University of Ljubljana

Univerza v Ljubljani

Basic information

  • Identifiers
    • DEQARINST2799
    • SI0001
    • SI-ETER.BAS.NATID: 33
    • Erasmus: SI LJUBLJA01

      • Erasmus Institution Code

      Identifier assigned by the European Commission to higher education institutions participating in the Erasmus+ programme - data harvested from ETER/OrgReg

      Read more...

    • SCHAC: uni-lj.si

      • SCHema for Academia

      Internet domain (DNS)-based identifier of institutions, used in several European initiatives for data exchange in the education and research sector, e.g. Emrex - data acquired using the European University Foundation (EUF) HEI API

      Read more...

    • Erasmus-Charter: E10209243

      • Erasmus Charter for Higher Education (ECHE)

      Application number related to the ECHE, required for higher education institutions participating in the Erasmus+ programme - data acquired using the European University Foundation (EUF) HEI API

      Read more...

    • EU-PIC: 999923240

      • Participant Identification Code (PIC)

      A PIC is assigned to legal entities participating in EU-funded programmes - data acquired using the European University Foundation (EUF) HEI API

      Read more...

    • EU-VAT: SI54162513

      • EU VAT number

      Identifier of economic operators for value-added tax (VAT) within the EU system, assigned by their national authority - data acquired using the EU participant register API

      Read more...

    • WHED: IAU-020664

      • IAU World Higher Education Database (WHED)

      Identifier used in the world-wide WHED database of higher education institutions, managed by the International Association of Universities (IAU) - data harvested from ETER/OrgReg

      Read more...

  • Provider type
    higher education institution
  • Legal seat(s)
    Ljubljana, Slovenia
  • Further location(s)
    Postojna, Slovenia
    Ptuj, Slovenia
    Slovenj Gradec, Slovenia
    Nova Gorica, Slovenia
    Kranj, Slovenia
    Krško, Slovenia
    Črnomelj, Slovenia
    Portorož, Slovenia
    Murska Sobota, Slovenia
    Trbovlje, Slovenia
    Celje, Slovenia
  • Website
    https://www.uni-lj.si/eng/
  • Founding year
    1919
  • QF-EHEA levels
    third cycle, second cycle, first cycle
  • Permalink
    https://data.deqar.eu/institution/2799

National External Quality Assurance Requirements

  • Accreditation of a study programme
    is granted for an indefinite period or the application is denied.
  • Re-accreditation of a higher education institution
    is granted for a period of maximum five years (or less) or, if quality standards are not meet the accreditation is denied.
  • Initial accreditation of a higher education institutions
    is granted for a period of five years or, if quality standards are not meet, the application is denied.
  • Accreditation of changes of higher education institutions
    Changes to another type, merger by acquisition, merger by the formation of a new entity or division of higher education institutions, changing the location in Slovenia
  • Further information on external quality assurance in Slovenia

External Quality Assurance Reports and Decisions

Institutional level

This report is not currently valid but part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Institutional re-accreditation
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Institutional evaluation
Decision: positive
Institutional audit
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Institutional re-accreditation

Programme level

Decision: positive
Water Science and Environmental Engineering (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Second cycle graduate
  • Level
    second cycle
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
Decision: positive
Water Science and Environmental Engineering (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Second cycle graduate
  • Level
    second cycle
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zakonski in družinski študiji (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
Part of the obligatory external QA system
Zakonski in družinski študiji (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8)
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
  • DEQAR Report ID
    89758
  • Agency
    Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency (SQAA)
  • Type
    Extraordinary evaluation of study programmes
  • Status
    part of obligatory EQA system
  • Formal decision
    not applicable
  • Date
    21/04/2022
  • Valid until
    not applicable
  • Summary

    Report summary

    Finally, group of experts concluded that a number of advantages and examples of good practice characterizes both, Faculty of Theology and the analyzed study programs. On the other hand, there are some topics that should be improved in future with regard to ensure future development and better positioning of faculty and its programs in wider educational and research area. We would like to thank all those who have put efforts that this virtual visit to faculty has passed at a very high level: Mr. Klemen Subic - NAKVIS expert, faculty management and all other stakeholders for constructive cooperation in interviews. Since this evaluation took place on-line, the efforts for successful implementation to all participating parties were even greater.
    Finally, group of experts concluded that a number of advantages and examples of good practice characterizes both, Faculty of Theology and the analyzed study programs. On the other hand, there are some topics that should be improved in future with regard to ensure future development and better positioning of faculty and its programs in wider educational and research area. We would like to thank all...
  • Report and decision
  • Permalink
    https://data.deqar.eu/report/89758
  • Agency's identifier
    6031-3/2019/26-UL-TEOF
  • Verifiable Credential
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Založniški študiji (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zdravstvena nega (degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Prva stopnja
  • Level
    -
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zdravstvena nega (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zdravstvena nega (first cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Bachelor
  • Level
    first cycle (NQF 7)
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
  • DEQAR Report ID
    89812
  • Agency
    Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency (SQAA)
  • Type
    Extraordinary evaluation of study programmes
  • Status
    part of obligatory EQA system
  • Formal decision
    positive
  • Date
    21/04/2022
  • Valid until
    not applicable
  • Summary

