SELF STUDY 2009 - DkIT · DkIT Self Study 2009 v Learning Resources and Student Support Mr Luke McGahon, President of the Students Union Mr Cathal Kearney, Head of School of Business

SELF STUDY 2009

DkIT Self Study 2009

i

Table o f Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 1

INTRODUCTION:....................................................................................................................................... 6

METHODOLOGY....................................................................................................................................... 8

1 POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE................................................ 10

1.1 THE IMPACT OF DELEGATED AUTHORITY ON THE INSTITUTE’S QUALITY SYSTEM. ................... 11 1.2 GOVERNANCE............................................................................................................................ 11 1.3 FOSTERING A QUALITY CULTURE .............................................................................................. 12 1.4 EVALUATION AND IMPROVEMENT.............................................................................................. 13

2 APPROVAL, MONITORING AND PERIODIC REVIEW OF PROGRAMMES AND AWARDS ......................................................................................................................................... 16

2.1 DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLICATION OF EXPLICIT LEARNING OUTCOMES...................................... 16 2.2 CAREFUL ATTENTION TO CURRICULUM AND PROGRAMME DESIGN AND CONTENT. .................... 17 2.3 SPECIFIC NEEDS OF DIFFERENT MODES OF DELIVERY.................................................................. 17 2.4 AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATE RESOURCES............................................................................. 17 2.5 FORMAL PROGRAMME APPROVAL BY A BODY OTHER THAN THE STAFF TEACHING THE

PROGRAMME.............................................................................................................................. 18 2.6 MONITORING THE PROGRESS AND ACHIEVEMENTS OF STUDENTS............................................... 19 2.7 REGULAR PERIODIC REVIEW OF PROGRAMMES........................................................................... 19 2.8 REGULAR FEEDBACK FROM EMPLOYERS.................................................................................... 20 2.9 PARTICIPATION BY STUDENTS IN QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCESSES........................................... 21 2.10 RESEARCH.................................................................................................................................. 21

3 ASSESSMENT OF STUDENTS .................................................................................................... 25

3.1 MEASURING ACHIEVEMENT OF INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES & PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES25 3.2 ASSESSMENT METHODS............................................................................................................. 25 3.3 ESTABLISHING AND PUBLISHING MARKING CRITERIA ............................................................... 26 3.4 ARRANGEMENTS FOR LEARNERS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS............................................................. 27 3.5 EXAMINERS................................................................................................................................ 27 3.6 EXAMINATION REGULATIONS: COMPLIANCE ............................................................................. 28 3.7 REGULATIONS COVERING STUDENT ABSENCE, ILLNESS AND OTHER M ITIGATING

CIRCUMSTANCES....................................................................................................................... 29

4 QUALITY ASSURANCE OF TEACHING STAFF..................................................................... 31

4.1 RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION ................................................................................................. 31 4.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM (PMDS)...................................... 32 4.3 CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT............................................................................. 33

5 LEARNING RESOURCES AND STUDENT SUPPORT............................................................ 37

5.1 LEARNING SUPPORT................................................................................................................... 37 5.2 STUDENT SERVICES UNIT ........................................................................................................... 39 5.3 PARTICIPATION .......................................................................................................................... 40 5.4 LIBRARY .................................................................................................................................... 43 5.5 STUDENT CENTRE FOR LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT............................................................. 43 5.6 INTERNATIONAL OFFICE ............................................................................................................ 44

6 INFORMATION SYSTEMS .......................................................................................................... 46

6.1 STUDENT PROFILE, PROGRESSION AND SUCCESS RATES............................................................ 46 6.2 EMPLOYABILITY OF GRADUATES............................................................................................... 47 6.3 STUDENTS’ SATISFACTION AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THEIR PROGRAMMES AND TEACHERS........ 48 6.4 LEARNING RESOURCES.............................................................................................................. 49


ii

6.5 DKIT WEBSITE........................................................................................................................... 50 6.6 FUTURE PLANS........................................................................................................................... 51

7 PUBLIC INFORMATION.............................................................................................................. 53

7.1 PROGRAMMES ON OFFER........................................................................................................... 53 7.2 DKIT HANDBOOKS..................................................................................................................... 54 7.3 OPEN DAY .................................................................................................................................. 54 7.4 RADIO AND PRINT MEDIA .......................................................................................................... 55 7.5 LEARNING OUTCOMES OF PROGRAMMES................................................................................... 55 7.6 QUALIFICATIONS AWARDED ......................................................................................................56 7.7 LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE TO STUDENTS............................................................... 56 7.8 EMPLOYMENT DESTINATION OF GRADUATES ............................................................................ 56 7.9 PROFILE OF THE CURRENT STUDENT POPULATION..................................................................... 57 7.10 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ....................................................................................................... 57 7.11 ANNUAL REPORTS...................................................................................................................... 57 7.12 ACADEMIC COUNCIL.................................................................................................................. 57

CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................... 58

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................................................... 60

APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................................. 62


iii

Index o f Tab les

TABLE 1 SOURCE: RESEARCH STATUS OF HETAC PROVIDERS, DRAFT, JANUARY 2009................... 23

TABLE 2 HR DEPARTMENT RECORDS 2009 ........................................................................................... 35

TABLE 3 SOURCE: HEA 2007-8 EQUAL ACCESS DATA COLLECTION...................................................37

TABLE 4 SOURCE: HEA 2007-8 EQUAL ACCESS DATA COLLECTION...................................................42

TABLE 5 THE STUDENT INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ............................................................. 47


iv

DkIT Sel f S tudy 2009

Institutional Review

Co-ordinator Ms Ann Campbell

Steering Committee

Mr Denis Cummins, President

Mr Stephen McManus, Registrar

Mr Cathal Kearney, Head of School of Business and Humanities

Mr Luke McGahon, President of the Students’ Union

Ms Caroline O’Sullivan, Head of Creative Media Programmes

Dr Tim McCormac, Head of Research

Policy and Procedures

for

Quality Assurance


Mr Eugene Roe, Head of School of Engineering

Ms Brianain Erraught, Head of Section (Hospitality Studies)

Mr Padraig Warren, Lecturer in Quality Management


Ms Caroline O’Sullivan, Lecturer in Creative Media

Mr Brendan Ryder, Lecturer in Informatics

Dr Aoileann Ni Eigeartaigh, Lecturer in Humanities

Mr Ronan Lynch, Postgraduate Student

Approval, Monitoring

and

Periodic Review

of

Programmes and Awards

Contribution also provided by:

Dr Colette Henry, Head of Department of Business Studies

Dr Edel Healy, Head of School of Nursing, Midwifery, Health Studies and Applied Sciences

Assessment of Students

Mr Gerry McTaggart, Acting Head of School of Nursing, Midwifery, Health Studies and Applied Sciences

Dr Daniel O’Brien, Head of Department of Mechanical, Manufacturing and Electronic Engineering

Ms Adèle Commins, Head of Music Programmes

Dr Kevin Howard, Lecturer in Humanities

Dr Fiona Fearon, Lecturer in Humanities

Ms Ann Campbell, Senior Lecturer, Registrar’s Office, Quality Systems, Awards and Graduate Studies


v

Learning Resources

and

Student Support

Mr Luke McGahon, President of the Students Union

Mr Cathal Kearney, Head of School of Business and Humanities

Mr Niall McGuinness, Lecturer in Informatics

Mr Mario McBlain, Lecturer in Business

Mr Alan McCabe, Lecturer in Hospitality Studies

Ms Anita Byrne, Lecturer in Nursing

Quality Assurance

of

Teaching Staff

Dr John Dallat, Head of Centre for Learning and Teaching

Mr Padraig McGuigan, Lecturer in Engineering

Ms. Maeve McArdle, Lecturer in Business Studies

Ms Catherine McCloskey, Lecturer in Engineering

Mr Gareth Kelly, Lecturer in Engineering

Ms Briege King, Head of Department of Nursing, Midwifery & Health Studies

Information Systems

Dr Gerard Bob McKiernan, Head of School of Informatics, Music and Creative Media

Ms Linda Murphy, Academic Administration and Student Services Manager

Mr John Sisk, Lecturer in Marketing

Ms Lorna O’Connor, Institute Librarian

Ms Sarah McCann, Lecturer in Business Studies

Ms Mary Larkin, Postgraduate Student

Public Information

Mr Shane Hill, Head of Department of Management and Financial Studies

Ms Noreen Carney, School Liaison Officer

Ms Liz Englishby, Lecturer in Business Studies

Ms Jill Atkinson, Head of Section (Midwifery)

Mr Ross Gavin, Postgraduate student


Executive Summary 1

Executive Summary

This report has been drafted to fulfil the requirements set out by HETAC for the

2009 Institutional Review at the Dundalk Institute of Technology, and to meet the

agreed terms of reference set out in Appendix 1.

The report consists of seven chapters to correspond with the seven internal

standards identified for quality assurance in higher education in the European

Higher Education Area. (ENQA 2005). Chapter by chapter, the Institute’s own

quality assurance arrangements are evaluated against the standard; good

practice is acknowledged and opportunities for improvement are revealed.

The main strengths acknowledged are:

Policy and Procedures for Quality Assurance

• A strong culture of peer review exists in the Institute, based on conformity to external standards;

• Feedback from peer review, student fora and Programme Boards leads to continual improvements;

• ISO 9001:2000 registration ensures continual review and improvement of processes in the Registrar’s Office and in the Human Resources Department.

Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards

• A rigorous validation process delivers programmes with specific learning outcomes targeted at the labour market;

• Learning outcomes are stated explicitly at both programme and module level in compliance with the threshold standards identified by the National Framework of Qualifications;

• Programmes and facilities in each School are peer reviewed in five-yearly Programmatic Reviews;

• Regular feedback is obtained from learners and from employers.

Assessment of students

• The newly established Centre for Learning and Teaching will ensure ongoing training in assessment methods to staff;


Executive Summary 2

• There exists a widespread recognition of the value of formative assessment;

• External examiners’ reports show confidence in the Institute’s assessment processes.

Quality Assurance of Teaching Staff

• The Performance Management and Development System (PMDS) has demonstrated numerous strengths, including the fact that it is mandatory for all academic staff on an annual basis and is a formal opportunity to express interest in continuing professional development;

• Student feedback, and in particular informal feedback, brings to the attention of academic staff and Heads of School/Department, issues relating to their respective programmes;

• Training events and workshops, Staff Development Week, study leave and sabbaticals, funding to register for higher degrees, including doctorates and Masters’ courses in higher education practice, as well as other professionally relevant areas contribute to the continuing professional development of staff;

• The new M.A. in Learning and Teaching (Higher Education) will enhance the professionalism of teaching staff;

• The recent development of a Teaching Standards Framework demonstrates a commitment to excellence in teaching.

Learning Resources and Student Support

• High levels of student satisfaction are reported in relation to student support;

• A broad range of teaching methodologies appropriate to each programme and to the needs of the diverse student body is utilised throughout the Institute;

• Many programmes offer a personal and professional development module which facilitates the transition to higher education and enhances independent learning;

• Excellence Through People Accreditation has been achieved by the Institute Library;

• The Institute’s Access Plan will assist in reaching the targets published in the National Plan of Access for Higher Education 2008-2013;

• Programmes run in outreach centres encourage adults to return to education and thus contribute to the achievement of the Institute’s mission of providing the community with quality third-level education and services relevant to the economic, social and cultural development of the region;


Executive Summary 3

• Tangible initiatives to address the needs of learners from diverse backgrounds include:

o The Student Assistance Fund;

o The Disability Office;

o The International Office;

o Supports to mature students to assist with transition to higher education;

o Screening software to profile learner needs.

• The Joint Executive/Student Forum provides a useful forum to gather learner feedback;

• Provision of ongoing health programmes to students in conjunction with the HSE; the provision of on-campus vaccination programmes for placement students, as well as the improved usage and visibility of the mental health service are valuable supports to the student population.

