Internal accreditation

The University’s quality management system provides for a two-stage procedure for the internal accreditation of a degree course or course bundle:

  1. The course monitoring
  2. the internal (re-)accreditation

Procedure stage 1: course monitoring

The so-called Institute/Academy Advisory Board is responsible for this stage of the procedure. The Advisory Board is made up of internal and external members as follows: two teachers and one student from the relevant institute, one subject representative from another university, one representative from professional practice (subject-related), one external student and one University of Music and Theatre Munich alumna/alumnus. In order to cover the range of subjects in the case of a bundling of degree courses, the Advisory Board may be expanded to include external subject representatives, external students and internal subject representatives.

As part of the course monitoring, a course or a bundle of course is reviewed on the basis of written self-documentation with regard to the implementation of the subject-related criteria for courses (§§ 11-15 BayStudAkkV). The quality criteria are discussed by the internal and external members of the Advisory Board.

Exclusively the external Advisory Board members also conduct an interview of approximately one hour with students of the relevant degree course(s) of the bundle.
The evaluation of the technical and content-related quality criteria is the sole responsibility of the external members of the Advisory Board.

The examination and evaluation of the formal criteria (§§ 3-10 BayStudAkkV) does not take place at the Advisory Board level, but was or is ensured on the part of the Quality Management/Accreditation Office as well as the Office of Legal Affairs already during the introduction of the degree course in question. This is explained accordingly in the written self-documentation.

As part of the course monitoring, it is also examined whether regular quality assurance procedures (surveys) are used for the further development of a course. For this purpose, evaluation results are submitted by the Advisor for Quality Management/Evaluation.

On the basis of the course monitoring meeting, a preliminary quality report is prepared for the course(s) concerned. The formal accreditation takes place in the second stage of the procedure.


Procedure stage 2: Internal accreditation

The University Committee on Accreditation makes the formal decision on the accreditation of a degree course or degree course bundle on the basis of the preliminary quality report. It is not bound by the accreditation recommendation of the Institute Advisory Board from the previous course monitoring. The Committee is composed of members who do not have a key function in the course monitoring process: the Vice President for Studies and Teaching (Chair), an external active or former member from the University Council, the Dean of Studies, the Chair of the Bachelor’s/Master’s Study Committee, a professor or a former professor of the University of Music and Theatre as well as a student of the University of Music and Theatre. Substitution regulations serve to ensure the impartiality of the members of the Committee.

In the case of conditions, fulfilment of the conditions is ensured by the chairperson of the University Committee on Accreditation.

The accreditation result is fed into the database of the Accreditation Council via the finalised quality report and published.


The period of validity for the initial accreditation of a degree course is eight years. The accreditation period begins retroactively from the semester in which the University Committee on Accreditation issues the accreditation. The period of validity for re-accreditation is also eight years. The semester in which the course monitoring took place is decisive here.

Significant change to an accredited degree course:
If an internally accredited degree course is substantially changed, the substantial change must be notified to the University Committee on Accreditation and described. The University Committee on Accreditation examines the substantial change. If, from the Committee’s point of view, the substantial change leads to an improvement or maintaining of quality, the accreditation remains in effect.