National University of Ireland, Galway An Coiste Feabhais Acadúil The Committee on Academic Quality Improvement The Academic Quality Assurance Programme 2008 ­ 2009 REVIEW OF THE IRISH CENTRE OF SOCIAL GERONTOLOGY NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND, GALWAY Final REPORT 11 March 2009
Irish Centre for Social Gerontology: Review Report 2008–09 This report arises from a visit by a review team to the Irish Centre for Social Gerontology on 29­30 January 2009. The Centre had already prepared and submitted a 'Self Assessment Report' that, with other documentation, was made available to the review team well in advance of the visit. The review team consisted of: Professor John Bond, Deputy Director, Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University (Chair); Professor Matt Sutton, Professor of Health Economics, Health Methodology Research Group, School of Community Based Medicine, University of Manchester; Ms Mairead Hayes, CEO, Irish Senior Citizens Parliament (Stakeholder); Dr. Ricca Edmondson, School of Political Science and Sociology, NUI Galway (Cognate); Professor Adrian Frazier, English Department, NUI Galway (Rapporteur). The report is structured to cover the following main topics: 1. Aims and Objectives 2. Organization and Management 3. Programmes and Instruction 4. Scholarship and Research 5. Community Service 6. The Wider Context 7. Summary and Concluding Remarks 1. Aims and Objectives The Centre has clear and easily accessible aims and objectives that are appropriate to the University. In fact, one of the stated, primary strategic aims of the university is research on ageing. The Centre has a strategic plan, but funding circumstances force it to be flexible. The Centre has four aims: research, development of the academic field of social gerontology, training and dissemination, and policy analysis/public engagement. 2. Organization and Management The Centre has recently changed its system of management in response to the Director taking on additional responsibilities as Head of Economics. There is a new Deputy Director, who does not have permanent academic employment with the university. The Centre has assigned responsibility for leading the Ethnographic Research Unit to the new professor of health technology assessment. The Centre has a development officer, who is highly committed to the Centre and its Aims. There does not appear to have been a further allocation of responsibilities within the Centre. It has a Board and an Advisory Committee—the Chair is Vice President of Research— that met to significant effect early in the programme’s development, but has not met within the last twelve months. Mechanisms are in place to facilitate feedback from students on teaching and administration, and to communicate with all staff. The Quality Review Team heard
2 Irish Centre for Social Gerontology: Review Report 2008–09 evidence from students that appropriate actions have been taken on foot of their feedback. 3. Programmes and Instruction The primary purpose of the Centre is research into the social and economic aspects of ageing. Every one of its research and education programmes aims to contribute to knowledge of ageing, to have a beneficial impact on policy development, and to contribute to society. The major contribution to education is a 2­year, part­time diploma course. The teaching is offered by the staff of the centre every other Saturday during the academic year. The Centre also has a successful seminar series which attracts international speakers. The number of students in the diploma course varies per year between ten and twenty; the age range goes from students in their twenties to those in their seventies; many of the students commute long distances. It exemplifies the accommodation of traditional and non­traditional students. The programme involves essay writing as well as exams. Inadequate provision is currently made by the institution for students with special needs and older people, in terms of parking, elevators, hospitality, and access; the Centre, although it serves older people, is located on the third floor in a building with no lift. Currently, there is no MA programme, although postgraduate programmes are in the strategic plan of the Centre. The Director supervises one PhD student on the economics of ageing technologies. He also has three other PhD’s, two of whom work in age­related areas. 4. Scholarship and Research The Centre has a culture of scholarship and learning which supports and nurtures research and scholarship. It is an innovative and creative working environment. The members of the research team passionately support their research and strongly support the director and the strategic aims of the centre. The research is in three strands: economics of ageing, technology and ageing, and social aspects of ageing. Apparently, it is only the director who works across all three areas. Within a small unit, this diversity of research interests has the capacity for both synergy and tension. Much of the research is focused on the requirements of funders, and thus freedom of inquiry is to some extent curtailed. This also means that the work of the Centre sometimes expands beyond its designated thematic areas. Over the last three years, the Centre’s staff have led or been involved in 22 projects. The Centre reports a considerable volume of output in under three years (25 peer­ reviewed journal articles, 5 book chapters, 5 commissioned reports, and a working paper series). It would be unrealistic to expect the research outputs of this new centre to be already recognized internationally given the time lag between funding of projects, implementation, completion, & dissemination.