Information Systems

• DkIT has made a commitment to the use of generic open source software including OpenOffice, Moodle, Apache and Thunderbird mail. This has improved cost effectiveness and allowed tailoring of software to meet the needs of staff and students.

Public Information

• The Institute’s award-winning website and its informative, well-designed handbooks are a useful source of information for the public;

• The Institute’s Freedom of Information Office ensures that the Institute complies with legislative requirements for the provision of information to the public;

• The Institute publishes annual reports and submits annual returns to the Higher Education Authority;

• The minutes of Academic Council meetings are published on-line as are the minutes of Executive Board and Governing Body meetings.

The main recommendations for improvement are:

Policy and Procedures for Quality Assurance

• There is a need to move from a culture of compliance to one based on best practice;


Executive Summary 4

• The Academic Council requires re-structuring to ensure that quality assurance processes are dealt with promptly. This re-structuring is to take place in March/April 2009, before the new Council is established;

• Systematic and periodic quality assurance reviews as detailed in the Quality Improvement Plan will enhance quality assurance in the Institute.

Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards

• A procedure is required to clarify the position where validation panels offer conflicting advice. The planned change of focus to emphasise conformance with standards, achievement of learning outcomes, assessment strategy, labour market requirements and resources should help alleviate this problem;

• Programme and module descriptors can be made more readily available through the use of module builder software, which is to be in place in 2010.

Assessment of students

• Increased participation in training on teaching and assessment strategies can advance the introduction of more innovative assessment methods;

• Increased roll-out of assessment matrices, setting out the knowledge, skills and competencies associated with a given grade will enhance public confidence in a credible and transparent marking system;

• All learners should receive an assessment schedule at the start of each semester to ensure that the assessment burden is spread evenly over the semester.

• Increased external examiner input in the approval and marking of continuous assessment assignments can enhance public confidence in the standards, equity and consistency of assessment across the whole assessment spectrum;

• To ensure the consistency of the decision-making process of the Examination Boards, it is recommended that Chairs from outside the School should be the norm, administrative assistance a given, training for new Chairs a pre-requisite and explicit clarification of powers, duties and responsibilities of members of examination boards desirable;

• The Institute’s Policy on Academic Integrity should be implemented in full to ensure that breaches of the policy are recorded.

Learning Resources and Student Support

• The planned online learning and teaching resource for staff will contribute to increasing professionalism;


Executive Summary 5

• Further English language support is necessary for international students, in some areas;

• The appointment of Programme Directors is recommended to ensure the efficient management of programmes;

• The establishment of a Student Centre for Learning & Development by 2010 will be a significant support to learners;

• The re-development of a comprehensive departmental induction and integration process by September 2010 will greatly assist new learners;

• The quality of learning resources is excellent in some areas, but there are deficiencies which should be addressed as budgets allow;

• Schools and Departments are largely responsible for the implementation of learning supports such as, the inclusion of a Personal Development Module in Programmes. Central mechanisms to ensure the implementation of such supports or policies are weak and should be strengthened.

Information Systems

• Departmental surveys of graduates should be extended to better track their employment paths;

• Student feedback mechanisms should be further reviewed with a view to replacing the QA1; QA2 and QA3 models;

• The proposal to establish an environmental scanning process, whereby outside information is gathered and analysed on the basis of a continuous watching brief, will, when in place, deliver a solid evidential-based framework upon which to base decision-making.

Public Information

• Information on the application process for postgraduate research degrees should be published on the website;

• Module Building Software will provide online, the level of detail required by the standard in respect of each module;

• The provision of more detailed online information on fees and student life can increase assistance to international students in their decision-making process prior to admission.


Introduction 6

In t roduct ion:

This Self-Study was carried out under the direction of HETAC and in compliance

with the requirements of the National Qualifications Authority of Ireland. Its aim is

to review the effectiveness of agreed quality assurance procedures as measured

against the Standards and Guidelines for Quality assurance in the European

Higher Education Area (ENQA 2005). The defined objectives for this review have

been agreed with HETAC and are set out in the Terms of Reference in Appendix

1.

The Institute is no stranger to external peer review. Indeed, this self-study

follows, draws from, and builds upon, the successful completion, in 2008/09, of

Programmatic Reviews in each of its four Schools. Moreover, this review took

place at the mid-point of the Institute’s 2006-2011 Strategic Plan. The Institute is

required to continually reflect and re-evaluate all aspects of its work, i.e., to

continually self-study. Watson and Maddison (2005:6) define this as “collective

reflective practice carried out by a university with the intention of understanding

better and improving its own progress toward its objectives, enhancing its

institutional effectiveness and responding to and influencing positively the context

in which it is operating”, a definition that captures succinctly how the recently

completed internal review process dovetails with the Institute’s objectives, as

outlined in the Strategic Plan.

This plan sets as its first strategic objective the placing of learning and teaching

at the core of all the Institute’s activities and will give students more learning

supports and a greater say in every aspect of Institute life. It is fair to say that this

is the primary strategic objective and the other strategic objectives in the plan are

there to support this primary focus. Already considerable progress has been

made with the establishment of a Centre for Learning and Teaching and the

establishment of student representative fora at programme board level, school

level and institutional level. However the Institute needs to ensure that these fora


Introduction 7

operate in a consistent way across all schools. The establishment of a Student

Learning Centre is now a priority and a suitable location has been identified, with

refurbishment works to take place in the summer of 2009. The years ahead will

see the Institute continuing its work to ensure it meets the objectives outlined in

the Strategic Plan.


Methodology 8

Methodology

The methodology adopted for the institutional review process at Dundalk Institute

of Technology draws on HETAC guidelines and also on best practice initiatives

identified, notably, by Cremonini and Westerheijden (2008); Kells (1995); Watson

and Maddison (2005) and Aerden (2008). It involved staff at all levels throughout

the organisation and also students and stakeholders.

The review was co-ordinated by the Registrar’s Office and managed by a

Steering Group, whose membership included a high ratio of senior staff to

underline the commitment of the leadership to the process. Working Groups were

established to evaluate the compliance of the Institute’s existing quality

assurance policies and procedures with the European Standards and Guidelines

for Quality assurance in the Higher Education Area (ES&G).

Each Working Group included a senior staff member, a junior staff member, and

where possible, a learner, and others who brought particular skill sets to the

group. As these groups had an audit function, efforts have been made to ensure

that processes were not audited by those who normally engage with the

particular process under review.

9

DkIT Dundalk Institute of Technology

Policy and Procedures

for

Quality Assurance

Chapter 1

10

1 Pol icy and Procedures for Qual i ty Assurance

Dundalk Institute of Technology achieved delegated authority status in 2004,

giving it primary responsibility for its own quality assurance in respect of bachelor

and taught masters programmes. From that point onwards, DkIT imported basic

quality assurance processes from HETAC. These can be characterised as being

high on external review and low on institutional and staff autonomy and

concentrated on conformance with existing standards and procedures. Examples

include the use of external peer review for programme validation, the external

examining system, Marks and Standards and periodic review of programmes and

awards. This model of quality control, necessarily, produced system-wide

homogeneity at the expense of the development of institutional and academic

autonomy.

The Institute did establish its own programme monitoring processes and updated

a constitution for the Academic Council. Over time, the Academic Council

modified regulations in relation to the appointment of external examiners,

continuous assessment policy, Marks and Standards and the operations of

Programme Boards. Quality procedures for research programmes at Masters

and Doctoral level were developed, as were processes for the validation of

minor, supplemental and special purpose awards and for individual modules.

Such procedures have evolved under the impact of operational experience,

changing programme structure and through observation of procedures in other

Institutes of Technology. Most of the change can be described as incremental,

although initiatives such as changes to admission requirements for level seven

programmes, the implementation of modularisation and semesterisation, and

progression regulations have been policy driven. Quality assurance

developments also acknowledge both external and internal requirements. These

include inter alia, the threshold standards identified on the National Framework of

Qualifications and the Institute’s own strategic goals.

11

1 . 1 Th e Impa c t o f D e l e g a t e d Au t h o r i t y o n t h e I n s t i t u t e ’ s Qu a l i t y S y s t em .

Delegation of Authority has encouraged the Institute to take responsibility for

quality and for academic standards. Rather than adhering to what’s standard in

the sector, discussions on quality increasingly refer to international examples of

recognised best practice, thus both reflecting and reinforcing the increasing

confidence and professionalism of the

Institute’s staff. In short, quality assurance has

become embedded, at least on the level of

conformity. Responsibilities are clearly

delineated between the Registrar’s Office, the

Academic Council, and the Schools and

Departments.

The Academic Council debates promote awareness of best practice in quality

assurance matters on an Institute-wide basis. Reports to Academic Council

promote concrete change, for example, the focus on programme and module

outcomes encouraged the development of the Learning Support Unit which

evolved in 2008 into the Centre for Learning and Teaching.

In addition, reflecting the need to move toward more student-centred

approaches, the voice of the student body at all levels of institutional decision-

making is greater than ever before. Students are represented on the Governing

Body, on the Academic Council and on Programme and School/Faculty Boards.

1 . 2 Gove rn an c e

Formally, the quality assurance system is governed by the Academic Council and

its sub-committees; it’s managed by the Registrar’s Office, and, on a day-to-day

basis, by each Academic Department. However, the Academic Council as a

representative body is large and can often be slow in making decisions, unable at

Rather than adhering to what’s standard in the sector, discussions on quality increasingly refer to international examples of recognised best practice.

12

times to respond quickly to changing needs. In addition, its oversight of

processes can be cursory. Indeed, a recent survey of its own members indicates

impatience with what some described as, an “at times laborious and pedantic

process.” As a result of this review, the Academic Council will be restructured to

ensure that the quality assurance processes are dealt with in a more timely

fashion. This restructuring is currently underway as a new Council convenes in

April 2009.

1 . 3 Fo s t e r i n g a Q ua l i t y Cu l t u r e

Engendering an institutional ethos of quality improvement is a collegiate process.

Staff are engaged in quality processes on a daily basis and are encouraged to

promote quality improvement. New staff are introduced to quality processes at

induction. Increasingly regulations and best practice are developed by the

Academic Council, or at school or department level, and staff are advised of

these through the appropriate communication channels. Training is provided

where necessary, for example in the development of outcomes-based

specification of modules.

At present, quality assurance of delivery can only be done at a distance. The

tools available for this include feedback from learners, annual PMDS interviews

and training programmes. Management information systems also have a role to

play in the quality assurance process. For example, the Banner system is a

registration and examination system that produces data and reports on students

and on examination systems. Syllabus+ is used for examination scheduling. The

Institute is in the process of purchasing module building software, which will allow

access to all module descriptors through the web. Plagiarism detection software

has just been rolled out across all departments following a trial in the Department

of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Studies. In addition, the recently established

Centre for Learning and Teaching has as its main aim to improve the quality of

teaching and assessment techniques. This should go some way to

institutionalising quality improvement as a self-generated, reflective practice.

13

The move from a teaching culture, towards a learning one, necessarily requires

that staff be given greater autonomy over delivery and assessment. However, the

learning environment is increasingly regulated (e.g., NFQ standards and learning

outcomes). This highly prescriptive approach, coupled with the need for

transparency and accountability, narrows the opportunities for staff ownership.

This in turn requires that levels of professional knowledge and exposure to best

practice be increased.

1 . 4 Eva l u a t i o n a nd Imp ro v emen t

Proposals for change can emanate from Schools and

Departments, from the Academic Council, from its sub-

committees, or on the initiative of the Registrar’s Office.

