An Coiste Feabhais Acadúil
The Committee on Academic Quality Improvement
The Academic Quality Assurance Programme, 2007–2008
Review of
The Department of History
Roinn na Staire
Final Report
11th July 2008
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
This report arises from a visit by a review group to the Department of History/Roinn na
Staire on 26-28 February, 2008. The Department had already prepared and submitted a
'Self Assessment Report' that, with other documentation, was made available to the Group
in advance of the visit.
The Review Group consisted of: Professor Michael Prestwich, Dept. of History,
University of Durham (Chair); Professor Ann Katherine Isaacs, Department of History,
University of Pisa; Professor Mike Cronin, Academic Director, Boston College, Dublin,
Dr. Frances McCormack, Department of English, NUI Galway; and Seosamh Mac
Donnacha, Academic Coordinator, Acadamh na hOllscolaíochta Gaeilge, NUI, Galway
acting as 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
8. Comments on the Methodology of the Review Process
1. Aims and objectives.
The aims and objectives set out by the Department are entirely appropriate for a unit which
has excellent staff, with a fine research record, and which wishes to retain and develop its
resources for teaching and research in both English and Irish. The Review Group expresses
its admiration for the evident quality of the Department staff and their remarkable research
productivity. It is very clear that the Department has a flexible syllabus which allows
students to have a direct link with on-going research, which we consider to be a
fundamental element in the formation of a new generation of historians.
Overall, it appears to us that the aims and objectives of the Department are
admirable but generic, being limited to a commendable push for excellence in teaching and
research. The Review Group also received a strong impression of disquiet from the
Department at all levels. The general impression is that the current transition to the new
School and College structure is bringing the Department – or the Discipline as it will now
be called – face to face with deep transformations in its role, calling into question the
teaching, administrative and organisation practices which have served it so well until now.
Putting together our observations on the written self-evaluation we received and the
many interactions with staff of the Department and of other sectors of the University, it
seems clear that the Department sees the present transition as a challenge. In the view of
the Review Group, it is essential that the Department uses this time of transition in a proactive and positive way. The new situation requires a number of changes, some of which
may now appear challenging, but which in fact will make it possible for the
Department/Discipline to continue to be a teaching and research unit of very high quality,
and a flagship of the National University of Ireland, Galway. We mention this at the outset,
because our view is that this transition can be a positive one, but if it is to be so a strategy
for the future will be required, elaborated by the Department in a transparent fashion.
1
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
Thus, the Review Group recommends that the Department undertake the
preparation of a Strategic Plan for the Discipline of History, within the context of its future
role within the new School/College structure, which will clearly define the disciplines key
priorities for development within the areas of, inter alia:

English-medium and Irish-medium teaching and learning.

Research.

Curriculum Development.

Staff induction and development.
This will allow the staff to engage in a process that provides them with the opportunity to
confront many issues head-on (such as work load, administrative shortfall, progression, the
development of ‘Stair as Gaeilge’, standard assessment procedures across courses, the
targeted development of Library resources for History and so on). It will also offer a clear
statement of what the Department sees as its key priorities for the foreseeable future and
assist it in prioritizing the use of its resources accordingly. It will also guide the University
in relation to making senior academic appointments to the discipline in the future. Given
the new structures that are emerging in the University, the Department needs to define what
it is and how it views its future shape and direction rather than having such imposed on
them by a School or College.
2. Organisation and management
Currently, the Department has a very simple organisational structure, one which places a
very considerable weight on its Head of Department. There are regular Departmental
meetings, with sub-committees or working parties set up as required; there is a strong
emphasis on informality. This is seen at least in part as the result of a lack of administrative
support. This informal system, described to the Review Group as ‘ad hoc’, has served the
Department well until now.
