Qualità della Didattica

Ensuring Quality is an indispensable process that involves all those who work in the Athenaeum in which each individual's progress benefits the entire Athenaeum and stimulates the healthy confrontation to which it is necessary to strive in order to make the social role played by the Athenaeum effective and concrete.


  • defining quality policies in tune and synergy with the University's strategic directions and reliable and robust procedures through which the governing bodies can implement them;
  • implementing activities to ensure effectiveness and efficiency in all the University's internal processes, first and foremost in the service of the quality of education and research;
  • creating awareness in all those who work in the University so that everyone's tasks are carried out competently and promptly, the services provided are effective, and a record is kept of what has been done to monitor and measure results.

For more information on Quality Assurance, please consult this page: https://www.unipr.it/AQ


Student Opinion Survey Questionnaire (OPIS)

The student opinion survey questionnaire (OPIS) is a tool designed to detect student opinion with a view to improving teaching, quality and the organization of study courses and is an integral part of the evaluation system. For students, it is an important opportunity to make their voice heard and actively participate in the life of their course of study, as a guarantee of better Quality Assurance: this is why the University recommends that it be filled in punctually and accurately.

More information on the OPIS questionnaires can be found on the following page: https://www.unipr.it/didattica/i-corsi-di-studio/compilazione-del-questionario-di-valutazione-della-didattica-line

Organization and responsibility for Course QA

Responsibility for the management of the Second Cycle Degree Course in Plant and Machine Engineering for the Food Industry, including the management of quality assurance aspects, the compilation of the SUA-CoS and the Re-examination Report, lies with the President of the CoS, Prof. Giuseppe Vignali.
The President is assisted in QA activities and in particular in the drafting of the Annual Review Report by a Review Group (RG), which is constituted as follows:
Chairman: prof. Giuseppe Vignali
Head of QA of the study course: prof. Mirko Morini
CCSM lecturer: prof. Roberto Montanari
Technical-administrative staff representative: Ilaria Magnati
Student representative of the course: Giulio di Maria

The scheduling of routine management actions (activities, deadlines) is indicated in the attached pdf.

The planning of Quality Assurance activities is also described on the page of the University Quality Presidium.

Quality Assurance of Study Courses (CoS) is a constituent element of the management, monitoring and measurement of the dynamics governing teaching, knowledge and know-how.
Study courses, in particular, are at the heart of the educational mission of higher education institutions. They are designed through the design of one or more output figures, defined through the identification of their scientific, cultural and/or professional characteristics and, consistently, of the training paths leading to the acquisition of the specific knowledge and skills associated with the output profiles.
Course design must involve students and external stakeholders most appropriate to the character and objectives of the course. The external stakeholders of the study course include all the actors and organizations and institutions potentially interested in the cultural and professional profile of the graduates designed by the study course (organizations representing the production of goods and services, the professions and/or - if considered relevant to the project - scientific societies, research centres, academic and cultural institutions of national or international relevance, etc.). Where functional to the proposed project, stakeholders may be represented by a Steering Committee, comprising a representation of the Department's faculty and representatives from the world of work, culture and research representing the stakeholders of one or more study courses.
Courses of study should be constantly updated, reflecting the most advanced knowledge in the disciplines, also with a view to the continuation of studies in subsequent cycles, ensuring interchange with the world of research and the world of work.

Course of Study Review Group Responsible for Quality Assurance

For the purposes of Quality Assurance, each school is required to:

  • apply, as far as it is competent, the policies and general guidelines for Quality established by the Governing Bodies;
  • carry out self-assessment and review activities of its own training pathway and of the management of the degree according to the analyses reported in the annual report of the CPDS and to the data provided by ANVUR, the Evaluation Committee and the Organizational Unit (O.U.) Management Control, also comparing itself with similar Boards with a view to benchmarking;
  • promoting continuous improvement and evaluating its effectiveness;
  • implementing the evaluation of teaching according to what has been set up at the University level.

The BoD, through its President, is also responsible for the information reported in the ANVUR documents (SUA-CoS, Annual Monitoring Form, Cyclic Review Report). 
To this end, each school establishes a Review Group (RG) composed of figures from within the school itself who are able to contribute to the evaluation of the course from various points of view (lecturers, technical-administrative staff, students). The RG normally consists of the President of the School, the School Quality Assurance Manager (QAM), a student representative and a Teaching Quality Manager from the School's Department. The RG has the task of guiding the CoS towards the goal of continuous improvement of its results. The RG manages the process of self-evaluation, i.e. the process by which the BoD monitors its own performance and assesses its own results, also in accordance with the guidelines established by ANVUR.

