Resolution on the Consistent Application of Conflict of Interest Guidelines for Quality Assurance Experts

The participation of students in quality assurance across the EHEA is firmly embedded in both European quality assurance standards and national legislation, guaranteed by:

1. The Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG 2015), adopted by the Ministerial Conference in Yerevan in May 2015, in particular Standard 2.4 (Peer-review experts), which mandates that external quality assurance must be carried out by groups of experts that include student members.
2. Article 248 Section 2 and Article 253 Section 1, which legally enshrine the role of the Students’ Parliament of the Republic of Poland (PSRP) in the Polish Accreditation Committee (PKA) and guarantee the participation of students as experts in the evaluation process.

While the ESG and Polish national regulations appropriately necessitate a “no-conflict-of-interest mechanism” to ensure the independence and objectivity of experts, these mechanisms are intended to prevent biases regarding the specific institution under review, rather than to isolate experts from the broader academic community.

Currently, there are unintended differences in how conflict of interest guidelines are interpreted across different groups of experts within PKA. In practice, broad interpretations of conflict-of-interest provisions may disproportionately affect highly engaged student experts, including those involved in student representation, ambassadorial activities, employment or institutional initiatives at their home institutions. Such interpretations risk excluding some of the most experienced and knowledgeable student representatives from participation in external quality assurance processes, despite the absence of direct conflicts with the institutions under review. At the same time, academic and professional experts routinely maintain employment and institutional affiliations with their home institutions without being automatically excluded from participation in external review processes, provided they are not assigned to evaluate those institutions directly.

To fully realize the spirit of the ESG and the statutory guarantees of the Law on Higher Education and Science—both of which envision students as equal partners in quality assurance—it is essential that the criteria for identifying conflicts of interest are applied consistently, proportionally, and fairly across all stakeholder groups. Applying disproportionately restrictive interpretations exclusively to student experts undermines the principle of students as equal partners in quality assurance and risks reducing student participation to a symbolic rather than meaningful role. Active involvement in one’s home institution should be recognised as valuable experience contributing to the quality, relevance and credibility of review processes, rather than being treated as an automatic basis for exclusion from evaluating unrelated institutions.

Similar discussions regarding proportionality and stakeholder participation in quality assurance processes have emerged across the EHEA, particularly as systems seek to strengthen compliance with ESG principles while maintaining inclusive and representative expert pools. The Polish case therefore reflects a broader European challenge regarding the meaningful inclusion of students in quality assurance governance.

PSRP and ESU therefore:

1. Call on the Polish Accreditation Committee (PKA) to review and harmonise the practical application of conflict-of-interest regulations, ensuring that student, academic and professional experts are subject to equal, transparent and proportionate criteria .. to the institution under review, and that legitimate engagement with one’s own institution should not automatically disqualify student experts from participating in evaluations of unrelated institutions.
2. Underline that interpretations of conflict-of-interest rules should support meaningful student participation rather than unintentionally discouraging engagement among highly active and experienced student representatives.
3. Committee and PSRP in order to ensure transparent, proportionate and consistently applied regulations that safeguard both the independence of review processes and meaningful student participation.
4. Ensuring fair and proportionate participation conditions for student experts is essential not only for the credibility and inclusiveness of the Polish quality assurance system, but also for maintaining alignment with the broader principles of the EHEA and strengthening students’ role as equal partners in higher education governance.

Ensuring fair and proportionate participation conditions for student experts is essential not only for the credibility and inclusiveness of the Polish quality assurance system, but also for maintaining alignment with the broader principles of the EHEA and strengthening students’ role as equal partners in higher education governance.

Reason & Seconders

Meaningful student participation in quality assurance is a cornerstone of the European Higher Education Area.