However, the Review Group noted that the Department and the University has gone
through a period of expansion which has seen a rapid increase in the number of students
and that this has happened at a time when technological and societal changes pose many
new challenges and obligations for the University sector. These changes include:
o the greater percentage of young people participating in third level education.
o the increased importance of second-chance education and life-long learning.
o the perception that a University has a much broader range of roles to play in society
than heretofore envisaged.
o the changed expectations of students as to what a third level experience should be
and what a third level education should deliver.
o the means available for students to engage with written material, through the
internet, electronic journals and Blackboard.
o the increased range of career and further study opportunities available to graduate
students.
o the increased number of international students attending Irish universities.
o the increased demands on Universities to develop more formal, transparent and
structured approaches to the delivery of education and the management of their
institutions.
2
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
o the move towards a more integrative approach to third-level education within
Europe.
These changes, which were mentioned several times in our discussions with students and
staff members of the Department, have an impact on the way in which academic
departments interact with students, with the rest of the University and with society in
general and this is reflected at University level by the transition to a
college/school/discipline structure. These issues also have important implications for how
the Department (in future the Discipline) is managed. It is clear that the collegial and
informal nature of the Department has been its strong point in the past and that this remains
the strongest organisational culture within the Department. It is the view of the Review
Group, however, that given the increased complexity of operating in the University
environment of NUI Galway (due to the increase in the number and range of students and
the shift to a situation in which change has a continuous presence), it is advisable for the
Department to set up a number of more formalised structures and procedures. We therefore
recommend that the Department establish:



A series of subcommittees/working groups covering the Department/Disciplines
main strategic and developmental requirements. The Review Group recommends
that consideration be given to the establishment of formal subcommittees to deal
with the following areas of responsibility: Planning and Development; Research
Strategy and Supervision; Curriculum Development and Monitoring; Stair as
Gaeilge; and a Staff-Student Consultative Committee.
That the terms of reference of sub-committees would include the following
managerial functions:
o Identifying the strategic requirements of the Department for the area in question
and feed this into the Department’s strategic plan as appropriate.
o Development of appropriate policies, procedures and criteria for the area in
question.
o Liaison with other relevant academic, service and administrative departments of
the University to ensure that the Department/Discipline’s requirements are
clearly represented and that the Department’s obligations to other sectors of the
University are clearly understood.
That, where appropriate, each sub-committee shall have representation from the
student body.
In our belief, formalising some structures and procedures in this way, when coupled with a
clear development strategy, will lead to better communication within the Department and to
a greater sense of empowerment both of senior staff with respect to other levels of
university authority, and of junior staff and students with respect to their role and their
contribution to the Department and to the University, and in the end will be recognised as
of benefit to all.
In some cases, as the School and Discipline structures develop, it may well be the
case that it is deemed more appropriate that some of the management and planning subcommittees referred to above be established at the School level. Regardless of what level
such committees are established at, however, it is essential that the Department/Discipline
of History engage pro-actively in such processes to ensure the effective management and
development of the discipline.
The Review Group noted that the Department has designated individual members in
posts of responsibility for various aspects of the Department’s activities. It was noted,
3
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
however, that, at least in some cases, the posts of responsibility in question were not
provided with clear terms of reference. The Review Group recommends that in all cases
where posts of responsibility are designated that clear terms of reference are provided and
that, where appropriate, the person designated for the post should work in consultation with
the relevant departmental or school sub-committee. This will give the staff a better sense of
what their role is, and will, when communicated to the students, better inform them of who
is responsible for which aspects of their relationships with the Department.
Among the specific issues that the Review Group noted, it observed that there is
currently no clear system for the equitable division of teaching and other duties, and this is
a matter of understandable concern. The University is developing a system for assessing
staff workload; it may be that this will serve the purposes of the Department. A first step
has to be acceptance by the Department of a system which assesses load in a fair and
transparent manner. This should take account both of contact hours, preparation time, and
time spent in marking and supervision. Administrative and managerial duties should also
be weighted.