In the course of the self-assessment process, the RG examines everything that can contribute to the analysis of the results of the CoS and, in particular:

  • the annual report provided by the Joint Teachers-Students Committee of reference;
  • the report of the Evaluation Committee;
  • the progress of students' careers;
  • the availability of context services (tutoring, internationalisation, orientation, internships, etc.);
  • consultation with the socio-economic system of reference (including the Steering Committee, sector studies, specific meetings with social partners, etc.);
  • the availability of resources (human and infrastructural);
  • the opinion of the University of Genoa.);
  • consultation with the socio-economic system of reference (including the Steering Committee, sector studies, specific meetings with the social partners);
  • availability of resources (human and infrastructural);
  • student opinion on teaching, the organization of the degree course and the training pathway;
  • any other information provided by the QAM, the Education Manager and the Coordinator/Responsible for the Quality Assurance Office (see section X).

The work of the RG takes the form of the compilation of an Annual Monitoring Form and the drafting of the Cyclical Review Report, which is discussed within the Council of the relevant BoD and forwarded to the PQA and the University Evaluation Committee.

Finally, the Quality Assurance Manager (QAM) has the function of monitoring and verifying the correct implementation of the improvement actions approved by the BoD. The QAM is identified from among the Lecturers of the CoS.

Departmental Quality Assurance

In this context, the role of the Departments, which are key organizational structures for the conduct of scientific research, teaching and training activities, as well as for the transfer of knowledge and innovation and for related or ancillary external activities, is of primary importance. The Director and the Department Council are the Departmental Governing Bodies responsible for defining the Quality Assurance Policies for Departmental Research and Teaching.

A Departmental Quality Presidium (PQD) is established within each department, an operational and liaison body between the department and the University Quality Presidium.
The PQD:

  • it spreads the culture of Quality;
  • applies, as far as it is concerned, the policies and general guidelines for Quality established by the Governing Bodies of the University;
  • assists the Chairpersons of the CDS in the drafting of documents for the QA of the CDS (SUA-CoS, Cyclic Review Report, Annual Monitoring Form);
  • assists the Director in the drafting of research QA documents (SUA-RD, any programme documents of the Department);
  • supports the Director and the Department Council in the definition of policies and objectives for Quality and QA of research and of the third mission;
  • promotes continuous improvement in Research and Teaching through self-evaluation activities and evaluates the effectiveness of the actions undertaken.

In addition, the PQD, through the Departmental Delegate for Teaching (as provided for in the 'Framework Regulation for the Functioning of Departments'), liaises with the Departmental Teaching Commission, a commission with the function of supporting the Director in carrying out his responsibilities in teaching matters (as provided for in the 'Framework Regulation for the Functioning of Departments'), while, through the Departmental Delegate for Research Quality and Third Mission, it verifies the regular performance of the procedures for the drafting of the SUA-RD.

Department Director

According to the Statute, the Director has the function of promoting, guiding and coordinating scientific activities. It supervises research and third mission activities and oversees their evaluation.
The Director is assisted by the Departmental Research Quality and Third Mission Delegate who is entrusted with the following tasks:

  • support in the definition of the Department's research quality and third mission policies with the identification of indicators that take into account not only teaching commitment but also the quality of research and technology transfer activities;
  • definition of the Department's research quality and third mission assurance procedures;
  • annual monitoring of research products (as defined by ANVUR in the VQR call and in the SUA-RD), both in quantitative and qualitative terms;
  • structured management of the Department's public engagement activities.

The Director is responsible for the information reported in the QA documents (SUA-RD and any other policy documents of the Department).

Joint Teachers' and Students' Committees

In accordance with the Statute and the University Teaching Rules and Regulations and the Framework Regulation for the functioning of Departments, the Joint Teachers' and Students' Committees (CPDS) of Departments are set up, composed of an instructor and a student for each CDS belonging to the Department. The CPDS, if deemed necessary, may be subdivided into subcommittees. And chaired by one of the tenured teachers.
The CPDS is a permanent observatory on teaching activities.

  • it monitors the range of course catalogue and the quality of teaching, as well as the service activities provided to students by professors and researchers within the Department; 
  • It expresses an opinion on the consistency between the ECTS credits allocated to educational activities and the specific educational objectives set;
  • It identifies and monitors indicators for the evaluation of results;
  • it formulates opinions on the activation and suppression of degree programmes;
  • it analyses data and information on the range of course catalogue and on the quality of teaching;
  • it submits proposals to the Evaluation Committee for improving the quality and effectiveness of teaching structures;
  • it monitors the indicators that measure the degree of achievement of teaching objectives at the level of individual structures.

By 31 December of each year, the CPDS draws up a report in accordance with the quality assurance regulations and forwards it to the Presidents of the Boards of Studies pertaining to the Department, to the Department Director, to the Coordinator of the University Quality Presidium and to the Coordinator of the University Assessment Board.

Departmental structures

At the departmental structure level, coordination in all typical departmental administrative and management activities is carried out by the Responsible Administrative Manager (RAG). Among other functions, the RAG oversees and coordinates:

  • activities concerning the administrative support to the institutional activities of teaching, including front-office work with students as far as it is concerned, in relation to the department's courses, the course catalogue, the evaluation and self-evaluation of courses, overseeing the processes inherent to the accreditation and quality of study courses;
  • the activities concerning administrative support to institutional research and third mission activities, including technology transfer, research grants, research scholarships, overseeing the processes inherent to the quality of departmental research and third mission.

