presented by deans,
b) evaluation of artistic and other creative results of education,
c) reporting of the results of artistic and creative work,
d) expert evaluation of the results by independent, internationally recognized experts,
e) artistic and other creative activity quality indicators defined by the methodology of the
Internal Evaluation Board.
Article 56
Artistic and Other Creative Activity Report
(1) The artistic and other creative activity report with view to the specifics of a
faculty and the art fields which it implements describes and evaluates as a rule:
a) the mission, vision and goals in artistic and other creative activities,
b) strategic management of the development of artistic and other creative activities,
c) connection of artistic and other creative activities with educational activities,
d) personnel conditions and increase of qualifications,
e) student artistic and other creative activities with special attention to the students of
doctoral degree programmes,
21
f) university, national and international projects investigated,
g) national and international cooperation in artistic and other creative activities,
h) social significance of artistic and other creative activities,
i) the manner and the results of internal evaluation of artistic and other creative
activities,
j) the weaknesses and strengths, the opportunities and risks in the field of artistic and
other creative activities.
(2) The artistic and other creative activity report is prepared by faculties once in
five years.
(3) Before it is forwarded by the dean to the rector, the artistic and other creative
activity report is subject to the statement of the artistic board of the relevant faculty.
(4) The rector submits the artistic and other creative activity report for statement to
the Internal Evaluation Board. The rector may also ask for the statement of the JAMU Artistic
Board.
(5) The summary of the results of the artistic and other creative activity report is
published in the public section of the JAMU website.
(6) The internal evaluation and assurance of artistic and other creative activities
are specified in rector’s measure which is subject the statement of the Internal Evaluation
Board.
TITLE VI
RELATED ACTIVITIES QUALITY ASSURANCE AND EVALUATION
Section 1
Related Activities Quality Assurance
Article 57
Organization of Related Activities
(1) Related activities are organized by other JAMU units for the needs of the entire
JAMU. The list of other JAMU units is provided in the JAMU Statutes.
(2) The organizational rules of a unit define in particular the unit’s organization
structure, management principles and professional competence.
(3) The organizational rules of a unit are issued by the head of the unit after
approval by the rector.
Section 2
Related Activities Quality Evaluation
Article 58
General Provisions
(1) The evaluation of the quality of related activities is performed on continual and
summary basis.
(2) The results of the continual and summary evaluation of the quality of related
activity at JAMU are reflected in te JAMU strategy and in the educational and creative
activity quality evaluation system.
(3) Reports on the continual and summary evaluation of related activities are sent
by responsible persons or bodies to the Internal Evaluation Board for information purposes.
22
(4) The structure and essentials of the individual reports and the submission
deadlines and the details on the method and course of the related activities quality evaluation
process are specified in a rector’s directive.
Article 59
Continual Evaluation
(1) Continual evaluation is done in such a way that the head of the unit and at the
Rector’s Office the managers subordinated to the rector prepare each year a report on
continual evaluation of the quality of related activities which they submit to the rector.
(2) Based on the submitted report on continual evaluation of the quality of related
activities the rector evaluates the quality of the related activities and proposes and monitors
the fulfilment of measures for the removal of deficiencies, if any.
(3) The head of the unit and at the Rector’s Office the managers subordinated
directly to the rector shall take the results of the continual evaluation into account when
preparing the summary report on the evaluation of the quality of related activities.
Article 60
Summary Evaluation
(1) Summary evaluation is done in such a way that the director of the unit and at
the Rector’s Office the manager subordinated directly to the rector prepare once in five years
a report on summary evaluation of the quality of related activities which they submit to the
rector.
(2) Based on the submitted report on summary evaluation of the quality of related
activities and the statement on this report given by external evaluators, if any, the rector shall
perform a final evaluation of the quality of related activities and propose measures to remove
deficiencies, if any, and shall submit this final evaluation to JAMU management for
discussion.
(3) JAMU management shall discuss the final report on the evaluation of the
quality of related activities and specify and monitor the fulfilment of measures for the
removal of deficiencies, if any.
TITLE VII
SUPPLEMENTARY ACTIVITIES QUALITY ASSURANCE AND EVALUATION
Section 1
Supplementary Activities Quality Assurance
Article 61
General Provisions
(1) The basic prerequisite for the implementation of supplementary activities is
their implementation in line with the mission of JAMU and in connection with educational
activities and creative activities or for a more efficient use of human resources and assets.
(2) Implementation of supplementary activities must not jeopardize the quality of
the implementation of educational and creative activities.
23
(3) Details on the implementation of supplementary activities are set out in a
rector’s directive.
Section 2
Supplementary Activities Quality Evaluation
Article 62
General Provisions
(1) The evaluation of the quality of supplementary activities is performed on
continual and summary basis.