The Department currently has limited administrative support, with just one and a
half posts. The move into a School structure obviously has considerable implications for
the administration of what will become a Discipline. The Review Group considers that the
present arrangements do not present the Department/Discipline with a sufficiently robust
administrative structure and is possibly a hindrance to effective communication within the
Department. The Review Group recommends that the administrative requirements of the
Department/Discipline and the effectiveness of current administrative arrangements, be
reviewed, with an input from both the Department/Discipline and University Management,
while taking into account:

the impact that the move to a School structure will have on the administrative
requirements of the Department/Discipline.

the development by the Department/Discipline of more formal decision making
structures and its strategic plan.
Within this context the Review Group recognises that the type of administrative structure
which the Department/Discipline adopts for itself going forward needs to involve a
strategic decision as to what proportion of its staff and other resources should be
deployed/expended on administration. The Review Group recommends that the current
administrative arrangements should be reviewed in this context and that if considered
necessary that additional administrative assistance be provided to the Department to cover
this transitional period.
The Department has difficulty with the University’s system for module approval; it
is difficult, for example, for it to fit with the timetable, as there are often late changes to
module provision; on occasion approval has come after teaching of a module has started. In
addition, there have been cases where a lack of forward planning has meant that modules
given by members of the Department have overlapped with those given by visiting
lecturers. These are problems which should be easily resolved with goodwill, co-operation
and understanding. In this context the Review Group recommends that the curriculum
committee referred to above have a central role in planning ahead for the overall provision
of modules/courses and for liaising with the College on such matters. In this context, the
Department/Discipline needs to be cognizant of the College’s/University’s need to work
within a timeframe that allows it to provide information to prospective and current students
in a timely fashion.
4
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
New staff should be routinely trained in their first year. Such training should
familiarize them with the administrative structures of the University, introduce them to the
various roles (e.g. year head) that they might reasonably be expected to undertake, and
familiarize them with the University’s criteria and opportunities for career development. In
addition, such staff should be made aware of all documentary processes that accompany
student assessment and progression, and introduced to their use. It is also important that
new staff are trained in the technological teaching aids that are specific to this institution
(Blackboard) and the electronic Library holdings (databases), so that they can best inform
their teaching in the context of what is available locally. Finally, they should have access to
further training and education in the area of Teaching and Learning, and in particular be
facilitated in gaining an insight into concepts underlying current best practice in the
development of new programmes and modules, particularly in relation to the use of
learning outcomes and NQAI levels.
3. Programmes and Instruction
The Department provides an undergraduate syllabus that is eminently appropriate. There is
an excellent range, from the ancient world to the present, and from the local to the
international. There is a good mix of teaching methods, from the large lecture format to the
small seminar or colloquium group. There is progression through the years, with increasing
specialisation from one to the next. Assessment criteria are well thought out, with excellent
grade descriptors, and are to be commended. The Department operates a range of
assessment techniques, from traditional essays and exams to oral presentation. Students
were wholly positive about the transparency of the assessment process in the Department,
as well as the quality and quantity of the feedback given.
The construction of the undergraduate curriculum, however, is something that has
developed historically and informally. While some efforts have been made to revisit
curricular issues—in a laudable restructuring of the first year programme, for example—
this kind of curriculum development ought to be performed holistically, and with a focus
on both individual years as well as the degree programme as a whole. The Group therefore
recommends the establishment of a curriculum committee to oversee and implement
changes in the curriculum. This committee could comprise heads of year, heads of
programmes, student representatives (from each year, as well as a representative of the
Mature and Visiting Students) and a graduate research coordinator. Its function would be to
oversee the systematizing of learning outcomes, assessment methods, and, for example,
ensuring that individual modules have a consistent student workload relative to the number
of credits which apply to the module.
The Department has recently formulated a set of generic and subject-specific
learning outcomes, which are appropriate and clear, and which relate specifically to the
degree programme as a complete entity. It is less evident that there are proper learning
outcomes set out at the level of individual modules, and more work needs to be done to
relate the learning outcomes to the assessment criteria that the Department employs. The
learning outcomes should also be properly publicised to students. This is work that could
be efficiently carried out by the curriculum committee recommended above, with the
advice and guidance of CELT.