Improvement initiatives are also informed by external peer

review and stakeholder feedback. Feedback on delivery and

assessment occurs through standard learner feedback

pathways, e.g. student fora, periodic surveys of learners, or

learner representation on Programme Boards, the Academic Council, or

Governing Body. Additionally there is learner input into the programmatic review

process and the strategic planning process. Improvement initiatives also occur

through monitoring of the students’ complaints’ process and internal and external

audits conducted as a requirement of ISO 9001:2000 registration. Programme

Board meetings have identified weaknesses in the system and have led to

incremental improvements as a result.

There has been a tendency in the past for quality assurance processes to be

accepted as a given. Until now, these have been evaluated at Programmatic

Review and as a by-product of annual internal processes, such as programme

board meetings. The programmatic review process, while being a useful vehicle

for measuring performance, has had the inherent weakness of being largely an

14

internal examination of quality assurance. The ensuing peer review examined

conformance.

There is no systematic review of strategic planning processes outside of a

reformulation at each occasion of a new strategic plan. On operational matters

ISO 9001:2000 registration is used increasingly as a tool for the systemisation of

administrative processes. The limitations of ISO 9001:2000 for the quality

assurance of higher education are acknowledged. ISO is a tool designed to deal

with business processes, and while it does ensure process compliance, the

Institute should perhaps examine other systems, e.g. ServQual or EFQM, to find

a model better suited to what Westerheijden describes as “processes that show a

large repertoire of option, the choice of which depends on expert insight, or on

trial and error.” (Westerheijden, 2008).

This institutional review has examined quality assurance processes and has

redefines elements of the quality assurance system in a new Quality Manual for

the Institute. The Quality Improvement Plan identifies mechanisms to ensure

systematic and periodic quality assurance reviews, which are informed by best

practice and not just conformance. These reviews will be overseen by the

Academic Council and the Executive Management Board. They will also give rise

to the subsequent implementation of improvement measures. An important

element will be the explicit reference to external standards and benchmarking

against best practice. It would be envisaged that each process would be

reviewed at least once every five years.

On strategic planning processes, the Institute is currently one of only two

Institutes of Technology (DIT is the other), participating in the pilot phase of

Empowering Staff through Institutional Planning (ESTIP). The Executive Board

has recently completed training and has made a decision to develop a new

Strategic Plan for 2010 -2103 over the coming 12 months. A first phase of this

will be a review of the current Plan.

15


Approval, Monitoring

and

Periodic Review

of

Programmes and Awards Chapter 2


Chapter 2 16

2 Approval , Moni tor ing and Per iodic Review of Programmes and Awards

2 . 1 Dev e l o pmen t a nd p ub l i c a t i o n o f e x p l i c i t l e a r n i n g o u t comes

Learning outcomes are based on Bloom’s Taxonomy and arise at two levels in

the development of programmes. They arise at the level of the module and also

at programme level. At the level of the module, outcomes are stated explicitly

and are directly linked to assessment processes. At validation, attention is paid in

the first instance to learning outcomes, with module content being a secondary

focus. Particular attention is also paid to ensuring that the programmes meet or

exceed the threshold standards identified in the National Framework of

Qualifications. Opportunities for progression are clearly delineated. Staff training

is provided in the writing of learning outcomes and considerable progress has

been made in this area. Further training will be provided on an ongoing basis.

Programme outcomes are drawn from the relevant standards and are explicitly

stated in programme documents. Linkages between programme and module

outcomes are made. Validation panels are encouraged to review the

programmes in the context of their overall outcomes. However experience shows

that there remains a tendency for some panels to concentrate on inputs as a

measure of the quality of the programme.

Programme descriptors are published internally, but are not readily available to

learners. The planned acquisition of module builder software will allow on-line

access to module descriptors.


Chapter 2 17

2 . 2 Ca r e f u l a t t e n t i o n t o c u r r i c u l um a nd p r o g r amme d e s i g n and con t e n t .

Programme design to external standards has been a feature of academic

development activities. In DkIT, it is a rigorous four-stage process, which

involves:

• An initial internal examination of resource requirements;

• An internally-led academic assessment process with external involvement;

• An external validation process;

• A final internal check to ensure that recommendations contained in the

validation report are addressed.

This effectively delivers programmes with specific learning outcomes targeted at

the labour market. It does not deal so well with modular systems where there is a

necessity to mix and match modules. The process can be cumbersome and

repetitive.

2 . 3 Spe c i f i c n e e d s o f d i f f e r en t mod es o f d e l i v e r y

The academic development and validation processes are targeted at present to

full-time learners. Although part-time learners are catered for, it is assumed that

delivery and assessment will not differ in type from full-time learners. Electronic

delivery and assessment only exist in pilot form, and the particular issues dealing

with Recognised Prior Learning (RPL) are the subject of Academic Council policy

development.

2 . 4 Ava i l a b i l i t y o f a p p r op r i a t e r e sou r c e s

The availability of resources is an issue dealt with internally at an early stage of

the development process and the adequacy of both personnel and physical

facilities are checked. The ongoing availability of resources is monitored by

programme boards and at programmatic review. The tacit assumption was made

heretofore, that resources once in place would remain available for the lifetime of


Chapter 2 18

a programme. While this was true in the era where resources were plentiful and

the institution was growing, it can no longer be assumed in an era of constraint.

More attention must now be paid to the effects of the ageing of equipment and

staff retirements.

2 . 5 Fo rma l p r o g r amme app ro v a l b y a b o d y o t h e r t h an t h e s t a f f t e a ch i n g t h e p r o g r amme

As mentioned above, at design stage, a programme undergoes two separate

academic evaluations. The first of these is an analysis by a sub-committee of the

Academic Council, supported by external peers nominated by the proposing

group. This looks at structure, resources, compliance with Institute policy,

detailed outcomes and resources. The second process is the actual validation

by external peers and experts chosen independently by the Registrar’s Office.

This repeats the previous process with the expectation that the focus is now on

broad programme outcomes, standards and facilities. This process, while

rigorous, is also cumbersome. An external panel may frequently interpret its brief

too broadly. The outcomes of the two evaluations may, in fact, contradict each

other, thus causing confusion.

It is necessary to achieve a balance between

the need for independent verification of

standards and the Institute’s own autonomy

and professionalism. The Institute intends to

work towards achieving this balance by

strengthening the initial stages of the validation

process. This will be achieved by the

development of more explicit Institute policies on resourcing and delivery and on

the specification of learning outcomes and assessment strategies.

The validation process will, in the future, be focused on a rigorous examination of

the following points:

It is necessary to achieve a balance between the need for independent verification of standards and the Institute’s own autonomy and professionalism.


Chapter 2 19

• Conformance to standards;

• The achievement of programme learning outcomes ;

• Assessment strategy;

• Labour market requirements;

• Adequacy of resources.

The Institute will, as always, seek to ensure that panel members are

experienced, and conversant with the standards and the expected programme

outcomes in the discipline.

2 . 6 Mon i t o r i n g t h e p r o g r e s s a nd a ch i e v emen t s o f s t u d en t s

The progress of learners is monitored on a number of levels. On an individual

level, learners are given regular feedback from academic staff on particular

modules. Class groups are assessed periodically throughout the year by

Programme Boards. Student performance is finally assessed at end of year by

the relevant Examination Board at the end of each semester. The Academic

Council ratifies the examination results for each student. Some of the oversight is

cursory, particularly at Academic Council level. The role of the Academic Council

needs to be more analytical, i.e., it should look at trends in results over a number

of years. The link between outcomes for individual modules and interventions in

delivery also needs to be strengthened in some cases.

2 . 7 Regu l a r p e r i o d i c r e v i ew o f p r o g r ammes

Programmes and facilities in each School are reviewed in a five-yearly

Programmatic Review. These reviews are major operations involving all the staff

in a School, and are done over an extended period. The resultant self studies are

examined by external panels and the outcomes of these are reported to the

Academic Council and the Executive Management Board. These reviews have

four interlinking objectives. They act as a programme revalidation process; a

review of the quality procedures within the School; a study of the implementation


Chapter 2 20

of the Strategic Plan in the School, and as an environmental scan of the

disciplines involved.

The four objectives do not work well together. The revalidation process is

effective, but is overshadowed by the other objectives. The review of quality

assurance procedures would be better replaced by a more frequent audit of

procedures and an Institute-wide review of the quality system.

Links with the Strategic Plan are addressed as part of the Programmatic Review

process. There is an argument that these links might be more appropriately

handled internally, as part of an annual planning exercise. Rather than looking at

specific plans, a revised model for Programmatic Review would concentrate on

the capacity of a school to develop, monitor, modify and deliver its programmes.

It would also confirm conformance with the decisions of previous external peer

reviews. Programmatic Review Panels should have expertise on delivery,

assessment and appropriate standards.

2 . 8 Regu l a r f e e db ack f r om emp l o y e r s

Employers are a formal part of the programme validation process. They also

contribute to Programmatic Reviews and are involved in discipline-specific

advisory groups. Graduate surveys provide more labour market information.

These systems tend to be reactive, with employers commenting on prior

initiatives of the Institute. The Institute will, as part of its reform of the

Programmatic Review, introduce environmental scanning processes specific to

its programmes. These will inform programme developers and the Executive

Management Board on developing issues.


Chapter 2 21

2 . 9 Pa r t i c i p a t i o n b y s t u d en t s i n q u a l i t y a s su r an c e p r o c e s s es

Students are formally represented and active on the Academic Council, the

Governing Body, and on Programmatic Review Panels. In these functions it is

either elected student union personnel, or senior, or postgraduate students who

are involved. The input at this level tends to be effective. Learners are also

represented on programme management boards. Their contribution at this latter

level is variable and they do suffer from a power imbalance with academic staff.

Some academic staff have in the past showed some reluctance to engage with

students on these processes.

2 . 1 0 Res e a r ch

The Institute has case-by-case approval for research awards as shown in Table 1. The HETAC reports on the Institute’s 2008 approvals are available on:

http://www.hetac.ie/publications.cfm?sID=59

Over the past two years, the Institute has developed its own Masters’ and PhD’

regulations, based on best practice. It has established research Programme

Boards in the Schools of Business and Humanities; Informatics, Music and

Creative Media and in Nursing, Midwifery, Health Studies and Applied Sciences.

The number of registered research students currently stands at a modest 49, but

this figure is growing. Dr Tim McCormac was appointed as Head of Research in

September 2008 and a new research strategy has just been developed. Its key

objectives are:

• To sustain a Research culture within the Institute;

• To develop and build a critical mass of sustainable research and scholarly

activity in a selected range of strategic areas and to review these areas


Chapter 2 22

formally, through the Research Sub-Committee on a regular basis, in line

with the Institute’s Strategic Plan and focus;

• To develop key strategic research competencies of specific relevance to

course provision, graduate needs and the needs of the regional and

national economy, the wider community and society;

• To support the development of new teaching programme modules and

content and to update existing knowledge through the deliberate

integration of research knowledge with teaching practice within a holistic

learning environment;

• To explore commercialisation possibilities for the Institute’s R&D activities

and develop and implement an Intellectual Property and

Commercialisation Policy for R&D within a national framework and

approach;

• To provide equality of opportunity to all to participate in research.

irrespective of race, gender, age, or disability;

• To support talented Researchers, Research Teams and Research

Centres of regional, national and international standing;

• To acknowledge the inherent social value of the artistic endeavour by

encouraging and promoting research and scholarly activity in the creative,

performing and interpretive arts.

• To ensure that all the Institute’s research activity is conducted to the

highest ethical standards and in line with the Institute’s Research Ethics

Policies and Procedures;

• To popularise and publicise research activities and career opportunities to

schools, the wider community and the general public.

Ensuring Delegation of Authority for awards at levels 9 and 10 is one of the

Institute’s Strategic Goals, and an application for accreditation is likely to be

lodged in 2009 for research in Smooth Muscle Studies, and Fresh Water Studies,

and in Informatics and Music.


