Building institutional capacity
Associate Professor Botirjon Kosimov
Head of Transformation Department
Real-world tips
- Build a shared understanding of quality early
Bring senior colleagues together for joint training so everyone works to the same principles and expectations. - Use external frameworks to support internal change
Recognised reference points (e.g. ESG, the UK Quality Code) help structure systems and strengthen decision‑making. - Invest in staff capability, not just systems
Training, resources and peer learning help colleagues move beyond compliance and apply quality confidently. - Make student partnership intentional
Clear, multi‑level representation structures make partnership meaningful and consistent. - Turn quality principles into action
Evidence‑based approaches (such as gap analysis and clear priorities) help translate policy into improvement. - Use data to inform decisions
Data helps teams identify gaps, set priorities and track progress. - Benchmark widely to build confidence
External networks and international partners validate progress and broaden perspective.
This case study shows how Tashkent State University of Law (TSUL) built the knowledge, skills and systems needed to strengthen its internal quality processes.
Membership at TSUL
Beyond compliance
One of the most important shifts supported by QAA was moving away from a compliance‑focused, “box‑ticking” approach. QAA’s emphasis on enhancement and student‑centred learning helped us reframe quality as a tool for improvement, rather than control, and sharpened our focus on building sustainable internal capability.
Shared understanding
Professional learning played a key role in this. The International Quality Assurance Programme in 2023 helped us understand the ESG and the UK Quality Code in practical terms and learn from other institutions facing similar challenges. In 2024, a five‑day in‑person training programme delivered by QAA brought together around 30 senior colleagues, including deans, department heads and managers. For the first time, we developed a shared understanding of quality principles and expectations across the institution.
Stronger systems
This collective learning strengthened our capacity to review systems critically, identify gaps and think more structurally about quality culture and self‑evaluation. QAA conferences and workshops, particularly those focused on student engagement and the use of data, further supported this by encouraging more evidence‑based decision‑making. We applied this learning directly through clearer priorities, more structured action plans and stronger monitoring processes.
Visible impact
QAA’s approach also supported the development of meaningful student partnership. Guided by its student‑centred focus, we introduced a three‑level student representation system at department, faculty and university levels. This has helped embed student voice more consistently in both teaching and quality processes.
The impact of this capacity building is now visible. Staff are more engaged and more confident in applying core quality concepts such as learning outcomes, constructive alignment and assessment for learning. Quality is increasingly understood as a shared responsibility, supported by more coherent and evidence‑based systems. For students, this has translated into more student‑centred learning and clearer opportunities to influence change.