(2) The results of the continual and summary evaluation are reflected by JAMU in
the JAMU strategy and in the system of evaluation of the quality of educational, creative and
related activities.
(3) Reports on continual and summary evaluation of supplementary activities are
sent by the competent persons or bodies to the Internal Evaluation Board for information
purposes.
(4) The structure and essentials of the individual reports and the submission
deadlines and the details on the method and course of the supplementary activities quality
evaluation process are specified in a rector’s directive.
Article 63
Continual Evaluation
(1) Continual evaluation is done in such a way that the head of the unit which
implements the supplementary activity prepares each year a report on continual evaluation of
the quality of the supplementary activity which he or she submits to the bursar.
(2) Based on the submitted report on continual evaluation of the quality of the
supplementary activity the bursar evaluates the quality of the supplementary activity and
proposes and monitors the fulfilment of measures for the removal of deficiencies, if any.
(3) The head of the unit which implements the supplementary activity shall take
the results of the continual evaluation into account when preparing the summary report on the
evaluation of the quality of the supplementary activity.
Article 64
Summary Evaluation
(1) Summary evaluation is done in such a way that the head of the unit which
implements the supplementary activity prepares once in five years a report on summary
evaluation of the quality of the supplementary activity which he or she submits to the bursar.
(2) The bursar may appoint external evaluators to evaluate each report under
clause (1).
(3) Based on the submitted report on summary evaluation of the quality of the
supplementary activity and the statement on this report given by external evaluators, if any,
the bursar shall perform a final evaluation of the quality of the supplementary activity and
propose measures to remove deficiencies, if any, and shall submit this final evaluation
through the rector to JAMU management for discussion.
24
(4) JAMU management shall discuss the final report on the evaluation of the
quality of the supplementary activity and specify and monitor the fulfilment of measures for
the removal of deficiencies, if any.
TITLE VIII
COMPLEX INTERNAL EVALUATION OF QUALITY
Article 65
Course of Complex Internal Quality Evaluation
(1) The course of the complex internal quality evaluation is managed by the
Internal Evaluation Board.
(2) The complex internal quality evaluation takes place at least once in 5 years.
(3) The complex internal quality evaluation is carried out by a team of evaluators
who are appointed by the rector upon the proposal of the Internal Evaluation Board.
Evaluators may be appointed from among JAMU employees or other persons as well.
(4) The results of the complex internal quality evaluation are reflected by JAMU in
the JAMU strategy.
(5) The conclusions of the complex internal quality evaluation, including measures
to correct identified deficiencies, are contained in the complex internal quality evaluation
report.
(6) The complex internal quality evaluation report is updated each year with a
supplement describing the change achieved in quality assurance and evaluation and in the
measures adopted for the correction of identified deficiencies.
(7) The structure and essentials of the internal quality evaluation report and the
supplements to this report (hereinafter the “internal quality evaluation report”) and the details
on the method and course of the complex internal quality evaluation process are specified by
the rector in a directive after discussion in the Internal Evaluation Board.
Article 66
Preparation of Internal Quality Evaluation Report
(1) The internal quality evaluation report is prepared by the Internal Evaluation
Board.
(2) The rector discusses the draft of the internal quality evaluation report before its
submission to JAMU AS with:
a) JAMU management,
b) Rector’s Council,
c) JAMU Artistic Board.
(3) The objectives of the bodies or persons mentioned in clause (2) are handled by
the rector after discussion in the Internal Evaluation Board.
(4) After discussion under clause (2) the draft of the internal quality evaluation
report is approved upon rector’s proposal by the JAMU AS. The rector shall make the draft of
the internal quality evaluation report accessible to the members of the academic community at
least 7 calendar days before its discussion in the JAMU AS in a manner enabling remote
access.
(5) After approval of the internal quality evaluation report in the JAMU AS the
rector discusses the internal quality evaluation report with the JAMU Management Board.
25
(6) The rector makes the internal quality evaluation report after its approval under
clause (4) and its discussion under clause (5) accessible to the bodies and the members of the
bodies of JAMU and its units and the Accreditation Office and the Ministry.
PART FOUR
EXTERNAL EVALUATION
Article 67
(1) External evaluation of JAMU is performed by the Accreditation Office in cases
defined by law.
(2) JAMU may also order the performance of the external evaluation at its own
expenses with a generally recognized evaluation agency, if decided by the rector after
discussion in the Internal Evaluation Board.
PART FIVE
FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 68
Effectiveness
This internal regulation becomes valid on the day of its registration by the Ministry and
effective on the first day of the month following the month in which it has become valid.
prof. Ing. MgA. Ivo Medek, Ph.D.
Rector
prof. PhDr. Silva Macková
Chair of the JAMU Academic Senate