{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017684887459807074, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.955307262569832, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Quality assurance processes in Finnish universities: direct and indirect outcomes and organisational conditions

In Finland, quality assurance related to the Bologna process has been adapted to existing systems of higher education at the national level and a form of implementation is also recognised at the level of the higher education institution. In universities, varied outcomes of quality assurance are based on interaction of organisational structures, management styles and academic cultures. Quality assurance generates direct impacts, which are intended reactions to the audit process and unintended outcomes: transparency, learning, enhanced status of work and social integration, as well as excess work‐load and insignificant benefits at the grass‐root level. Indirect impacts only emerge when intertwined with other processes, motives, actors, relations and pressures. The structures and management of an organisation and culture and position of individual disciplines influence the outcomes of quality assurance. A flat organisational model promotes participation of personnel in the quality assurance work. In addition, the culture and position of a particular discipline affects implementation and outcomes of quality assurance.