    Report summary

    A group of experts in accordance with recommendations carried out the external evaluation of the Faculty of Health Sciences and the three study programs (Nursing - 1st cycle, Nursing - 2nd cycle, Laboratory Dental Prosthetics 1st - cycle) and criteria set by the Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (SQAA). Faculty meets the requirements in all five standards of assessment. The opinion of group of experts is that faculty is a wellorganized higher education institution that puts a lot of efforts in continuous improvement of all fields of its activities. As a member of the University of Ljubljana, faculty accepts all rules and regulations from the University and prescribes its own rules in accordance with them. The quality assurance system (QAS) was, until its introduction, continuously improved with consequential acceptance of quality culture and the awareness of its importance in all relevant stakeholder groups. Each year self-evaluation procedure is performed and their conclusions serve as a starting point for action plan for future period. The contents of this document is comprehensive and summarize results from surveys and interviews with all stakeholders included in all activities of the faculty. The main objectives of annual self-evaluation reports are education, research, quality assurance and management. The annual self-evaluation reports are creating by different parties (teachers and associates, departments, study program coordinators, professional support employees, and students) and every party give their opinion regarding the performance during the past period and suggestions for future one. The quality assurance committee analyses those partial reports and merge them into the final document. Afterwards, the faculty’s Senate discusses the document, gives its approval, and accepts it. All the parties included in creating the document got feedback information about conclusions of the report. The evaluation visit was performed on-line due to an epidemiological situation connected with COVID-19 pandemics. Group of experts has got from the faculty a long list of documents necessary for evaluation that, together with answers got during interviews with relevant groups of stakeholders, served as a basis for evaluation of the institution and study programs evaluated. The disadvantage of such approach was that group of experts did not have the opportunity to witness the actual material and other conditions on-site. However, the above-mentioned elements have enabled group of experts to get pretty good insight in the functioning of the faculty and its activities. The group of experts got the impression that faculty and all stakeholders involved (management, teachers and associates, professional support employees, and students) are very interested and dedicated to the performance and quality improvement of educational process. In this regard, there are well-established protocols of information flow and communication between different stakeholder groups in both, formal and informal way. However, experts think that not all of the involved stakeholders are equally familiar with all of their rights and responsibilities. Nevertheless, the overall impression is that education is performing in a successful way and that there are noticeable improvements every year. Management of the faculty encourages all the efforts in that direction. They are trying a lot to improve teaching and working conditions (including material and ICT) for both, students and employees. From previously mentioned sources, group of experts got the impression that research activity at the faculty has some challenges to deal with in the future. Although there are evidences that research activity is improving over time, experts think that high teaching burden of teachers and especially younger colleagues represents an obstacle for greater research productivity and greater inclusion of students in the research. Currently, there are 28 active projects at the faculty. Most of them are not thematically connected with the analyzed study programs. Group of experts believes that the increase in number of thematically adjusted projects is needed since their results and findings would enable greater transfer of research knowledge into the teaching process and would help the process of teaching staff renewal. Finally, group of experts concluded that a number of advantages and examples of good practice characterizes both, Faculty of Health Sciences and the analyzed study programs. On the other hand, there are some topics that should be improved in future with regard to ensure future development and better positioning of faculty and its programs in wider educational and research area. We would like to thank all those who have put efforts that this virtual visit to faculty has passed at a very high level: Mr. Klemen Šubic - NAKVIS expert, faculty management and all other stakeholders for constructive cooperation in interviews. Since this evaluation took place on-line, the efforts for successful implementation to all participating parties were even greater.
    A group of experts in accordance with recommendations carried out the external evaluation of the Faculty of Health Sciences and the three study programs (Nursing - 1st cycle, Nursing - 2nd cycle, Laboratory Dental Prosthetics 1st - cycle) and criteria set by the Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (SQAA). Faculty meets the requirements in all five standards of assessment. The o...
  • Report and decision
  • Permalink
    https://data.deqar.eu/report/89812
  • Agency's identifier
    6031-3/2019/26-UL-ZF
  • Verifiable Credential
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zdravstvena nega (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8)
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
  • DEQAR Report ID
    89812
  • Agency
    Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency (SQAA)
  • Type
    Extraordinary evaluation of study programmes
  • Status
    part of obligatory EQA system
  • Formal decision
    positive
  • Date
    21/04/2022
  • Valid until
    not applicable
  • Summary