3 Irish Centre for Social Gerontology: Review Report 2008–09 In due time, the great importance of the work of the research centre will be more and more made public and then recognized more widely by international scholars; it is already recognized by government, NGOs, and practitioners within Ireland. The Centre offers an excellent example of research­led teaching. 5. Community Service The Centre does an outstanding job of projecting its mission and the outcomes of its research. It is fully engaged with civil society and is exerting a positive impact on social policy. The draft strategy for Civic Engagement if implemented will further strengthen the engagement with stakeholders and the links with civil society. The Centre’s research is widely used by important players in the ageing sector. The Centre has been commissioned to do work by the Health Service Executive, Alzheimer’s Society, the Health Research Board, and National Council for Ageing and Older People, to name some (see pp 25­28 in the Self Assessment Report). 6. The Wider Context The Centre is unique: it is the only dedicated unit in Ireland that brings together the social and economic aspects of ageing. The Centre is currently engaged in collaboration with a range of research centres and departments in the University on social aspects of ageing. The recent appointment of a new Professor of Health Technology Assessment in the Department of Economics has opened up further opportunities for collaboration with economists in the university. Currently, human life is being extended by 2.1 years a decade, so the proportion of the population that is older than 65 is increasing. As a sector of humanity, older people present unique characteristics and make unique demands upon and contributions to society. It can therefore be expected that the field of gerontology will expand markedly in the future, which will further augment the Centre’s significance. 7. Summary and Concluding Remarks The ICSG is an innovative research centre, whose long­term potential should be secured. In many ways the Centre exemplifies the aspirations of NUI Galway’s strategic plans for excellent interdisciplinary research, research­led teaching and more profound contributions to society. However, the Centre is not typical of the academic teaching units with which the University’s financial and human resources structures normally deal. This lack of fit could thwart the Centre’s plans and may have particular implications for the tenure of research staff. Aims and Objectives: The Centre needs to clarify its core purpose further, in order to balance the demands of supporters, funders, students, and the university, while taking into account that a small group cannot do everything. Organization and Management:
4 Irish Centre for Social Gerontology: Review Report 2008–09 It would be useful to devolve responsibilities within the Centre further, both for the sake of the stability of the centre and the further professional development of its staff. The Boards should meet according to their schedules (three times a year for one, once a year for the other) for the sake of communication, reflection, internal publication of the Centre’s work, and forging alliances in the wider world. The proposed Professor of Social Gerontology will provide greater stability of management. Multiple interdependencies (Nursing, Soc/Pol, Economics) improve stability as they mature; connections with Medical researchers can be further developed. ICSG should work to extend its research networks within the National University of Ireland by identifying others engaged in ageing and life cycle research and encouraging them to work collaboratively with ICSG. A significant challenge for ICSG in developing research capacity and in meeting strategic research objectives is the lack of a well­travelled career path for researchers within National University of Ireland. To support research staff in their career development the University, the College of Business, Law and Public Policy and the ICSG should provide robust systems for staff mentoring and professional development and review. To ensure continuing staff capacity to deliver the University’s strategic research objectives, a less risk averse attitude to research staff funding will be necessary on the part of the institution. Under current institutional rules the ICSG is likely to lose a number of talented individuals and limit the capacity to recruit high­ calibre staff from Ireland and Europe. Education: In the first two years, the Centre has offered a Diploma, which has been experienced by students as highly successful. It should rapidly move to develop a taught MA programme, for the sake of providing budget stability for the Centre, useful professional training for the researchers, and the discovery and development of new leaders in Social Gerontology. An MA programme should entail the appointment of another permanent member of the academic staff. The current PhD student was impressive in interview. It is crucial to increase the number of PhD students, in order to develop a postgraduate culture, to enhance the creativity of the centre, to pull in more research funds, and to create future core faculty for the discipline. However, until there are more members of staff labelled officially as “academic”, capacity for thesis supervision is constricted by the University’s regulations. Joint supervision of post­graduate students is recommended so that research staff can supervise along side experienced academic members of staff. This will benefit the career of junior colleagues and reduce the post­graduate workload of the Director and other academic members of staff. Scholarship and Research: The Centre needs to maintain a balance between reports and peer­reviewed articles; i.e., between contribution to society and academic development. Both are valuable.
5 Irish Centre for Social Gerontology: Review Report 2008–09 The Centre has a charismatic and acclaimed Professor and highly talented researchers. Between them there is a difference in age and experience. Steps should be taken to bridge differences in capacity between colleagues, and prepare for the significant influence this discipline will have in future years. We recognize the achievements of this cutting­edge research centre working in the context of a traditional university environment. Its development is impeded by the fact that researchers cannot supervise PhDs, act as Principal Investigators in grant applications, compete for longer term research contracts, or plan their academic futures. Given the current economic climate, the Centre and University should seek pragmatic solutions to overcome these barriers. Comments on the Methodology of the Review Process 1. The Review Process should clearly demonstrate ensure high­level commitment to the process (we did not get to see the Vice President for Research who chairs the Centre’s Board and Advisory Group). 2. The Review Process could usefully include some academic content in the review process (e.g. presentations of representative portfolio of work). This would involve the staff more and make them feel they contributed effectively to the outcome of the review process. Professor John Bond (Chair) Professor Matt Sutton Ms Mairead Hayes (Stakeholder) Dr. Ricca Edmondson (Cognate) Professor Adrian Frazier (Rapporteur) (11th March 2009)
6