Chapter 2 23

Record of Approved Research

Date of HETAC Decision Research at Level 9 Research at Level 10

2005

(Grandfather

Clause)1

Music

Social Care

Humanities (Cultural Studies,

History)

Biology

Food Science

Business Studies

Entrepreneurship

October 2008 Social Networks, Environments

and Technologies for Wellness

and Ageing-in-Place

Social Networks,

Environments and

Technologies for Wellness

and Ageing-in-Place

Fresh Water Studies Smooth Muscle Studies

Smooth Muscle Studies Fresh Water Studies

Approval

Pending

Informatics Informatics

Table 1 Source: Research Status of HETAC Providers, Draft, January 2009

1 The Grandfather Clause refers to areas in which research had been conducted in Institutes of

Technology prior to the establishment of HETAC policy on research accreditation, which were deemed to have been ‘approved’ following an evaluation exercise.

24


Assessment

of

Students

Chapter 3


Chapter 3 25

3 Assessment of Students

3 . 1 Measu r i n g A ch i e v emen t o f I n t e nd ed L e a r n i n g Ou t comes & P r og r amme Ob j e c t i v e s

The constructive alignment of assessment tasks, with learning outcomes and

programme aims, is essential to achieving effective learning across the cognitive,

affective and psychomotor domains. To further ensure commitment to best

practice in this area, the Institute has established the Centre for Learning and

Teaching. This Centre represents a measure designed to increase the

professionalism of Institute staff and as such, is a substantial commitment to the

aim of ensuring all staff are equipped to identify and apply assessments tasks

relevant to the achievement of the programme’s intended learning outcomes.

3 . 2 Ass e s smen t M e t h od s

Staff recognise that the evaluation of intended learning outcomes involves

diagnostic, feedforward, feedback, and summative aspects. While these terms of

themselves may not be current among staff, there is a widespread recognition

that feedback is the key to effective learning, thus providing the basis upon which

a more systematic process of formative assessment is developing. Across the

Institute, departments are introducing standard feedback sheets for all

assignments, involving both feedback and feedforward elements, which when

combined, are powerful aids to learning.

Nevertheless, as elsewhere, assessment at DkIT remains overwhelmingly

summative (See: Ryan, 2007; Brown, 1999 and O’Neill, 2002). There is a

perception among some staff that non-summative assessment exercises would

present an unnecessary burden to both learners and staff. The payback, in terms

of the deep learning which formative assessment can encourage, is not always

obvious.


Chapter 3 26

Staff recognise also the potential value of self and peer assessment.

Nevertheless, given the importance students place on assessment (Brown, 2001;

Rust, 2002; Martin, 2003; Light and Cox, 2003; Ramsden, 2003; Biggs, 2004;

2006) there is a reticence amongst some staff about the usage of these

approaches. Increased participation in training on teaching and assessment

strategies can advance the aspirations towards more innovative assessment

methods alluded to, but not explained, in the Institute’s Programmatic Review

documentation.

3 . 3 Es t ab l i s h i n g and Pub l i s h i n g M a r k i n g C r i t e r i a

The Institute’s Marks and Standards regulations (based on the HETAC 2001

version and updated by the Academic Council in October 2008) are available on

the Institute website. Examination papers and continuous assessment

assignments indicate the marks available for each required task. Moreover, to

enhance their validity and reliability, the marking schemes and model answers for

summative assessment tasks are available to external examiners. Model

answers are available to learners after the suite of examinations is complete.

This does not seem to be the general practice for continual assessment

assignments.

This review has identified an opportunity to focus in more detail on marking

criteria and recommends the use of marking bands setting out the knowledge,

skills and competencies associated with a given grade. A credible and

transparent marking scheme could do much to eliminate discrepancies between

marks attained in science and humanities disciplines, due to the traditional

reluctance of examiners in the humanities to use the full range of marks

available.

Assessment drives learning, and it is essential

that students are made aware of the formal

There is some concern that students may be over-assessed.


Chapter 3 27

requirements of the assessment process. This review has established that there

is some concern that students may be over-assessed. To ensure that this does

not happen, learners should receive a schedule of the assessment assignments

at the start of each semester. A carefully structured schedule would ensure an

even spread over the semester to minimise the assessment burden. This

problem is linked to the absence of Programme Directors. That this schedule is

not always issued is a matter of concern, which must be addressed. In addition,

students are encouraged to access the regulations governing examinations and

continuous assessment available on the Institute website at:

http://ww2.dkit.ie/student_life/examinations/docs/conduct_of_examinations .

These regulations were formally updated in October 2007 by the Academic

Council.

3 . 4 A r r an g emen t s f o r L e a r n e r s w i t h S p e c i a l N e ed s

In relation to learners with special needs, a range of supports exist. For example:

• Extra time;

• Reader or Scribe;

• Rest Period;

• Use of technology, e.g. a laptop;

• Separate examination facilities;

• Waiver on Spelling, or Grammar.

3 . 5 Exam i n e r s

All examiners are appropriately qualified in the discipline area examined.

External examiners are drawn from the Irish Institute of Technology sector, from

Irish or overseas universities and from industry. Postgraduate examiners are

more frequently attached to overseas universities than is the case for

undergraduate programmes. Training in assessment methodologies is available

to internal examiners as indicated above. The Institute would see an advantage


Chapter 3 28

for the sector as a whole, if training were provided to a nationally agreed

standard.

This review indicates external examiners’ confidence in the quality of learners’

achievements at the Institute. Nevertheless, there is some concern that the input

of external examiners is peripheral to the examining process, as their workload is

a heavy one and budget difficulties restrict them to one annual meeting with

internal examiners, at the time of the Summer Examination Board Meetings.

Second readers can enhance the examining process, a practice which works well

where resources allow. As continuous assessment becomes an increasing

feature of all modules, the input of the external examiner in assignment approval

should become more proactive than is currently the case. The Examination

Board is the final arbitrator in the examination process and as such ensures that

decisions never rely on the judgement of one examiner. To ensure the

consistency of the decision-making process of the Examination Boards, it is

recommended that independent Chairs should be considered, administrative

assistance a given, training for new Chairs a prerequisite and explicit clarification

of powers, duties and responsibilities of members of examination boards

desirable.

3 . 6 Exam i n a t i o n R egu l a t i o n s : Comp l i a n c e

Reviews of the examining process take place following each suite of

examinations both at programme board level and in the Examinations’ Office.

The Programme Board is assisted in its review by the reports from external

examiners and changes are put in place when necessary. The Examinations

Office has ISO 9001:2000 registration and operates a system of continual

improvement following such reviews. Internal audits of examination procedures

are held bi-annually and the NSAI conducts a similar audit every three years as a

condition of registration. Assessment information and results should be

permanently archived. All examination material is retained for eighteen months.


Chapter 3 29

3 . 7 Regu l a t i o n s co ve r i n g S t u d en t Ab s en c e , I l l n e s s a nd o t h e r M i t i g a t i n g C i r c ums t an c e s

Regulations covering student absence, illness and other mitigating

circumstances are available to learners through the Institute website. The

Academic Council has implemented a detailed policy regarding submission dates

for Continuous Assessment assignments.

Learners are informed of their provisional examination results within 24 hours of

the Examination Board meeting; they have an opportunity to meet with staff for a

re-check, or review of their results.

The Institute’s Policy on Academic Integrity, adopted in 2004, is one response to

incidents of plagiarism, a problem across the third-level sector (Peden Smith &

Duggan, Eds., 2004; Duggan, Ed., 2007). Following the successful trial of a

plagiarism detection tool in the Department of Nursing, Midwifery and Health

Studies in 2007, the licence has been extended in 2009 to allow for its

widespread use. This review suggests a need to update the existing policy on

academic integrity and to ensure in particular, that adequate records are kept of

incidents of plagiarism.

30


Quality Assurance

of

Teaching Staff

Chapter 4


Chapter 4 31

4 Qual i ty Assurance of Teaching Staf f

4 . 1 Rec ru i tmen t a nd S e l e c t i o n

The Human Resources Department (HR) gained ISO 9001:2000 registration in

October 2008. In keeping with the philosophy of ISO, continuous improvement

techniques have been embraced in the form of planned, regular HR meetings

and regular collaboration and benchmarking with HR departments in other

Institutes of Technology. The Department strictly adheres to the guidelines set

out by the Irish Government’s Department of Education and Science with regard

to recruitment and selection procedures.

Existing HR guidelines have evolved from Government legislation and in

particular the 1992 RTC Act, which may be due for review. Currently, however,

there are no formal procedures in the Institute to assess teaching competence

amongst existing staff, nor are specific qualifications stipulated as an essential

requirement in new staff selection procedures. HR maintains staff qualifications

records, but cannot ensure their completeness.

The current economic climate, advances in technology and resulting changes in

student expectations will present opportunities in the form of increasing and

diversifying the existing pool of talent available for selection. The suite of courses

the Institute provides, for example at Master’s level, presents the opportunity for

existing staff to actively pursue their own academic development. The use of

developments such as e-recruitment will offer the opportunity to reach further

academic talent. The HR Department’s ISO9001:2000 registration offers a

building block on which to develop expertise in the quality assurance of

recruitment and ongoing development of future and current teaching staff.

Obvious threats in this area are other Institutes of Technology, who will be

competing for the best candidates, adverse changes in the labour market and

changes, or reductions in government funding.


Chapter 4 32

4 . 2 Pe r f o rman c e M an ag emen t a nd De v e l o pmen t S y s t em ( PMDS )

As part of the PMDS process, every staff member has an individual meeting with

their Manager/Head of Department, during which they review progress and

performance for the previous year and agree a Personal Development Plan

(PDP) outlining new priorities and objectives for the following year, including a

summary for each area of the agreed development and training plan, which is

copied to the HR Department.

PMDS has numerous strengths, including the fact that it is mandatory for all

academic staff annually and is a formal opportunity to express interest in

Continuing Professional Development (CPD). It is also an opportunity to review

the performance of the previous year and to identify a staff member’s strengths

and potential areas of professional development. The PDP includes agreed work

priorities, development needs, and plans for the year ahead. Training requests

from the meetings are aggregated by HR and used for central planning purposes.

Quality assurance of teaching staff is conducted through an agreed quality

assurance process which, in the initial stage affords students an opportunity to

provide feedback to the lecturer on ‘Presentation of subject’ and ‘Effectiveness of

communication’. A summary of this form (QA1) is then supplied to the Head of

Department by the lecturer in question via a QA2 form. This survey allows

feedback to be given directly to the lecturer. The correlation of all collected data

allows the Head of Department to obtain an overview of students’ opinions of

lecturer quality (amongst other things) using the QA2 form. By agreement with

the social partners, the completed QA1 forms remain the sole property of the

lecturer and the Head of Department does not have access to these. Thus

she/he receives only a summary by the delivering lecturer, which may be

subjective. The results of this exercise do not, moreover, contribute in any way to

either CPD or PMDS, in which case there is now an opportunity to integrate

these more closely.


Chapter 4 33

A further quality assurance mechanism used by students is the Student

Representation Forum, which is structured on a School basis. The function of the

Student Representation Forum is to provide a mechanism by which students are

able to bring to the attention of academic staff and Heads of

School/Department/Section issues relating to their respective Programmes and

the Institute as a whole. Students also have access to a Complaints Procedure

which is set out in the Student Handbook. This is given to all students at

induction.

4 . 3 Con t i n u i n g P r o f e s s i o n a l D e v e l o pmen t

Numerous strengths have been identified concerning the Institute’s provision of

opportunity for continuing professional development. These include staff-

requested training events and workshops, a Staff Development Week, study

leave and sabbaticals. In addition, members of staff receive funding to register

for higher degrees, including Doctorates and Masters programmes in higher

education practice, as well as other professionally relevant areas, and there is

also a two-day induction for new staff. A number of staff have received a

Postgraduate Diploma, or Certificate in Education from the University of Ulster in

order to enhance their teaching skills. International exchanges are encouraged

and financed, guest lectures and lunch-time seminars offered throughout the

year, and ‘on-the-job’ training supported through the Human Resources

Department at departmental level. The HR Department, in consultation with all

relevant stakeholders, processes staff training and development needs. This

process includes a training needs’ plan formulated through the PMDS process.