    Report summary

    A group of experts in accordance with recommendations carried out the external evaluation of the Faculty of Health Sciences and the three study programs (Nursing - 1st cycle, Nursing - 2nd cycle, Laboratory Dental Prosthetics 1st - cycle) and criteria set by the Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (SQAA). Faculty meets the requirements in all five standards of assessment. The opinion of group of experts is that faculty is a wellorganized higher education institution that puts a lot of efforts in continuous improvement of all fields of its activities. As a member of the University of Ljubljana, faculty accepts all rules and regulations from the University and prescribes its own rules in accordance with them. The quality assurance system (QAS) was, until its introduction, continuously improved with consequential acceptance of quality culture and the awareness of its importance in all relevant stakeholder groups. Each year self-evaluation procedure is performed and their conclusions serve as a starting point for action plan for future period. The contents of this document is comprehensive and summarize results from surveys and interviews with all stakeholders included in all activities of the faculty. The main objectives of annual self-evaluation reports are education, research, quality assurance and management. The annual self-evaluation reports are creating by different parties (teachers and associates, departments, study program coordinators, professional support employees, and students) and every party give their opinion regarding the performance during the past period and suggestions for future one. The quality assurance committee analyses those partial reports and merge them into the final document. Afterwards, the faculty’s Senate discusses the document, gives its approval, and accepts it. All the parties included in creating the document got feedback information about conclusions of the report. The evaluation visit was performed on-line due to an epidemiological situation connected with COVID-19 pandemics. Group of experts has got from the faculty a long list of documents necessary for evaluation that, together with answers got during interviews with relevant groups of stakeholders, served as a basis for evaluation of the institution and study programs evaluated. The disadvantage of such approach was that group of experts did not have the opportunity to witness the actual material and other conditions on-site. However, the above-mentioned elements have enabled group of experts to get pretty good insight in the functioning of the faculty and its activities. The group of experts got the impression that faculty and all stakeholders involved (management, teachers and associates, professional support employees, and students) are very interested and dedicated to the performance and quality improvement of educational process. In this regard, there are well-established protocols of information flow and communication between different stakeholder groups in both, formal and informal way. However, experts think that not all of the involved stakeholders are equally familiar with all of their rights and responsibilities. Nevertheless, the overall impression is that education is performing in a successful way and that there are noticeable improvements every year. Management of the faculty encourages all the efforts in that direction. They are trying a lot to improve teaching and working conditions (including material and ICT) for both, students and employees. From previously mentioned sources, group of experts got the impression that research activity at the faculty has some challenges to deal with in the future. Although there are evidences that research activity is improving over time, experts think that high teaching burden of teachers and especially younger colleagues represents an obstacle for greater research productivity and greater inclusion of students in the research. Currently, there are 28 active projects at the faculty. Most of them are not thematically connected with the analyzed study programs. Group of experts believes that the increase in number of thematically adjusted projects is needed since their results and findings would enable greater transfer of research knowledge into the teaching process and would help the process of teaching staff renewal. Finally, group of experts concluded that a number of advantages and examples of good practice characterizes both, Faculty of Health Sciences and the analyzed study programs. On the other hand, there are some topics that should be improved in future with regard to ensure future development and better positioning of faculty and its programs in wider educational and research area. We would like to thank all those who have put efforts that this virtual visit to faculty has passed at a very high level: Mr. Klemen Šubic - NAKVIS expert, faculty management and all other stakeholders for constructive cooperation in interviews. Since this evaluation took place on-line, the efforts for successful implementation to all participating parties were even greater.
    A group of experts in accordance with recommendations carried out the external evaluation of the Faculty of Health Sciences and the three study programs (Nursing - 1st cycle, Nursing - 2nd cycle, Laboratory Dental Prosthetics 1st - cycle) and criteria set by the Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (SQAA). Faculty meets the requirements in all five standards of assessment. The o...
  • Report and decision
  • Permalink
    https://data.deqar.eu/report/89812
  • Agency's identifier
    6031-3/2019/26-UL-ZF
  • Verifiable Credential
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zgodovina (degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Prva stopnja
  • Level
    -
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zgodovina (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zgodovina (first cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Bachelor (univerzitetni)
  • Level
    first cycle (NQF 7. raven (7))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zgodovina (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zgodovina (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Zgodovina jugovzhodne Evrope (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Živilstvo (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Živilstvo in prehrana (first cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Bachelor (univerzitetni)
  • Level
    first cycle (NQF 7. raven (7))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Znanost in inženirstvo materialov (third cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Phd
  • Level
    third cycle (NQF 10. raven (10))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
Part of the obligatory external QA system
Znanost in inženirstvo materialov (third cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Doctorate
  • Level
    third cycle (NQF 10)
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme
  • DEQAR Report ID
    100025
  • Agency
    Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency (SQAA)
  • Type
    External (sample) evaluation of a study programme
  • Status
    part of obligatory EQA system
  • Formal decision
    not applicable
  • Date
    21/09/2023
  • Valid until
    not applicable
  • Summary

