Frequently Asked Questions
1. What is the National Register of Evaluators?
For the fulfillment of its responsibilities, ARACIS maintains its own register of evaluators, based on a transparent methodology and using criteria of competence and competitiveness. ARACIS provides methodological training to these evaluators and delegates them to conduct external quality evaluation missions.
The National Register of Expert Evaluators consists of: the National Register of Expert Evaluators (academic staff), the National Register of Student Expert Evaluators, the Register of International Expert Evaluators, and the Employers’ Register.
2. What are the eligibility conditions to become an ARACIS evaluator?
International expert evaluators may be academic staff from higher education institutions abroad, holding academic ranks equivalent to lecturer, associate professor, or professor, and with experience in evaluating the quality of education.
3. What is the profile of an ARACIS evaluator?
An ARACIS evaluator must have teaching and scientific research experience, as well as experience in university management. At the same time, they must be available for evaluation activities, demonstrate responsibility, and show honesty and reasonable rigor in their evaluation work.
4. How are ARACIS evaluators selected?
The selection process for the Register of International Expert Evaluators is conducted transparently, based on a procedure approved by the Agency’s Council, available on the ARACIS website.
The selection of international expert evaluators takes place only following the launch of a Call for International Expert Evaluators.
5. How to publish an article in the ARACIS journal Quality Assurance Review for Higher Education (QAR)?
To publish an article in QAR, please follow these steps:
- Submit the article according to the Author Guidelines to the following email address: qar@aracis.ro.
- ARACIS will notify you upon receipt of the article and the approximate date by which the peer review will be conducted.
- ARACIS will notify you in writing of the peer review outcome. If the review is favorable for publication, suggested corrections will be proposed, after which you can submit the final version of the article electronically to the above-mentioned address.