In the field of didactics, according to the University's functional chart, the RAG can call upon the services of a Quality Assurance Office Coordinator (cat. EP), who coordinates, in conjunction with the RAG, the typical activities supporting didactics, the course catalogue, the front office with students as far as it is concerned, and the quality of courses, including PhDs. It coordinates the department's teaching contacts; it coordinates guidance on entrance and career guidance initiatives; it coordinates the admission processes to study courses and the management of activities relating to tutoring and undergraduates; it supports the CoS Presidents, the Joint Student-Teacher Committee and the SAGs of the study courses hinged on the Department. It coordinates activities related to traineeships, traineeships and international mobility. It performs functional staff coordination. It operates in functional connection with the teaching area.

Alternatively, the RAG can call upon the services of a Head of Quality Assurance Office (cat. D) who ensures, under the coordination of the RAG, the oversight of the typical teaching support activities as outlined above.
For each CoS there is also a Teaching Quality Manager (TQM) (Cat.  D, C, B) that ensures the organization and functionality of the teaching of the study course. It ensures, in functional coordination with the head of the Quality Assurance Office administrative support for everything concerning the organization and operation of study courses. It manages and updates the content of the degree course website in cooperation with the relevant structures. It operates in functional connection with the teaching area.

As a member of the RG, he plays an essential reference role for the teaching organization and is a professional figure of particular value for the Quality Assurance of Courses of Study.

In the area of Research and Third Mission, according to the University's function chart, the RAG can call on the services of a Research and Third Mission Service Coordinator (cat. EP) who coordinates, in common with the RAG, the typical activities supporting research (national and international), the third mission, research quality, and the valorisation of departmental know-how, also acting as an interface and liaison with the department's technical staff. It coordinates and oversees the support processes related to the proper execution of the department's research-related activities, from participation in calls for tenders, to the management of research projects (including contract research), to support in the preparation of research contracts, to the reporting of all national and international projects and contracts. It supports the drafting of the SUA-RD. It performs functional staff coordination. It operates in functional connection with the Research Area. Alternatively, the RAG can call upon the services of a Research and Third Mission Manager (Cat. D) which guarantees, under the coordination of the RAG, the supervision of the typical activities in support of research and the third mission as reported above.

Work scheduling and implementation deadlines for initiatives

The quality assurance of the CoS consists in the implementation of the QA Model proposed and coordinated by the Quality Presidium and in the planning and implementation of corrective actions, the effectiveness of which is assessed annually through the analysis of indicator trends in the Annual Monitoring Form and, in depth, periodically in the Cyclic Review Report.
Corrective actions under the control of the Department and/or the CSD are planned according to the organizational and management modalities of the Department and/or the CSD and are coordinated and monitored by the Quality Assurance Manager (QAM).
The CoS appoints an internal review group (RG) whose activities are organised as follows:

- annually drafts the SUA-CoS for the following academic year; - annually drafts the SUA-CoS for the following academic year; - periodically checks the status of implementation of improvement measures.

These are proposed in the Cyclical Review Report and assess the overall career development of students, based on data provided by ANVUR.
The overall planning of QA activities leads to daily contact with student representatives, tutors, lecturers and staff in the Academic Office and central offices. In correspondence with deadlines for documents or fulfilments (review, SUA form, beginning and end of semesters, examination and graduation sessions), activities intensify and take the form of drafting texts or collecting information.

The scheduling provides for the following activities and plausible deadlines for some variations depending on the year:

  • survey of the demand for training (involvement of stakeholders): every year by 31 December;
  • definition/update of training objectives: every year by 31 January;
  • redesigning of the course catalogue: every year, if necessary, within the ministerial deadlines for amending the organizational frameworks;
  • harmonisation of teaching programmes: every year by 31 July;
  • updating of the teaching syllabus for the following academic year: every year by 31 July;
  • evaluation, by the QAM, of the students' questionnaires: every year by 31 October;
  • compilation of the SUA-CoS: every year according to ministerial deadlines, normally between the end of May and the beginning of June;
  • compilation of the Annual Monitoring Form: every year by 31 October;
  • meetings of the Review Group aimed at monitoring actions and proposing improvement initiatives: at least three per year: a) one in January
  • analysis of the survey on the demand for training and possible redesigning of the Course Catalogue, analysis of the Evaluation Committee’s annual report, monitoring of drop-outs and proposals for improvement (educational tutoring) b) one in March/April
  • analysis of the report of the Joint Teachers' and Students' Committee, preparation of the SUA-CoS, harmonisation of the programmes, updating of the teaching schedules, preparation of the Study Manifesto; c) one in September/October
  • analysis of the results of the student opinion survey, analysis of the CoS indicators and preparation of the SMA, evaluation of the status of the actions reported in the RRC, preparation of the SUA-CoS.