Use of Blackboard is at present limited to a few modules. The Group recommends
the adoption of a consistent policy regarding the Departmental use of Blackboard as a
pedagogical tool and for disseminating information to students. The use of Blackboard for
5
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
student questionnaires also seems especially pertinent given the number of questionnaires
that have already been prepared by the Quality unit and made available by CELT. The use
of the existing technology of Blackboard and the associated questionnaires would not only
provide a valuable way of assessing student experiences, but would also save time as the
Department would not have to evolve its own processes of evaluation. We also suggest that
the Department as a group seek training from CELT in the deployment of this Virtual
Learning Environment, as even a minimal use of it will give students easy access to
booklists, essay lists etc. In addition, there is a need to upgrade the technology currently
available in the Department: seminar rooms need to be equipped with data projectors, and
perhaps electronic whiteboards.
Student workload appeared to the Review Group to be broadly reasonable and
appropriate, but there were some concerns that more was demanded in some courses than
others. The requirements in terms of both written work, oral presentation and student study
time need to be set out clearly in the course literature, so that it can inform student choice.
Overall loads should be monitored by the Syllabus Committee.
Students are provided with outlines of modules to assist them in making their
choices, but the quality of the information that they are then provided with appears to vary.
A particular concern arose among Visiting Students, for example, who did not feel that they
had received sufficient and timely information about the seminars on offer and the selection
and registration process involved. The Department should consider encouraging a greater
degree of standardisation, perhaps with the development of course handbooks (or
Blackboard pages) which would provide standard information for each module, i.e. lecture
list, bibliography, learning outcomes, essay titles, other work assignments, etc. The Review
Group appreciates that in some cases such information cannot be set in stone, but develops
as the module progresses; nevertheless, it should still be possible to produce helpful guides.
The Department is clearly student-centred in its approach to teaching and learning,
and it is clear that the Department’s commitment to the student experience as a whole is
both developed and strong. A number of staff members have participated in training
workshops or programmes for third-level teachers, and the effects of this on teaching are
evident. Students acclaimed the quality of the teaching they receive, and the helpfulness
and approachability of the teaching staff. In this way, it would be of great benefit to all
stakeholders to persist in setting up and maintaining a staff-student committee, at which the
Department would receive feedback upon which it can base its continued commitment to
education. While student feedback is encouraged through the distribution of course
evaluation questionnaires, and while staff are both reflective and active in their
implementation of this feedback, their responses to the feedback are not communicated to
the students, and therefore a more dialogic process is to be recommended. There is at
present no system of peer-review, whereby members of staff have the opportunity to
observe each other’s teaching; it is good practice to do this.
The Department has made a number of commendable modifications to its course
offerings in order to enhance the opportunities of its students to learn in small groups. The
Review Group expresses some concern, however, that the second year colloquia may still
contain up to thirty students, and suggests, therefore, that numbers be capped at fifteen to
twenty. Furthermore, some concerns were expressed regarding the somewhat ad hoc
approach to the structuring of tutorials, whereby these tutorials may vary in number,
frequency and approach, depending on the preferences, needs, and intentions of each
individual tutorial leader. A more formal and consistent approach to the provision of
tutorial teaching would be of great benefit to both tutorial leaders and students.
Furthermore, graduate students assisting in teaching tutorials should be required to receive
6
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
more formal training, either at a departmental level or through CELT.
The problems involved in trying to establish some equality of staff workloads have
led the Department to schedule popular modules against each other, or to timetable them at
unpopular hours. The Review Group was not convinced that this was a better method of
controlling student enrolments than a system of capping modules. In part the problem lies
with the fact that visiting students are given a free choice of modules; this causes
considerable difficulties for the Department, and the policy should be revisited.
