- Academic experts who have held posts of responsibility in the management teams of higher education and research institutions;
- An administrative expert with experience of at least one senior management or administrative management post;
- An expert from the socio-professional sector with experience of relevant senior leadership/managerial duties and/or scientific and/or cultural posts in a business sector of potential interest for the professional integration of students or the exploitation of the research products of the evaluated institution;
- An international expert from the academic or socio-professional sector;
- An expert on Quality (in management, training or research
- A student;
- Any expert who has evaluated an institution during a previous group of evaluations cannot participate in the next group. Experts must not have any special-interest ties with the evaluated institutions and cannot ordinarily be attached to an institution situated in the same region as the evaluated institution.
Institutions are invited to participate in the formation of their evaluation panels, subject to meeting the following requirements for the composition of panels, which must include:
The expert panel consists of French and international experts. However, to facilitate the experts’ work and in accordance with the legislative requirements, institutions and territorial coordinations are asked to submit their files and documents in French. Nevertheless, certain documents - especially those pertaining to the evaluation of research bodies - may be submitted in English if accompanied by a summary written in French.
- Schools of architecture are covered by a joint procedure involving the Department of Evaluation of Higher Education and Research Institutions and the Department of Evaluation of Study Programmes at Hcéres.
- Under the terms of a partnership between Hcéres and the CTI, engineering schools also benefit from a coordinated procedure defined by both institutions, which is designed to improve the links between evaluations and simplify the documentation file submitted by engineering schools. A single self-evaluation file meeting the requirements set out in each external evaluation standard used by both institutions is required, and the visit date is also coordinated.
- Throughout the entire process, the experts are likely to ask the institution to provide documents in addition to those included in the file, via the Hcéres contacts. During the visit, the participants interviewed by the experts may also pass on any relevant documents, which may also be made available to the experts during the evaluation on a dedicated Intranet site created by the institution. On this account, the experts are subject to strict rules of confidentiality and professional secrecy.
- The institution must ensure that these different documents are systematically transmitted to the project manager of the designated Hcéres team in order to ensure the consistency of the database associated with the evaluation.
- After receiving the draft report, the institution can respond to it and request the correction of any factual errors, as well as any misunderstandings, omissions or erroneous terms.
- After the president of the panel has agreed to their inclusion in the report, the amended report will be sent to the institution in a provisional version. The president/director of the institution will then be asked to submit comments on this version of the report, which will then be appended to it.
- The report becomes final once the president of Hcéres and the president of the panel of experts have signed it.
- Discussions only take place during the interviews listed on the visit schedule. If necessary, the project manager who accompanies the panel during the visit will pass on any requests for additional documentation to the institution.
- There is no direct contact between the experts and the institution throughout the entire evaluation process.
The type of professional integration should be specified in the same way for all doctors, e.g. professor, research fellow, post-doctoral contract, secondary education, fixed-term or open-ended contract in the private sector, independent professional, job-seeker. Simply mentioning that the graduate has returned to his or her home country is insufficient.
Considering the appointment procedure for the director (by the head of the institution after consulting the Scientific Council), this is a major change justifying the submission of the file as an “amended renewal”.This answer did not bring you any solution? Would you like to contact us? Click here to access the contact form and get in touch with one of our corresponding.
YES: each doctoral school must provide a detailed analysis of its results for the current contract. In the event of even a partial merger, the review may concern both the overall number and the proportion of doctoral students concerned by the merger. The “single” file will include the reviews and the plan for the future school.This answer did not bring you any solution? Would you like to contact us? Click here to access the contact form and get in touch with one of our corresponding.
No. Evaluations conducted by Hcéres lead to the production of a report based on the experts’ written contributions. The report is the only type of feedback provided.