    Report summary

    The evaluated doctoral study program Materials Science and Engineering educates well trained experts in the field of materials science and engineering, who are highly employable, and their employment in industry represents an important link with the faculty for future collaboration and research. Good research infrastructure is available and additional research infrastructure and equipment is available at participating faculties and research institutes. The student-centered approach of teaching enables tailoring the study contents to the needs of students with regards to the subject of their dissertations. Dissertations were in general found of good or high quality and students as well as their mentors are active in publishing their research result in international journals. One of the weaknesses of the program is the small number of students, which also complicates the retrieval of their satisfaction with the program through Questionnaires. No formal engagement of stakeholders in the evaluation process has been notified. Study program changes are made individually but not comprehensively monitored by the internal quality assurance system at the level of the institution. Furthermore, monitoring of changes is not documented. This results in several partial compliance or major weaknesses or non-compliances, which need to be addressed and overcome. The group of experts has particularly exposed: - inadequate informing of stakeholders from outside the institution, who as a consequence do not provide feedback needed for improvement of the content, structure and delivery of the study programme, - students are not engaged in actual preparation of self evaluation reports. Their opinion is not considered statistically relevant and therefore not considered in the self evaluation report. This leaves the quality loop not completely closed, since there is no feedback to or from all stakeholders assured. Students and stakeholders outside the institution are not engaged in actual preparation of self evaluation reports. The opinion of students is not considered statistically relevant and therefore not considered in the self evaluation report. In addition: - study program changes are made individually but not comprehensively monitored by the internal quality assurance system at the level of the institution. No effective actions are taken to update the changes in course syllabi or improve the study program based on the needs of the stakeholders outside university, - some course descriptions are empty in terms of content, competences, expected study results, teaching methods and assessment methods, - the number of ECTS points and the workload of students in the compulsory subject "Attendance at the lectures" for both the first and second year of study is too large compared to the expected workload of students. These actions, which by themselves represent important improvements, hould in addition include the opportunities for improvement suggested by the group of experts in their report.
    The evaluated doctoral study program Materials Science and Engineering educates well trained experts in the field of materials science and engineering, who are highly employable, and their employment in industry represents an important link with the faculty for future collaboration and research. Good research infrastructure is available and additional research infrastructure and equipment is avail...
  • Report and decision
  • Permalink
    https://data.deqar.eu/report/100025
  • Agency's identifier
    6034-9/2023/6
  • Verifiable Credential
This report does not have a validity period, but it is older than 6 years and thus considered part of the historic record.
Part of the obligatory external QA system Decision: positive
Znanost o živalih (second cycle degree)
  • Qualification/award
    • Master
  • Level
    second cycle (NQF 8. raven (8))
  • Programme type
    Full recognised degree programme

Verifiable Credentials

A Verifiable Credential (VC) is a digitally-signed and thus tamper-evident document containing information on a subject (e.g. personal information, entitlements of an individual, degrees held by an individual or accreditation of a higher education institution). Quality assurance results recorded in DEQAR can be downloaded as W3C-compatible Verifiable Credentials.

Currently, two types of credentials can be issued:

EBSI Verifiable Accreditations (VA) can be used by a higher education institution in the context of the EBSI Early Adopters programme.

  • The VA allows the institution to prove its external quality assurance on the Trusted Issuer Registry (TIR). EBSI VAs are only issued for external quality assurance results with an official status in a national system (“part of obligatory EQA system”).
  • At present, the higher education institution’s EBSI DID needs to be communicated to EQAR and recorded in DEQAR manually at the moment. If you are a higher education institution participating in EBSI, please contact us to register your DID.
  • EBSI VAs are issued by EQAR under its DID did:ebsi:zk4bhCepWSYp9RhZkRPiwUL.

DEQAR Format Verifiable Credentials primarily serve as a proof of concept and public demonstrator currently.

  • DEQAR Format VCs are based on the plain W3C Recommendation and our own data model. While they closely follow the EBSI Schema, no EBSI-specific or EU-specific elements or data types are used.
  • The higher education institution is identified by its DEQAR URI in this case.
  • DEQAR Format VCs are issued by EQAR under its DID did:web:data.deqar.eu.

Please note: this is an experimental feature.