The teaching of history through the medium of Irish is a distinctive feature of the
Department and a significant part of its mission. The Department is to be admired for its
determination to provide history programmes through the medium of Irish, and to continue
to offer courses which cater for students with a similar commitment. Numbers, however,
are currently very low; it should be possible to do more to publicise the possibility of ‘Stair
as Gaeilge’, which some students assured us they would have taken had they known about
it in good time. This is an area of its activities that the Department needs to review in the
context of its Strategic Development Plan, with a view to making its ‘Stair as Gaeilge’
offering more attractive and visible to students. Options that could be considered include
the provision of a number of modules that would be available solely through the medium of
Irish coupled with the provision of a departmental brochure clearly outlining what
courses/modules are available ‘as Gaeilge’, which could be used to market the ‘Stair as
Gaeilge’ option for incoming first year students; and the development of an Irish-medium
MA programme.
The panel was impressed by what it saw of the MA degree; this is entirely
appropriate both as a free-standing degree, and as an introduction to PhD work. The
students agreed that the MA feels like a natural progression from undergraduate level, and
in this way the curriculum is well structured. The course director of the MA was also
praised in her dealings with students, and on her commitment to making regular and
systematic contact.
4. Scholarship and research
The Department has a very distinguished research record. Senior members are major
leaders of the profession, with very considerable reputations; the Review Panel was also
very impressed by the achievements of the younger members of the Department. The
publication record is excellent; work has appeared with academic publishers of the highest
quality, and in peer-reviewed journals of high international standard. Research is also
disseminated through conference attendance, and through conference organisation.
Members of the Department have excellent research links with other institutions and
colleagues worldwide. The research informs the teaching, bringing students into contact
with the latest ideas in the development of the discipline.
There is a strong culture of individual research activity; the Department has not
moved in the direction of establishing distinct and separate ‘research clusters’. Given its
relatively small size, this is not surprising. It is important, however, to maintain a powerful
collective sense of the importance of the research done in the Department, by, for example,
maintaining a tradition of holding regular research seminars.
There is an excellent record of obtaining research grants. Inevitably, it is the senior
members of the Department who have been successful in obtaining large project grants;
retirements will take their toll of this in future years, and it will be important to maintain
and develop the culture of applying for grants among all members of staff. With this in
7
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
mind, young scholars and new staff to the Department (especially those who may be
unfamiliar with the sources of Irish Higher Education funding) should be provided with
information about the variety of schemes that are available. They should also be fully
supported in the process of creating, costing and submitting a bid. The creation of a
research committee should help in this; it should comment on, and suggest improvements
to all grant applications submitted by members of the Department as a matter of course.
The Head of Department has been able to do much on an informal basis, but in the
changed environment of the new School, it will be necessary to introduce systematic
monitoring and planning of research. Currently, research activity is not formally monitored;
staff are not asked for annual returns of publications, nor for statements of their future
plans. Nor is there a system of regular appraisal or performance review which would enable
staff to set out their research objectives. There is no collectively agreed strategy for the
future direction of research. In its strategic planning for the future, the unit needs to
consider the research directions that it sees appropriate for its future development, taking
into account the library and other resources available.
The Review Group was impressed by the support that the Library is able to provide;
however, the continued improvement of library facilities is essential for the intellectual
health of the Department and the University needs to recognise that for the Department to
maintain its research excellence, it will be necessary to increase library resources for
History. There is a need for the maintenance of book funds – while extremely valuable,
electronic resources cannot be a substitute for monograph purchases. At the same time, an
increasing quantity of primary material is becoming available electronically. The Review
Group recommends, that within the context of the Strategic Plan for the discipline and the
University’s proposals for the development of a new Library Building, the
Department/Discipline should quantify what its Library requirements will be going
forward, with a view to providing a level of library provision which meets the requirements
of both its teaching and research commitments. The Department should also establish a
process and relevant criteria that will enable it to expend its Library Budget according to its
priorities.