An agreed annual budget ensures staff training and development will occur. Staff

Development Week provides staff with training opportunities, which again is

organised through HR following in-depth consultation with staff. However, the

training budget is held centrally and is not allocated to specific schools and

departments, for example on a pro-rata basis according to staff numbers. Some

schools indicate a wish to control these budgets at local level.


Chapter 4 34

Within the Institute, there is no formal, or compulsory academic induction, other

than the two days referred to above. Staff training events/workshops do not

benefit from a dedicated time when all would be available to attend. Sabbaticals

are granted under strict criteria. Teaching staff who are encountering difficulties

in their teaching are offered structured support through the Centre for Learning

and Teaching. This includes observation of teaching by the new Head of

Learning and Teaching, who reports back to the Head of Department and the

Head of School. With this recent appointment, a planned Academic Induction

programme in keeping with CPD opportunities in other Irish institutes of higher

education, will become available as part of a new M.A. in Learning and Teaching

(Higher Education) scheduled to start in September 2009. Its blended learning

and teaching approach will help resolve the perennial difficulty of finding

dedicated time for staff to attend training events on a particular day, morning or

afternoon. The Head of Learning and Teaching has also developed an online

Learning and Teaching resource, which staff will have access to from the end of

February 2009, thus affording flexible access to professionally relevant content

on effective practice. The Head of Learning and Teaching has also recently

developed a Teaching Standards framework on teaching effectiveness.

In light of the current economic climate, a threat for Continuing Professional

Development is that of potential budget cut, which may impinge on the strengths

already in place, as well as the opportunities identified above.

Table 2 below provides a profile of the postgraduate qualifications held by academic staff.


Chapter 4 35

Postgraduate Qualifications: Academic Staff.

School Number of

Academic Staff 2

Masters

Degrees

PhD (& on

going)

Business & Humanities 83 64 (77%) 12 (14%)

Informatics, Music &

Creative Media 51 44 (86%) 11 (22%)

Engineering 100 46 (46%) 12 (12%)

Nursing, Midwifery, Health

Studies & Science 56 52 (93%) 21 (38%)

Table 2 HR Department records 2009

2 HR Department records 2009

36


Learning Resources

and

Student Support

Chapter 5


Chapter 5 37

5 Learn ing Resources and Student Support

5 . 1 L e a r n i n g Supp o r t

DkIT has had among the highest participation rate of students from manual,

semi-skilled and unskilled backgrounds in the country over the years. (Clancy &

Wall, 2000). (See also Table 3). Many of these students represent the first

generation of their family to enter higher education. Additionally, the Institute

must cater to the needs of international students, students with disabilities and

mature students. Supporting these learners requires an awareness of a range of

varying learning needs and the identification of appropriate supports.

Socio-Economic Profile of New Entrants to DkIT for whom a classification was assigned

% of DkIT

Respondents National

Population3 Participation Ratio

DkIT4

Employer & Manager

20.1% 17.0% 1.2

Higher Professional

3.7% 4.50% 0.8

Lower Professional

7.9% 10.20% 0.8

Non-Manual 11.6% 21.10% 0.5 Skilled-Manual 20.6% 10.60% 1.9 Semi-Skilled 9.4% 7.5% 1.3 Unskilled 6.5% 3.50% 1.9 Own Account 8.0% 3.20% 2.5 Farmers 7.8% 3.00% 2.6 Agricultural Workers

0.5% 0.50% 1.0

Other & Unknown 4.0% 19.00% 0.2 Table 3 Source: HEA 2007-8 Equal Access Data Collection

3 17-19 year old age cohort from 2006 Census 4 A ratio greater than 1 indicates that a Socio-economic Group is over-represented among new entrants compared to its share of population.


Chapter 5 38

The Joint Executive/Student Representation Forum provides a useful vehicle to

gather learner feedback. High levels of student satisfaction are reported in

relation to student support. A broad range of teaching methodologies

appropriate to each programme and to the needs of the diverse student body is

utilised throughout the Institute. Methodologies include lectures, group

discussion and debate, tutorials, seminars, guided study, self-directed study and

guest speakers. Teaching of practical skills involves demonstration, simulation,

role-plays, audiovisual display, and performance. Teaching and learning

methodologies for placements include observation, supervised practice,

demonstration, role-modelling, case conferences, multidisciplinary team

meetings, reflective practice and critical incident debriefing. Online learning and

blended learning is growing, with the use of moodle and video-conferencing to

enable distance- and part-time learning. Further growth in this latter area can be

promoted by setting specific targets on e-learning delivery.

Many programmes offer a personal and professional development module which

facilitates the transition to higher education and enhances independent learning.

Orientation and induction procedures are delivered at departmental level and

many programmes provide programme specific student handbooks. Schools and

Departments are largely responsible for the implementation of learning supports

such as, for example, the inclusion of a Personal Development Module in

Programmes. Central mechanisms to ensure the implementation of such agreed

policies are however weak and must be re-examined to ensure effectiveness.

At master’s level, teaching and learning is underpinned by a problem-solving

methodology and a learner-centred approach. Learning is seen as being

‘dialogic’ and students are engaged in debate and critical reflection. Students are

expected to reflect on the practical applications of theoretical knowledge, to

explore topics in more detail and to reinforce key principles and core knowledge.


Chapter 5 39

Prompt feedback to learners who engage in these activities is critical to the

learning experience, and the Institute’s policy of delivering prompt and

constructive feedback in relation to assessment, holds good in this respect also.

Programme handbooks are an example of good practice and it is desirable that

these become the norm for all programmes, as indeed should be the offer to all

learners of a module on personal and professional development. International

students already receive considerable English language support, but there is

evidence to suggest that even more is needed. Learner feedback, as well as

student success rates and progression pathways can continue to identify those

supports which work best and those which are less effective. The Institute has

not appointed programme directors for each programme, to date. Were this

deficiency to be addressed, it would not only lead to an enhancement of

individual programmes, but would also increase the professional skills of the

programme leaders themselves. The re-development of a comprehensive

departmental induction and integration process by September 2010 will greatly

assist new learners. The quality of learning resources is excellent in some areas,

but there are deficiencies which should be addressed as budgets allow.

5 . 2 S t ud en t S e r v i c e s Un i t

The Student Services Unit strives to enhance the individual student experience

by providing an accessible, efficient and excellent service which supports the

holistic development of the person, thereby enabling each student to achieve

his/her full potential. The following support services operate within the Student

Services Unit:

• Access; • Disability and Student Quality • Office; • Careers;

• Chaplaincy; • Counselling; • Sports and Societies; • Health Unit.

Students can access these services free of charge.


Chapter 5 40

5 . 3 Pa r t i c i p a t i o n

The Institute recognises that a comprehensive equality of access and

participation policy is essential to its efficiency and effectiveness as a provider of

higher education.

Encouraging adults to return to education is a primary role of the Access Office.

In this role it contributes to the Institute’s mission of providing the community with

quality third-level education and services relevant to the economic, social and

cultural development of the region. The Access Office offers advice and

information to potential applicants on an one-to-one basis, organises visits from

local VEC5 schools, runs programmes in outreach centres (Drogheda &

Longford) and visits VEC centres and Further Education Institutes. An Access

Plan Steering Group is drawing up an access plan based on targets published in

the National Plan of Access for Higher Education 2008-2013. The Institute,

through the Access Office also participates in and contributes to national, local

and regional policies and initiatives through its representation on a range of

groups and boards. These include RAPID groups in Drogheda and Dundalk, the

Social Inclusion Measures Group in the Louth County Development Board, an

Integration group on Traveller Access, Northeast Further & Higher Education

Alliance, (NEFHEA) and The Association for Higher Education and Disability

(AHEAD).

One of the strategic action areas in the Institute’s Strategic Plan is to “develop

initiatives that support the recruitment, retention and graduation of non-

traditional6 students, including the development of targets in relation to increased

access for these students.” Specific targets will be set for non-standard

admissions as one of the outcomes of the Access Plan referred to above. Plans

5 Vocational Education Committee 6 Traditional Students are those who enter higher education directly upon completion of second level education.


Chapter 5 41

for enhancing the provision and resources for non-traditional students will

emanate from the Access Plan Steering Group.

Additional orientation is provided to mature students, which addresses topics

such as academic writing, “Refresher Maths,” and making the transition to Higher

Education. The number of mature students attending DkIT is lower than the

national average and additional effort and resources will be required to increase

participation.

Most students who present at DkIT with a specific learning difficulty furnish an

educational assessment needs’ analysis on entry (See Table 4). Those who can

not, are encouraged to consider the benefits of having such an assessment

carried out. Software which profiles a student’s preferred learning mode has

been purchased recently. Additional academic and examination supports are

provided. Financial support is available through the Student Assistance Fund.


Chapter 5 42

New Entrants indicating a Disability

DkIT All Participating Institutions

% of new Entrants 7

Total number of Students with Disabilities 65 1,389 32,223

Profile of Reported Disabilities 8

Blindness, deafness, severe vision or hearing impairment

4.6% 11.7% 0.5%

Physical Condition 10.8% 13.4% 0.6%

Specific Learning Difficulty 55.4% 49.8% 2.1%

Psychological or Emotional Condition 9.2% 13.1% 0.6%

Other, including any chronic illness 23.1% 22.2% 0.9%

% new entrants with a disability who indicated a requirement for additional supports

52.3% 44.2%

% new entrants with a disability indicating a need for additional supports as a proportion of all new entrants

2.7% 1.9%

Table 4 Source: HEA 2007-8 Equal Access Data Collection

Schools are developing a range of programmes to respond to the current

economic crisis. The School of Business & Humanities has, for example,

developed a programme that seeks to address the needs of people recently

made redundant from the business, office or hospitality environment and wish to

up-skill to re-enter the employment market, or continue in education.

7 In the 24 institutions that returned this set of data 8 As respondents could tick more than one disability the total number of disabilities recorded could exceed

the total number of students with a disability


Chapter 5 43

Recognised Prior Learning (RPL) is in its infancy and when fully operational, will

support access, progression and participation. An RPL function will enhance the

service to students and has the potential to attract many first generation and non-

traditional students to higher education.

5 . 4 L i b r a r y

The library’s mission is to creatively deliver quality library and information

services and be a dynamic partner in the achievement of DkIT’s teaching,

learning and research objectives. The library holds ISO 9001:2000 registration

and has gained Excellence Through People Accreditation.

The library is housed centrally in a modern, light building and feedback from

users regularly attests to a quality service provided by competent staff. However,

with the significant growth in student numbers it has become too small. Library

opening hours do not meet the requirements of students, and dissatisfaction

exists around wireless access and the number of ebooks available to users.

There are insufficient textbooks for some undergraduate programmes.

Postgraduate research is hindered by the fact that the library, in common with all

libraries in the Institute of Technology sector, does not have access to the entire

Irish electronic Libraries (IReL) database. However, the HEA has just funded

access to Academic Search Premier and Business Source Premier for 2009 in a

step that begins to address this deficiency and hopefully augurs well for the

future.

5 . 5 S t ud en t C en t r e f o r L e a r n i n g and D e v e l o pmen t

A Student Centre for Learning & Development is about to be established at DkIT

by 2010. This will:

• Support the Strategic Plan Goal of moving from a teaching to a learning

environment;


Chapter 5 44

• Ease the transition from second- to third-level study and improve retention

rates;

• Provide one-to-one and small group support and tuition in specific academic

fields, including writing, mathematics, ICT and examination skills;

• Support learners who wish to improve their academic and study skills;

• Offer advice by experienced members of staff to learners about their studies;

• Develop student confidence and self-esteem and motivate students to want

to learn.

