Accreditation Process at RPTU

The use and maintenance of the digital module handbook (MHB) is mandatory for all departments. For the upcoming accreditation of the teacher education program, please use the accreditation instance of the digital module handbook created for the teacher education program. You can find this in the download section for the accreditation process for the teacher education program and the dual-major bachelor’s degree.

As part of the WdU process, a new numbering system for module identifiers has not yet been established. Therefore, “bridge numbers” should be used temporarily for the module numbers. Please note that for dual-major subjects and corresponding subjects in the dual-major Bachelor’s program, the assignment to the teacher education pseudo-departments L-XXXX will be retained. This will be important for the assignment during the subsequent transfer to the staging instance. Modules offered at only one location (only in LD or only in KL) may remain assigned to their actual departments. These assignments may still change and will be transferred to the open staging instance for the Winter Semester 2028/29.

Compulsory attendance in courses under the HSchG is permissible only if it is necessary to achieve the learning objectives. Requirements for mandatory attendance must be justified on a case-by-case basis with reference to the acquisition of competencies. To regulate mandatory attendance uniformly at RPTU, the Senate decided at its meeting on July 1 to require the RPTU’s academic departments to document justifications for mandatory attendance in courses in a transparent manner in the digital course catalog.

At its meeting on July 1, the Senate adopted the regulation governing the submission of examination plans as part of accreditation procedures. These regulations stipulate that, in the future, an examination concept will consist of two parts: an expanded study plan and justifications for the examinations included in the self-report.

For combined degree programs, it is impractical to list all possible subject combinations in study plans. This applies to three-subject and two-subject combined degree programs, such as teacher education programs or two-subject bachelor’s programs. Furthermore, the limit of six examination sessions per subject does not serve as an adequate guideline for combined degree programs, since students study more than one subject. Therefore, a brief justification within the examination framework must always be included in the course of study plan for the subject at the sub-program level.

The templates for the self-report and the study plan can be found in the download section for the accreditation process for teacher education and dual-major bachelor’s programs.

At its meeting on July 1, 2026, the Senate adopted the following explanations and guidelines regarding the resolution to safeguard interdisciplinary course offerings for degree programs at RPTU—referred to as the “Safeguarding Resolution”—as a recommendation for the Senate:

Explanation of the Safeguarding Resolution

The Safeguarding Resolution is a resolution by the Departmental Council to ensure the availability of courses in a degree program offered by another department. The Safeguarding Resolution is intended to ensure the availability of modules and courses that are directly necessary for achieving the program’s learning outcomes—typically from the required and required-elective categories. It encompasses the import of teaching resources and services (see explanation below). As part of the accreditation process, safeguard resolutions must be requested from the departments providing the teaching resources or services for the degree programs (the subject of accreditation) must be requested from the departments providing the teaching resources or services and submitted by the accrediting department as part of the accreditation documentation.

Interdisciplinary degree programs whose examination regulations are adopted by multiple departmental councils do not require mutual approval resolutions. However, approval resolutions for any additional participating departments must be submitted.

Chaining of Educational Services: Educational service modules and courses that are accompanied by a bilateral approval resolution may be transferred to third departments for use in other degree programs, provided that a corresponding provision was made in the original approval resolution for the educational service. This transfer (export) may in turn require an approval resolution, provided that the export is directly necessary for achieving the program’s learning outcomes.

Requirements of the Approval Decision

The quality assurance resolution…

• is adopted by the departmental council.
• is issued for an accreditation period (typically 8 years) and renewed upon reaccreditation.
• covers modules and courses that are directly necessary for achieving the qualification objectives of a degree program outside the department: These are required modules and, as a rule, mandatory elective modules.
• includes the following information:
  • Module/course name and module/course number
  • Semester in which the module/course is offered
  • Classification of the module/course as a teaching import or service
  • Date of the validity period (expiration of the accreditation period, generally September 30 of each year)
  • Language of the module/course
  • Ensures that the learning objectives remain essentially unchanged.
  • Includes a requirement that changes to modules and courses covered by the approval resolution must be submitted as a major change to the degree program. The applicant is the exporting department; prior consultations with the importing department must be conducted. Changes to the module/course name and module/course number must be reflected in the approval decision but do not constitute a change that must be submitted as a substantial change to the degree program.
  • May include a provision regarding the transfer of teaching services as an “export” to other degree programs or third departments (optional).
  • may include information on the number of available seats in a course, a maximum group size, or the number of weekly semester hours for courses (optional information).

The basis for the above explanation and guidelines was a resolution recommendation by the Senate Committee on Quality Assurance (QSL) dated June 2, 2026.

A template for the approval resolutions can be found in the download section for “Accreditation Procedures for Teacher Education and Dual-Major Bachelor’s Programs.”

According to the Executive Board’s resolution from January, the course formats specified in the State Ordinance on Teaching Obligations at Universities (HLehrVO) serve as the guiding principle. A proposed classification was developed centrally based on the findings of the relevant working group of the Senate Committee on Quality in Studies and Teaching, as well as other relevant documents (e.g., HRK, Science Council), and departments were asked for feedback.

The final file, “Determination of Credit Factors for RPTU Courses,” can be found in the download section for the accreditation process for teacher education and the dual-major bachelor’s program.

Exam formats must be described in the program documentation in accordance with statutory regulations. If you have questions regarding how to classify exams under the existing categories, please contact Division 4 or the LEQS Office. A university-wide discussion on the content and pedagogical design of exams is planned for next year. If you have questions regarding planning, please contact the LEQS Office.

The program coordinators for the “dual-subject” programs have been asked to check whether the MHB drafts they have already submitted contain module combinations that are not permitted. If this is the case, they are asked to make the necessary changes.

The central units will review the feedback from the program coordinators regarding the current status and any questions they may have.