4 Assessment of the quality of aspects of the program based on UNIGE evaluation criteria

\label{assessment-of-the-quality-of-aspects-of-the-program-based-on-unige-evaluation-criteria}

4.1 Do the descriptions and conclusions of the self-evaluation report correspond with the facts observed during the on-site visit?

\label{do-the-descriptions-and-conclusions-of-the-self-evaluation-report-correspond-with-the-facts-observed-during-the-on-site-visit}
Yes, the review board comes basically to the same conclusions. There are only some points (see recommendations) which have not been mentioned in the self-report. We will come to these points in more detail in the “recommendation section”:

4.2 Are the criteria justifiably seen as having been “fulfilled” or “to be improved”?

\label{are-the-criteria-justifiably-seen-as-having-been-fulfilled-or-to-be-improved}
Most of the criteria raised in the self-report have been evaluated as “fulfilled”. Only a few (n=6) have been labeled as “to be improved”. We fully concur with this evaluation. Those criteria, which have been labeled as “to be improved” are listed below:
The review board is in line with the self-evaluation committee in terms of these points. There are indeed some opportunities to improve these points. But we would like to emphasize that the identified opportunities to improve the program should not be taken as a strong critic or as indicators of a failure of the program. They should rather be taken as possibilities and leverages for improvement.

4.3 Based on the documents from the self-evaluation process and your on-site visit, what conclusions do you draw as to the quality of each aspect of the program?

\label{based-on-the-documents-from-the-self-evaluation-process-and-your-on-site-visit-what-conclusions-do-you-draw-as-to-the-quality-of-each-aspect-of-the-program}
The self-evaluation contains a SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats), which we mostly agree with. In their analysis they evaluated several points where they are pretty sure that the criteria for success have been achieved. These points (strength) are the following:
The self-evaluation comes to the conclusion that there are some aspects which offer the possibility for improvement (weaknesses):
The self-evaluation committee also mentioned some so-called external factors that could negatively affect the development of the program (threats):

4.4 What conclusions do you draw as to the overall quality of the program being evaluated?

\label{what-conclusions-do-you-draw-as-to-the-overall-quality-of-the-program-being-evaluated}
There is no doubt that this PH.D. program is of high or even excellent quality both in terms of organization and scientific content. In the following we will evaluate this Ph.D. program according to eight main areas (1: description and general condition, 2: positioning and relevance, 3: students enrolled, 4: program design, 5: implementation and functioning, 6: educational outcomes and impacts, 7: resources, and 8: educational outcomes and impacts).