5 . 6 I n t e r n a t i o n a l O f f i c e

The Institute has 140 incoming Erasmus students and 26 outgoing Erasmus

students. This imbalance in student flows is typical for Irish and UK institutions.

European students seek to improve their English language skills, and generate a

high demand for Erasmus places in Ireland and the UK. English-speaking

students do not have the same interest in studying abroad. A policy of

integrating compulsory study abroad components into some business

programmes has at least ensured that though small, outgoing flows are higher for

DkIT than in most other Institutes of Technology.

The Institute has 250 non-EU students, most of whom are Chinese nationals.

Though a majority of these students study business programmes, there is a now

a spread of international students across Schools. The International Office has

ISO9001:2000 registration and seeks to offer a continual improvement of

services to students. A Chinese-speaking pastoral care administrator is

employed to help students with day-to-day issues.

45


Information Systems

Chapter 6


Chapter 6 46

6 In format ion Systems

The provision of Information Systems in the Institute has developed rapidly over

the past decade. Such systems are key to garnering institutional self-knowledge

by allowing the collection and analysis of information about activities such as

learner progression and success rates, the profile of the student population,

learners’ satisfaction with their programmes, the effectiveness of teaching and

the employability of graduates.

6 . 1 S t ud en t P r o f i l e , P r o g r e s s i o n and Su c c es s R a t e s

The Student Information Management System, (Banner) allows administrative

and academic records to be managed securely in a central database.

Administrators can use the system to progress a student from the application

stage through to graduation. This product was originally designed to meet US

requirements. The Irish Institute of Technology sector uses a bespoke version of

this software, in order to accommodate the requirements of a programme and

stage-based system. In addition, many local developments have been put in

place to best meet local practices. “These local developments have had the

negative effect of inhibiting the product’s utility in a modular environment.” (Circa

Report, 2008). The system is complex, and insufficient training of staff in its use

often leads to the perception that Banner is itself the source of many problems.

The proposed introduction of the Curriculum Advising and Programme Planning

(CAPP) system will simplify many of these matters and prevent the problems that

can occur with a modular system.

Information from initial CAO9 applications is analysed and forms the basis for the

effective management of resources, support provision and programme

development. It also provides valuable information on shifts in student demand.

9 CAO = Central Applications Office


Chapter 6 47

Table 5 The Student Information Management System

6 . 2 Emp l o ya b i l i t y o f G r adu a t e s

DkIT Careers Office gathers information on graduate employment via an annual

postal survey undertaken each November. The results are published in the

Graduate Survey Report, which is sent to all Heads of School and Heads of

Department. Several departments also conduct their own graduate surveys. The

data gathered is used to effectively inform decision-making around programme

review and development.

The survey carried out by the Careers Office has a relatively low response rate.

The timing of this survey may be one inhibiting factor, as graduates may not have

sourced employment at that point. To some extent, the HEA First Destination

Reports can offset the effect of poor local response rates, as these reports

provide information on national employment trends. As departmental surveys

elicit a higher response than the central survey, departments can address

information deficiencies by becoming more proactive in tracing their own

graduates.

HEA Returns

Reports

Social Welfare

County Councils &

VEC

HEA Interface

Fees Claims - Dept of

Education


Chapter 6 48

6 . 3 S t ud en t s ’ S a t i s f a c t i o n a nd E f f e c t i v en es s o f t h e i r P r o g r ammes and T e a ch e r s

The Institute operates a student satisfaction survey for each module in each

semester. This survey gathers data under the agreed quality assurance process

already referred to in Chapter Four. These QA1, QA2 and QA3 surveys, as they

are known, are designed to assist in determining the effectiveness of lecturers

and also the levels of satisfaction among students with their programmes of

study. To evaluate the quality of this feedback, this review has surveyed Heads

of Departments, Heads of Function and the Students’ Union.

Findings indicate that feedback from

learners is most effective, when it is used to

deliver improvements in a focused, coherent

and relevant manner. Where learners

witness a real-time response to their

anxieties, the Institute is perceived as being

open and willing to listen to their needs.

However, the expectation of prompt response must always be met. Learners are

less likely to provide the required information, if they perceive that their

comments go unnoticed. This finding is supported by research elsewhere (see

Brennan & Williams, 2004, 23 & Harvey, 2003). The speed of response across

departments varies and this has the real potential to discredit the value of the

activity.

In addition, Heads of Department and Heads of School are of the view that the

questions posed are not sufficiently robust and are often too vague to deliver

concrete information.

Learners consider that they are surveyed too frequently. They are requested to

provide feedback in relation to each module each semester. They suffer from

‘questionnaire fatigue’ as identified by Brennan & Williams (2004, 24), and do not

“Realistically the questions in the QA1 and QA2 forms are not sufficiently robust to be of any real value. They are often very vague.”


Chapter 6 49

therefore take the time to deliver the considered responses, which might emerge,

if they were surveyed less frequently.

It is suggested that a review of these surveys be undertaken now. This review

should identify concise objectives for each survey. These objectives could vary

from semester to semester and such frequency as now exists may not be

necessary for each module. Bespoke surveys are an effective means of

acquiring feedback in a defined context. An institutional survey might be

considered, such as occurred in the University of Limerick in 2000 and has

occurred in a number of UK universities, such as John Moore’s University in

Liverpool and Leeds Metropolitan.

The practice of conducting surveys at the end of a module is widely regarded as

a lost opportunity for the cohort of students in question, as having completed the

module, they cannot benefit from any improvements to that module arising from

their feedback.

6 . 4 L e a r n i n g R e sou r c e s

Moodle (http://moodle.dkit.ie) is a

software e-learning platform, designed to

help educators create online programmes

with opportunities for rich interaction. It is

available Institute-wide and there are currently 7,592 registered users, with 1,844

being classed as ‘active’, i.e. they had logged on within 30 days, prior to a survey

in January 2009. 240 lecturers across all schools in the Institute currently utilise

Moodle in the delivery of their modules and it can be accessed by staff and

students both on and off-campus.

The use of open source software, as opposed to a purchased platform as used in

other ITs (such as Blackboard, WebCT, etc.) has led to both cost-effectiveness

and the tailoring of the software to meet the needs of the staff and students of the


Chapter 6 50

Institute. One centralised dedicated Technician deals with staff queries to set up

and amend modules and it is planned that the system will become part of an

overall Programme Management System that will feed into all existing

Information Systems within the Institute, e.g., Banner, dkit.ie, etc. Training is

offered on a regular basis to staff to allow them to utilise Moodle in their daily

activities, and the Institute recognises the need to continue to provide this

training, so as to increase its roll-out potential to students.

6 . 5 Dk I T Web s i t e

Since September 2007, the DkIT website has boasted a new look and feel. The

use of open source software such as eZPublish, Apache & mySQL, along with

the training of individual web editors in each department/section within the

Institute has led to both cost-effectiveness and up-to-date content online.

eZ Publish RSS feed

News from the Institute can be disseminated to all internally & externally via an

RSS feed and all updated news appears instantly on the homepage. This

updated news can also be accessed through staff’s individual email inboxes.

News from all departments on the website is archived in a searchable database

for future reference.

The Institute’s IT Strategy for the period 2003 –2006 did not deliver on all of the

ambitious 51 actions, covering the strategic themes of Planning and Structures,


Chapter 6 51

Access to IT, Technical Support, the development of a Total Information Culture,

Management Information Systems, Learning Environment and Scholarship, and

IT Infrastructure. One inhibitor in delaying the full implementation of the IT

Strategy has been the considerable focus on the structural re-organisation of IT

Services. This has been completed since early 2008, with all IT support

personnel in the Institute now being part of a centralised IT Service. Additionally,

resource limitations have put limits on what can be realistically achieved.

6 . 6 Fu t u r e P l a n s

Morrison (1992) argues that decision-makers in colleges and universities need

an awareness of what is happening in the external environment and to take

cognisance of this in their planning processes. The Institute proposes to establish

an environmental scanning process, whereby outside information is formally

gathered and analysed on the basis of a continuous watching brief. When in

place, this will deliver a solid evidential-based framework upon which to base

decision-making.

52


Public Information

Chapter 7


Chapter 7 53

7 Publ ic In formation

7 . 1 P ro g r ammes o n O f f e r

Information on all programmes is made available to the public via:

1. DkIT Website (www.dkit.ie);

2. DkIT Handbooks;

3. Open Day, School Visits and Careers Exhibitions;

4. Radio and Print Media.

The DkIT website can be found online at http://www.dkit.ie. In November 2007,

DkIT website won a Golden Spider award for excellence in internet and digital

media. See http://www.goldenspiders.ie/winners_2007.php).

The website is used

extensively by students to

access information on

programmes. An analysis

of the visits to the DkIT website between January 2008 and January 2009

revealed an average of 5.5 million hits on the website per month. A Student

Services survey of incoming first year students (September 2008) established

that 23.3% of respondents to the survey obtained “most information on

programmes” from the DkIT website.

Unusually for the sector, the Institute website provides information in Mandarin

and Polish. This is welcomed by students and their parents. International

students have requested the provision of more detailed information on fees and

student life to assist them, when making their choice of study destination.

The website and handbooks offer detailed information on research opportunities.

However, information in relation to the application process for research degrees

is sparse and would be enhanced by the inclusion of staff research profiles.


Chapter 7 54

Although the website is a key source of information, the working group has

nonetheless identified a number of opportunities for improvement, based on

feedback from students and staff and also by comparative analysis with the

websites of 10 other Institutes of Technology. These are as follows:

• The provision of a summary listing of all programmes on the DkIT

homepage could allow for improved ease of access to programme

information. The proposed acquisition of module builder software will

greatly enhance the level of detail available to learners and prospective

learners, by supporting online module descriptors;

• The provision of a seamless navigation tool from homepage to programme

description page can more readily provide information on programmes to

first-time visitors. Respondents reported difficulties in accessing individual

programmes on the website, as programmes are categorised by

department;

• The creation of a web-page for applicants from Northern Ireland could

provide a focus on admissions criteria in relation to equivalent UK awards.

7 . 2 Dk I T H andboo k s

Research undertaken for this review strongly endorsed the

presentation of programme information within the Admissions

and Postgraduate Handbooks.

In the 2008 Student Services survey, 78.8% of respondents

indicated that they “had a good idea” of what was involved in

their programme prior to coming to DkIT.

7 . 3 Open D a y

Information provided at school visits and at careers fairs is supplied in the

Admissions and Postgraduate Handbooks. In the Student Services’ survey of


Chapter 7 55

incoming first year students (September 2008), 28.7% of respondents indicated

that they obtained “most information” on programmes from their Guidance

Counsellors.

Guidance Counsellors, surveyed on the effectiveness of Open Day 2008

indicated that the Institute is not providing sufficient programme information on

Open Day. This matter could be addressed by an increase in the number of

subject talks and additional programme information at the exhibition stands.

7 . 4 Rad i o a nd P r i n t M ed i a

The Institute currently produces its own weekly, local newspaper, the DkITimes.

Information on programmes and news events is circulated in this paper, and on

the Institute’s radio station DkITalk, and on regional radio stations.

DkIT has ownership of the information provided to the newspaper and radio

stations. It was outside the scope of this review to conduct an evaluation of the

information circulated in radio and print media. However, the review group is

satisfied that the information provided to the public in the print media is correct

and accurate.

National publicity of DkIT’s programmes and awards however is at best

intermittent and compares poorly with the media coverage of competing IoTs.

The Institute did in the past employ the services of PR/Media consultants, but the

contract has since been discontinued, due to budgetary constraints.

