Universitetskanslersämbetet instämmer i bedömargruppens ställningstagande.

In conclusion, the programme is assessed as maintaining high quality.

Aspect area 'environment, resources and area': The higher education institution is assessed by the panel to deliver a very coherent programme in all its facets. The third-cycle environment is assessed as an environment of high quality and intensity of activity with a range of connections and collaborations with external bodies. The staffing of the programme is generally satisfactory, and the higher education institution's intention to appoint staff in order to improve the number of supervisors in some areas is noted.

Aspect area 'design, teaching/learning and outcomes': The assessment panel highly values the very effective structure offered to the doctoral students. Individual study plans, methodological seminars, national and international conference participation, and individual supervision guarantee broad knowledge and understanding. Moreover, the institution stimulates doctoral projects that explore design and experimental writing as a way of research and knowledge production. Further attention paid to the mutual relationship between these elements of supervision could enhance the programme even more. Regarding the training of research methods and a methodological approach to thesis work, the assessment panel values that the development of scientific methodologies is supported by ResArc courses, supervisor-student discussions (which include advice on which courses to take), actual step-by-step writing exercises, and cross-referral by supervisors. This 'co-supervising' is received very positively and as exemplary. An international orientation and performance adds to this positive framework.

Working life perspective: The working life perspective is satisfactory as doctoral students are well prepared for both an academic career and a career outside academia. However, a potential area of improvement is follow-up and feedback from alumni, a strategy that will inevitably need time and resources.

Doctoral student perspective: Doctoral students at the higher education institution have ample opportunity to make their voices heard in various forums at the department and institution level.

Gender equality perspective: By focusing on a balanced recruitment of students and staff and, by the continuous evaluation of the gender content of each research and teaching field, the higher education institution is a leading institution in the field of gender issues and architecture.

Aspect area 'follow-up, actions and feedback': The processes for follow-up and responsibility for action is unclear when it comes to the third-cycle programme environment. When it comes to the teaching/learning, there is a valuable structure for evaluation and feedback, with good examples of initiatives such as the supervisors' collegium. The assessment panel sees a more rigorous use of the individual study plans as a potential area of improvement.