The Department has an impressive record of recruiting PhD students. The
distribution of students among colleagues is good; the introduction of three-person
supervisory committees in accordance with University policy will help to introduce
younger colleagues to the supervisory process. The PhD students that the Group met
seemed unaware of the IUQB documents which set out the requirements and expectations
of supervision (to which the Department is committed); though all seemed content with the
advice and assistance that they were receiving. PhD students also complained that they
sometimes had difficulty in accessing information concerning special/guest lectures
relevant to their research, in a timely manner. The Review Group strongly recommends that
dedicated space be provided for research students as a matter of urgency.
The Group was also concerned that the students fell into two groups, some in the
Moore Institute, and others not. Research in History is frequently lonely; the Department
should consider establishing a fuller induction process, which could help to integrate new
research students more rapidly. It would also be good to see the postgraduate students
encouraged to establish their own relatively informal discussion groups; this would help to
improve their presentational skills, and encourage a more cohesive atmosphere.
8
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
5. Community service
The Department contributes in various effective ways. The provision of teaching history in
the medium of Irish is one; teaching evening classes is another. Members of the
Department are active in the presentation of their work in the public media.
It is obvious, given the high profile of members of the Department in local and
national media, that the Department is understood publicly as being a centre of excellence
and knowledge. The wide range of conferences and papers given by members of the
Department, both in academic and general settings, demonstrates that they are well
regarded as speakers and experts by their peers and others engaged in public history.
The long-standing involvement of the History Department in the delivery of
evening courses is to be applauded as this allows a host of non-traditional students, who
may otherwise not attend University, to do so. The delivery of such programmes is of high
quality. To continue with the success of the programmes it is important that they are well
publicised and that the standard of material made available to students (handbooks and so
on) is high. It may also be worth considering how the use of electronic teaching aids might
be further developed to keep students who are off campus during the day in touch with each
other, their staff and the programmes.
Like the evening courses, the Department’s involvement in Extramural and
Community courses has been significant. This speaks volumes about the importance and
accessibility of history to a general audience in a way that many other disciplines would not
be. The Department’s involvement in courses across the West of Ireland has been a central
part of the University’s outreach in the region.
The ongoing support for classes – at all levels and in a variety of settings – in both
Irish and English lies at the core of the thinking of the Department as to how history should
be delivered. This emerges not from a simple desire to support the language, but also
acknowledges the methodological imperative of using Irish to understand and access
sources. The ability to offer classes in Irish to the wider community, given the geographical
location of the University and its commitment to the language, is highly relevant and
compliments other locally based initiatives to promote and sustain Irish such as TG4.
6. The wider context
It is clear that the excellence of the history provision at NUI Galway, at undergraduate and
postgraduate level and in terms of research and funding, is comparable to other Irish and
European institutions. The particular strengths of the Department, in Irish history and its
provision of Stair as Gaeilge, mark it out as an important centre in international terms and
of particular significance to the mission of the University.
7.
Summary and Concluding Remarks
The Review Group expresses their admiration for the evident quality of the Department of
History, its excellent staff and their remarkable research productivity. It is very clear that
the Department has a flexible syllabus which allows students to have a direct link with ongoing research, which we consider to be a fundamental element in the formation of a new
generation of historians, and is committed to retaining and developing its resources for
teaching and research in both English and Irish.
Overall, it appears to us that the aims and objectives of the Department are
9
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
admirable but generic, being limited to a commendable push for excellence in teaching and
research. The general impression is that the current transition to the new School and
College structure is bringing the Department – or the Discipline as it will now be called –
face to face with deep transformations in its role, calling into question the teaching,
administrative and organisation practices which have served it so well until now. Currently,
the Department has a very simple organisational structure, one which places a very
considerable weight on its Head of Department. This informal system, described to the
Review Group as ‘ad hoc’, has served the Department well until now. It is clear that the
collegial and informal nature of the Department has been its strong point in the past and
that this remains the strongest organisational culture within the Department.
