Quality Check

The EIT Deep Tech Talent Initiative brings together courses and training programmes that contribute to the European Commission’s objective to expand the workforce of people capable of working in deep tech fields and sectors. The Quality Check aims to ensure that all courses and training programmes published on the EIT Deep Tech Talent platform provide value for learners, training and education institutions and enterprises.

To publish a course on the EIT Deep Tech Talent platform, Pledgers need to complete a Course Information Form in English, which will be quality checked by the EIT Deep Tech Talent Quality Check team, following the process below.

Purposes and benefits of the Quality Check

The Quality Check has been designed to ensure that all courses published on the platform are high quality, meet the strategic objectives of the EIT Deep Tech Talent Initiative and fulfil mandatory criteria, including the amount and relevance of deep tech learning included in each course.  The Quality Check is not designed to be a full quality assurance process; it is a lighter touch process, focused on the course’s appropriateness for the initiative and its contribution to learning in deep tech.

The main benefit of the Quality Check for learners is that it guarantees all courses in the catalogue include an appropriate level of deep tech learning and are clearly and consistently described. For Pledgers, publication in the course catalogue with a Quality Check approval mark, shows that the course has been independently assessed as containing sufficient and relevant deep tech learning.

Mandatory criteria

All courses and training programmes in the EIT Deep Tech Talent Initiative need to meet the following mandatory criteria, which will be verified during the Quality Check process. Pledgers should ensure the course meets these criteria before completing the Course Information Form.

1.      The course must have a proven deep tech focus (see the Deep Tech Definitions document).

2.      The course should contain at least 50 hours of learning (guided learning and student learning hours/coursework combined) – or at least 25 hours if the course is aimed at under 18s.

3.      The course should be equivalent to at least level 3 of the European Qualification Framework (EQF) (secondary technical level).

4.      The training provider should issue a verifiable certificate of achievement or qualification.

For any questions about the mandatory criteria or any other aspects of the Quality Check, please contact the Quality Check team at quality-check@eitdeeptechtalent.eu.

Quality Check Process Guidance

The following table explains the three stages that make up the Quality Check process. More information and guidance are provided to Pledgers once they are registered and have an account to log in to a personalised dashboard on the EIT Deep Tech Talent Initiative platform.

For those who have not registered yet but would like to have an idea of the information required, a blank template of the Course Information Form can be viewed here and a version of the form with further guidance and model answers can be viewed here.

Quality Check Process Stages

Submission of Course Information Form and initial Quality Check

To make a course application, registered Pledgers need to access their dashboard on the EIT Deep Tech Talent Initiative platform, using the account name and password that were shared upon approval of their Pledge request. On the dashboard, go to the “Courses” tab, click on “Add new course” and fill out the online Course Information Form, which includes tick-box information about key features of the course and some descriptive information about it.

Once the form has been submitted, a quality checker from the EIT Deep Tech Talent Initiative team will review the information provided and make a recommendation to a Course Approval Panel. If needed, a quality checker will contact the Pledger to clarify or ask for additional information.

Course Approval Panel

The Course Approval Panel is made up of deep tech and quality assurance experts, who meet every two months to review the recommendations made by the quality checker for each course application. The Panel will decide which of three possible outcomes should be applied to each course:

1.  Course accepted (no changes required)

2.  Course conditionally accepted (minor changes required)

3.  Course not accepted (revise and resubmit)

The expectation is that most courses should be accepted with no changes required if the application is complete and the course meets the mandatory criteria (above).

The Quality Check outcome will be valid until the end of December 2025.

Notification of Quality Check outcome and publication of courses

Pledgers should receive notification of the Quality Check outcome within a week of the Course Approval Panel meeting. The aim is to complete the Quality Check process within two months of the course application being submitted and possibly sooner, depending when the course application is submitted within the two-monthly Quality Check cycle.

The next steps after the panel meeting will vary depending on the outcome.

In most cases where the course is accepted (outcome 1), the course will be published on the EIT Deep Tech Talent Initiative website, the Pledger will be notified, and they will be able to download a certificate and quality seal.

For outcome 2 (minor changes required), the quality checker will contact the Pledger to explain what changes need to be addressed and work with them to resolve the issues. If the changes are minor, the course will usually proceed to publication as soon as the changes are made. In some cases, if the changes are more significant, the Course Approval Panel will wish to discuss the course again at the next panel meeting before making an outcome decision.

For outcome 3 (revise and resubmit), feedback will be provided as to the reason(s) why the course was not accepted, and the changes required to revise and resubmit the course successfully.

For both outcomes 2 and 3, Pledgers will have the opportunity, if they wish, to challenge the outcome and request a review by a second quality checker.