7 . 5 L e a r n i n g Ou t comes o f P r o g r ammes

Learning outcomes are broadly defined in the Institute Admissions and

Postgraduate Handbooks and on the Institute website. However, the learning

outcomes of individual modules within a programme are not specified in these

documents, but rather in programme documents, not readily available to the


Chapter 7 56

general public. This matter can be addressed through the acquisition of module

builder software, which would make learning outcomes and information on

teaching, learning and assessment procedures available on line.

7 . 6 Qua l i f i c a t i o n s Awa rd ed

The level and type of award is already clearly indicated in the handbooks and on

the DkIT website.

7 . 7 L e a r n i n g Oppo r t u n i t i e s a v a i l a b l e t o S t u d en t s

Programmes are currently delivered in fulltime, part-time, and access modes to

students. A number of programmes are delivered by distance learning. The

Admissions Handbook, Postgraduate Handbook and the DkIT website indicate

these learning modes. Further opportunities for learning include: exchange

programmes, work placements, progression, access opportunities, etc. These

are detailed in the handbooks and on the Institute website. Although this

information is made available, it would appear that students are not always

aware of these additional learning opportunities.

7 . 8 Emp l o ymen t D e s t i n a t i o n o f G r adu a t e s

The Institute Careers Service carries out a comprehensive Graduate

Employment Survey every year. The most recent survey was carried out in 2007.

The findings of this survey are available in-house only. The survey findings could

be made available online on the DkIT website.

As part of its marketing campaign, the Institute provides graduate testimonials in

the Admissions Handbook. The information presented is therefore not impartial

or objective. However, the inclusion of the Graduate Survey on the DkIT website

would provide impartial information on the employment destinations of graduates.


Chapter 7 57

7 . 9 P ro f i l e o f t h e Cu r r e n t S t u d en t Popu l a t i o n

A profile of the current student population is not available in the Institute

handbooks, or on the DkIT website. It is however available in selected Institute

documents, such as the Strategic Plan, and the Institute’s Self-Study. A profile

could be included in the Admissions, Part-time, Postgraduate and Student

Handbooks.

7 . 1 0 F r e edom o f I n f o rma t i o n

The Institute’s Freedom of Information Office ensures that the Institute complies

with legislative requirements for the provision of information to the public.

7 . 1 1 Annu a l R epo r t s

The Institute publishes annual reports and submits annual returns to the Higher

Education Authority.

7 . 1 2 Academ i c Co un c i l

The minutes of Governing Body, Executive Board and Academic Council

meetings are published online.


Conclusion 58

Conclus ion

Enhancing public confidence in the quality of education and training provided by

the Institute was the first objective of this self study. As demonstrated in

Chapters One to Five, the Institute has in place robust quality assurance systems

to ensure that its programmes and awards meet national and international

standards as attested to, by external peer review. Assessment mechanisms are

designed to meet learning outcomes and be appropriate for their purpose.

Assessment criteria are published and the external examining system ensures

fairness and consistency.

The second objective of contributing to coherent strategic planning and

governance has been achieved through the data collection and evaluation

exercises associated with the review. This appraisal enabled the Institute to put

in place a Quality Improvement Plan based on the recommendations contained

in this report.

The effectiveness of the Institute’s quality assurance arrangements have been

measured against the European Standards and Guidelines for the European

Higher Education Area. Good practice is acknowledged in the mechanisms for

approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards;

assessment of students; learning resources and student supports; quality

assurance of teaching staff; information systems and public information. The

study reveals high standards of compliance, but also opportunities for

improvement based on best practice elsewhere.

The Institute’s implementation of the national framework of qualifications and

procedures for access, transfer and progression is examined in Chapter Two of

this report. Compliance with the framework is firmly established. Programmes

are outcome-based, awards have national and international recognition, and

opportunities for progression are clearly delineated. Further training in the


Conclusion 59

design of learning outcomes and assessment modes will enhance programme

provision in a developing learner-centred environment.

The operation and management of delegated authority for the delivery of level

six, seven, eight and taught level nine programmes is the shared responsibility of

the Academic Council, the Registrar’s Office, Schools and Departments. The

Institute operates in a regulated environment and external peer reviews

(Programmatic Review, the Programme Validation Process and this Institutional

Review) ensure compliance. The strategic goal of transforming the teaching and

learning process to a learner-centred one, where the student takes responsibility

for their own learning, is a reflection of the Institute’s maturity. The establishment

of the Centre for Learning and Teaching is set to enhance the professionalism of

staff through the delivery of the new Master’s programme in Teaching and

Learning. The recent adoption of the Teaching Standards Framework, the

provision of an online learning and teaching resource and the establishment of a

Student Centre for Learning & Development by 2010 represent not only

significant support to learners, but also a shift beyond mere compliance towards

excellence. This is underpinned by a range of student supports outlined, aimed at

facilitating access and retention of standard and non-standard learners: the

traditional school leavers, mature students, students from varied ethnic

backgrounds and those from lower socio-economic groups. Many of these

students are first generation third-level learners and the Institute has responded

to their needs as outlined throughout this report, but specifically in Chapter Four.

The Institute is not complacent. This report acknowledges need for improvement

and sets this out in its Quality Improvement Plan and in the recommendations

provided in the Executive Summary to this report. The report is written in a time

of economic crisis and it is recognised that the times ahead are challenging. This

review has produced a solid body of evidence on which to base the Institute’s

response to the obstacles it is likely to encounter in an uncertain future.


Bibliography 60

Bibl iography

Aerden, Axel (20 June 2008), Quality assurance Toolbox. NVAO Nederlands Vlaamse Accreditatieorganisatie.

Biggs, J. (2004), Aligning teaching for constructive learning, The Higher Education Academy. [online], available from <http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/embedded_object.asp?id=21686&filename=Biggs> [accessed 03 March 2009].

Biggs, J., (2002), Constructive Alignment: a guide for busy academics. The Higher Education Academy. [online] available from <http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=156> [accessed 03 March 2009].

Bloom, B. Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W. and Krathwohl, D. (1956), Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook 1, The Cognitive Domain. New York: McKay.

Brennan, J, & Williams, R. (2004), Collecting and Using Student Feedback, A Guide to Good Practice. Learning and Teaching Support Network. [online] available from <http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/tla/collecting_and_using_student_feedback.pdf> [accessed 20 February 2009].

Brown, G. (2001), Assessment: A Guide for Lecturers. Assessment Series No.3. The Higher Education Academy. [online] available from <http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=3> [accessed 17 February 2009].

Brown, H., Fry, H. and Marshall, S. (2003) Reflective Practice, in Fry, H., Ketteridge, S. and Marshall, S. (eds.) A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: enhancing academic practice, [pp. 215-225]

Brown, S. (1999), Institutional Strategies for Assessment, in Brown, S. and Glasner, A. (Eds), Assessment Matters in Higher Education, Buckingham: SRHE and OU Press

Clancy, P. and Wall, J. (2000), Social Background of Higher Education Entrants, Higher Education Authority, Dublin.

Cremonini, L. & Westerheijden, D.F. (October 2008) Self Evaluation and SWOT Analysis. Presentation at EAIE professional development course on Quality Assurance Management, Enschede, the Netherlands.

Duggan, F, (Ed.) (2007) Proceedings, 2nd International Plagiarism Conference, JISC, Northumbria University Press.

Fry, H., Ketteridge, S. and Marshall, S. (eds.) (2003), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: enhancing academic practice, London: Kogan Page.


Bibliography 61

Harvey, L. (2001), Student Feedback, Quality in Higher Education, Vol. 9, No. 1 , April 2003 [online] available from http://www.shu.ac.uk/research/cre/publications/studentfeedbackqhe9pt1.pdf. [accessed 12 February 2009].

HETAC, (June 2008), Supplementary Guidelines for the Review of the effectiveness of Quality assurance Procedures.

HETAC. (2008), Assessment and Standards. Draft Document.

Kells, H.R. (1995), Self Study Processes: A Guide to Self-Evaluation in Higher Education, 4th edn. Phoenix, AZ: Orynx Press.

Light, G., and Cox, R. (2003) /Learning and Teaching in Higher Education./ London: SAGE.

Modularisation in the Institutes of Higher Education, (2008), Report to the Council of Registrars, IOTI and An Chéim, The Circa Group

Morrison, J. L. (1992). Environmental scanning, in M. A. Whitely, J. D. Porter, and R. H. Fenske (Eds.), A primer for new institutional researchers (pp. 86-99). Tallahassee, Florida, The Association for Institutional Research.

O’Neill, G. (2002), Variables that influence a teacher versus student-focused approach to teaching, UCD, Centre for Learning and Teaching Report.

Peden Smith, A. and Duggan, F. (Eds) (2005) Plagiarism: Prevention, Practice & Policy Conference Proceedings 2004, JISC, Northumbria University Press.

Quality Improvement Plan, (2009), Dundalk Institute of Technology.

Ramsden, P. (2nd edition) (2003), Learning to Teach in Higher Education, London and New York, RoutledgeFalmer.

Rust, C. (2002), The impact of assessment on student learning, Active Learning in Higher Education, 3 (2), [pp.145-158].

Ryan, N. (2007), Writing and Using Learning Outcomes, A Practical Guide, Quality Promotion Unit, University College Cork.

Standards and Guidelines for Quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area, (2005) Helsinki, ENQA.

Watson, David & Maddison, Elizabeth (2005), Managing Institutional Self-Study, Maidenhead, Open University Press

Westerheijden, Don F. (2008), What Can We Do with Industrial Quality Assurance Models in Higher Education? Paper for Conference: Perspectives on Knowledge in the Knowledge Society.


Appendix 62

Appendix


Appendix 63

HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING AWARDS COUNCIL, IRELAND Comhairle na nDámhachtainí Ardoideachais agus Oiliú na, Éire Institutional Review of Providers of Higher Educati on and Training TERMS OF REFERENCE Dundalk Institute of Technology STATUS - set 21 – 22 April 2009 www.hetac.ie


Appendix 64

Higher Education and Training Awards Council

Terms of Reference For Institutional Review Of Dund alk Institute

of Technology,

21 April 2009

STATUS: FINAL

1. Purpose

The purpose of this document is to specify the Terms of Reference for the institutional review of Dundalk Institute of Technology 20 – 21 April 2009. The HETAC Institutional Review policy applies to all institutions providing HETAC accredited programmes, or programmes accredited under delegated authority. These Terms of Reference are set within the overarching policy for institutional review as approved in December 2007 and should be read in conjunction with same. These Terms of Reference does not replace or supersede the agreed policy for Institutional Review. The Terms of Reference once set may not be amended and any significant revision required to the Terms of Reference will result in a new Terms of Reference to be HETAC following consultation with the Institute. These Terms of Reference should be read in conjunction with the supplementary guidelines for institutional review. The objectives of the institutional review process are

1. To enhance public confidence in the quality of education and training provided by the institution and the standards of the awards made;

2. To contribute to coherent strategic planning and governance in the institution;

3. To assess the effectiveness of the quality assurance arrangements operated by the institution;

4. To confirm the extent that the institution has implemented the national framework of qualifications and procedures for access, transfer and progression;

5. To evaluate the operation and management of delegated authority where it has been granted;

6. To provide recommendations for the enhancement of the education and training provided by the institution.

It is possible that, within the objectives outlined above, Institutions may have specific sub-objectives to which they will attach particular importance and wish to emphasise in their TOR. To maximise the benefits of the review process,


Appendix 65

Institutions may also consider including additional objectives relevant to its context. The approach taken by HETAC to institutional review will:

• Acknowledge that institutions have ownership of and responsibility for their activity;

• Be conducted in a spirit of partnership with institutions, with a view to improvement and enhancement, whilst acknowledging statutory requirements for accountability;

• Be conducted in a manner which adds value to the institution, minimises overhead and assists in building institutional capacity;

• Be flexible, adaptable and scalable in order to meet the needs of diverse institutions;

• Be conducted in an open, consistent and transparent manner; • Be evidence-based in accordance with established criteria; • Promote learning and development for all involved; • Reward innovation and experimentation when it seeks to enhance our

understanding of good practice; • Promote collaboration and sharing of good practice between institutions; • Take cognisance of international best practice and contribute to European

and international developments in this area.