In the view of the Review Group, it is essential that the Department use this time of
transition in a pro-active and positive way. The new situation requires a number of changes,
some of which may now appear challenging, but which in fact will make it possible for the
Department/Discipline to continue to be a teaching and research unit of very high quality,
and a flagship of the National University of Ireland, Galway. It is our view that given the
increased complexity of operating in the University environment of NUI Galway (due to
the increase in the number and range of students and the shift to a situation in which change
has a continuous presence), it is advisable for the Department to set up a number of more
formalised structures and procedures which will support the development of a sustainable
strategy for the future, elaborated by the Department in a transparent fashion.
Our main recommendations are as follow:
1.
2.
That the Department undertake the preparation of a Strategic Plan for the Discipline
of History, within the context of its future role within the new School/College
structure, which will clearly define the disciplines key priorities for development
within the areas of, inter alia:

English-medium and Irish-medium teaching and learning.

Research.

Curriculum Development.

Staff induction and development.
That the Department establish a series of subcommittees/working groups covering
the Department/Discipline’s main strategic and developmental requirements (or that
where appropriate such structures be developed at school level). Consideration
should be given to the establishment of formal subcommittees to deal with the
following areas of responsibility: Planning and Development; Research Strategy
and Supervision; Curriculum Development and Monitoring; Stair as Gaeilge; and a
Staff-Student Consultative Committee.
2.1
That the terms of reference of sub-committees include the following
managerial functions:
o Identifying the strategic requirements of the Department for the area in
question and feed this into the Departments strategic plan as appropriate.
o Development of appropriate policies, procedures and criteria for the area
in question.
o Liaison with other relevant academic, service and administrative
departments of the University to ensure that the Department/Discipline’s
10
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
are clearly represented and that the Department’s obligations to other
sectors of the University are clearly understood.
That, where appropriate, each sub-committee shall have representation from
the student body.
That where posts of responsibility are designated that clear terms of
reference are provided and that, where appropriate, the person designated for
the post should work in consultation with the relevant departmental or
school sub-committee.
That the level of administrative support available to the Department and the
effectiveness of current administrative arrangements be reviewed with an
input from both the Department/Discipline and University Management,,
taking into account the effect of moving to a School structure and the
development by the Department/Discipline of more formal decision making
structures and a strategic plan, and if considered necessary that additional
administrative assistance be provided to the Department to cover this
transitional period.
That the curriculum committee referred to above have a central role in
planning ahead for the overall provision of modules/courses and for liaising
with the College on such matters, in a manner which is cognizant of the
College’s/University’s need to work within a timeframe that allows it to
provide information to prospective and current students in a timely fashion.
3.
That the Department develops a consistent approach to the use of Blackboard as a
pedagogical tool, for the dissemination of information to students and for gathering
feedback from students.
4.
That the technology currently available in the Department be upgraded, with
particular reference in particular to upgrading of seminar rooms with data
projectors, and perhaps electronic whiteboards.
5.
That within the context of the Strategic Plan for the discipline and the University’s
proposals for the development of a new Library Building, the
Department/Discipline should quantify what its Library requirements will be going
forward, with a view to providing a level of library provision which meets the
requirements of both its teaching and research commitments.
6.
The Review Group strongly recommends that dedicated space be provided for
research students as a matter of urgency.
11
File name
612887961
Quality Review Report 2007–08: Department of History/Roinn na Staire
8. Comments on the Methodology of the Review Process
The Review Group was grateful to the Department for the care that it had taken in
formulating its Self-Assessment Report, and in providing much other helpful material.
While the information provided on the undergraduate programme was full, the material on
the MA was in short supply and no course outlines were sent to us. Likewise, while we had
a list of PhD students, their supervisors and subjects, there was no material on how the PhD
students were trained and how they were integrated into other activities such as the
departmental research seminar.
The Review Group would like to express its appreciation with the staff and students of the
Department and the staff of the Quality Office for the courteous and professional manner in
which they dealt with us in all matters.
Professor Michael Prestwich (Chair)
Professor Ann Katherine Isaacs
Professor Mike Cronin
Dr. Frances McCormack
Seosamh Mac Donnacha (Rapporteur)
11th July 2008
12
File name
612887961