Appendix 66

2. Institution Profile Dundalk Institute of Technology is a major provider of higher education and training in the North East region of Ireland. Established in 1970 as the Regional Technical College offering primarily technician and apprenticeship courses, it has evolved since then as a major player in Irish higher education, and currently provides a suite of programmes at craft, undergraduate and postgraduate levels to more than 3,867 full-time and 615 part-time students, of which 230 are international students representing 14 different countries. The Institute’s mission is to provide the community with quality third level education and services, relevant to the economic social and cultural development of the region in the national and international context. It aims to promote personal responsibility among all its students and enhance the professionalism of all its members in a supportive, inclusive and productive environment. Dundalk Institute of Technology has undergone enormous change over the last five years. These changes are most visible in the transformation of the physical appearance of the campus, most particularly with the Wind Turbine, the T. K. Whitaker building, the Nursing and Health Studies building, Faulkner Student Services building and further expansion to the Regional Development Centre In June 2006, the Governing Body of the Institute adopted a Second Strategic Plan: 2006-2011. This plan envisages placing learning and teaching at the core of all its activities and will give students more learning supports and a greater say in every aspect of Institute life. The years ahead will see the institute continuing its work to ensure it meets the objectives outlined in the Strategic Plan. As a publicly funded Higher Education institution, the Institute operates currently under the aegis of the Department of Education and Science. Since 2006 the Institute has been funded by the Higher Education Authority (HEA), the planning and development body for higher education in Ireland. The Qualifications Act (1999) required all Institutes to establish procedures for quality assurance for the purpose of improving and maintaining quality of education and training. Since then a structured approach to quality assurance in higher education has evolved under the guidance of the NQAI and HETAC. The Institute has adopted a Quality Policy Document, which was approved by HETAC in 2004 and which describes the key structures, processes, policies, procedures, performance measures and quality assurance mechanisms that facilitate a systematic approach to embedding a quality improvement approach within the Institute. This document describes the quality assurance mechanisms which relate inter alia to the admissions process, the equal access and participation policy, assessment, programme validation and modification, Programme Boards and the Constitution and statutory responsibilities of the Academic Council. Additionally, the Institute has received ISO9001:2000 certification in the following


Appendix 67

areas: Regional Development Centre, Human Resource Department and the Registrar’s Office, including the Examinations, Admissions and Awards functions; the administration of the Academic Council; the Library; the School Liaison Service and I.T. Services. The Institute Library also has recently achieved Excellence Through People Accreditation from Fás. Policy, regulations and procedures in respect of supervised research degrees have been agreed with HETAC together with the Institute codes of conduct for the responsible practice of research. Self evaluation is principally carried out through quinquennial programmatic reviews of individual Schools. Three such reviews have been completed in 2008, with the final one for the School of Engineering due for completion in January 2009. Data collected for these reviews will input into the Institutional Review. Routine self evaluation is an integral and regular activity throughout the Institute’s activities. Such evaluations are conducted by Programme Boards, who consider external examiners’ reports, examination performance, and student feedback; the Academic Council, which updates Institute policies as necessary and those areas certified under ISO9001:2000, who evaluate the effectiveness of administrative processes as per the schedules indicated in their Standard Operating Procedures. The Institute received delegated authority from HETAC to offer programmes to Bachelor degree level and also taught Master’s programmes in all its Schools in 2004. The Institute has case-by-case approval to offer research degrees at levels 9 and 10 in Smooth Muscle Research; Freshwater Studies and Aging Technologies and awaits a panel report on its application to extend this approval to Informatics. It is proposed to seek delegated authority to deliver research programmes at level 9 in these areas and also in Music and at level 10 in Smooth Muscle Research, Informatics and Freshwater Studies in the future. There are four Schools in the Institute: School of Business and Humanities; School of Engineering; School of Informatics, Music and Creative Media; School of Nursing, Midwifery, Health Studies and Applied Sciences. While the Institute continues to offer programmes in areas that it has traditional strengths such as Engineering, Science, Technology and Business, it has also more recently diversified into Humanities, Arts, Music, Social Studies and Health. The Institute has also grown its research capability in line with developing programmes at honours degree and postgraduate degree level. There are now research centres in the following areas: Entrepreneurship, Software Technology, Smooth Muscle Research, Renewable Energy, Freshwater Studies and Aging Technologies. The Institute also plays a key role in the economic, social and cultural development of the region with the Regional Development Centre and Lifelong


Appendix 68

Learning Centre both providing support to the business and general communities. 3. Institution’s Team (please specify) Full Legal Name of Institution Dundalk Institute of Technology

(DKIT) Address Dublin Road, Dundalk, Ireland Telephone +353 42 93 70 200 Fax + 353 42 93 33505 Web address www.dkit.ie President Mr Denis Cummins, M.Sc.

e-mail: [email protected] Tel : + 353 42 93 70252

Registrar Mr Stephen McManus, M.Sc e-mail: [email protected] Tel: + 353 42 93 70229 Fax: + 353 42 93 33505

Liaison for Institutional Review Ms Ann Campbell, M.A., H.Dip.Ed. e-mail: [email protected] Tel: + 353 42 93 81710 Fax: + 353 42 93 33505


Appendix 69

4. HETAC objectives for institutional review There are six prescribed objectives for institutional review as outlined below. Institutions may wish to highlight any areas of specific importance to the Institution within each of the objectives. Objective 1: To enhance public confidence in the qu ality of education and training provided by the institution and the standa rds of the awards made This objective is to enhance public confidence in the quality of education and training provided by the Institution and the standards of the awards made. This is an overarching objective which covers all areas of the Institution’s activity. The quality of the institutional review process itself is a critical part of this as is the internal self study, the publication of the Self Evaluation Report and panel report. The information provided by the Institution to the public falls within this objective. Special Considerations for DKIT The Institute aims to embody best practice in the delivery of all its services by increasing the level of professional expertise within its community and to identify mechanisms which can support the increasing professionalism of its staff. Professionalism of higher education and training provision/ management and an evaluation of the training initiatives designed to promote professionalism among staff members. The newly established teaching and learning unit has as a specific objective the development of increasing professionalism of teaching staff. Objective 2: To contribute to coherent strategic pl anning and governance in the institution This objective is to contribute to coherent strategic planning and governance in the institution. The review may address the coherence of institutional mission, vision and values and overall institutional strategic planning. For recognised institutions with delegated authority this objective also includes the Operation and Management criterion of the review of delegated authority (governance, management, administration, planning and evaluation) and the Objects of the Qualifications Act criterion relating to national contributions etc. Special considerations for DKIT A significant proportion of DKIT students belong to the first generation of their families to attend higher education and many of these come from disadvantaged backgrounds. The Institute’s Strategic Plan 2006-2010 has stated as one of its goals the creation of a learner-centred and empowering process in which students take responsibility for their own learning and one in which the staff-student relationship is based on equality and mutuality. The move from mass higher education to universal provision poses its own unique challenges and it is


Appendix 70

a special consideration of the Institutional Review to identify and promote those learner supports which contribute to the development of these new learners. Objective 3: To assess the effectiveness of the qua lity assurance arrangements operated by the institution This objective is to assess the effectiveness of the quality assurance arrangements operated by the institution. This will be based on Part One of the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance10. By including this in the institutional review process the statutory requirement for review of QA is met. How the Institution manages its QA for the “seven elements” of Part One of the European Standards and Guidelines should be explicitly addressed by the review process including : Policy and procedures for quality assurance; Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards; Assessment of students; Quality assurance of teaching staff; Learning resources and support; Information systems; Public information. Special considerations for DKIT In the context of the “seven elements” of the European Standards and Guidelines, the role of the Institute as a provider of universal education must be especially considered. The emphasis under this objective is to assess whether the Institute has the capacity to meet the needs of first generation and disadvantaged students in terms of teaching and learning provision; learning resources and student support; information systems and public information. Objective 4: To confirm the extent that the institu tion has implemented the national framework of qualifications and procedures for access, transfer and progression This objective is to confirm the extent that the institution has implemented the National Framework of Qualifications and procedures for access, transfer and progression. The National Qualifications Authority has produced guidelines in relation to this[1]. For example this includes issues such as credit, transfer and progression routes between levels and award types, entry arrangements and information provision. As part of this objective, HEA-funded Institutions should be mindful of the goals of the HEA’s National Plan for Equity of Access to Higher Education (2008-2013) and pay particular attention to the objectives relevant to Higher Education Institutions. Objective 5: To evaluate the operation and manageme nt of delegated authority where it has been granted 10 “Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area”. European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education, 2007, Helsinki, 2nd edition.


Appendix 71

This objective is to evaluate the operation and management of delegated authority (where applicable) for taught programmes. The institutional review process will satisfy the statutory requirement for the review of delegated authority for recognised institutions, once Objective Five of the institutional review process is included in the Terms of Reference. The majority of the delegated authority criteria are covered under the objectives of institutional review. Additional criteria which relate specifically to the operation of delegated authority are included in the Supplementary Guidelines and should be addressed in the Institution’s submission. Institutional review will cover all areas for which DKIT has Delegated Authority. In 2004, the Institute received delegated authority from HETAC to offer programmes to Bachelor degree level and also taught Master’s programmes in all its Schools. Objective 6: To provide recommendations for the enh ancement of the education and training provided by the institution This objective is to provide recommendations for the enhancement of the education and training provided by the institution. This will include both the recommendations arising from the external peer review process and recommendations arising from the internal self study process. 5. Institution-specific objectives None 6. Schedule for Dundalk Institute of Technology As outlined in the Institutional Review policy, the process consists of six phases

1. HETAC sets terms of reference following consultation with institution; 2. Self-study by the institution; 3. Visit by expert panel appointed by HETAC and written panel report; 4. Institutional response including implementation plan; 5. Panel report and response published; 6. Follow-up report submitted by the institution.

The major milestones in the timeframe for the institutional review of DKIT are outlined below. This should be read in conjunction with the supplementary guidelines for institutional review.


Appendix 72

Relative timeframe

Actual Date Milestone

At least 6 months before panel visit

Institution indicates timeframe for institutional review as per overall HETAC schedule of reviews

At least 6 months before panel visit

December 2008

Terms of Reference set following consultation with Institution

3 to 6 months before panel visit

Institution undertakes self study process and produces self evaluation report

5 weeks before site visit

13th March 2009

Submission of Self Evaluation Report and other documentation This has already been altered to 6 weeks based on experience with the process to date


20th March 2009

Desk based review of SER and feedback to Institution


March 2009 From 30 on..

Advance Meeting between Chair, Secretary and Institution

Panel Visit 20th – 22nd April 2009

Site Visit by external peer review panel (1-3 days approximately as determined by TOR) Preliminary (oral) feedback on findings

6 weeks after site visit

2 June 2009 Draft report on findings of panel sent by HETAC to Institution for factual accuracy

2 days following this

4 June 2009 Final report on findings of panel sent by HETAC to Institution

6 weeks following receipt of final report

13 July 2009 Response by Institution to HETAC including plan with timeframe for implementation of any changes

Next available HETAC Council meeting

14 September 2009

Consideration of report and institutional response by HETAC Council Publication of report and response on website once adopted

12 months after Council adoption

September 2010

Follow up report by Institution to HETAC on implementation of recommendations

Documents

SELF STUDY 2009 - DkIT · DkIT Self Study 2009 v Learning Resources and Student Support Mr Luke McGahon, President of the Students Union Mr Cathal Kearney, Head of School of Business