An Coiste Feabhais Acadúil
The Committee on Academic Quality Improvement
The Academic Quality Assurance Programme, 2007–2008
Review of the
Higher Diploma in Business Studies
Final Report
13th May 2008
Higher Diploma in Business Studies Programme 2008: Review Report
2
This report arises from a visit by a review group to the Higher Diploma in Business
Studies (HDBS) Programme on 10 March, 2008. The Programme Board 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: Mr Sean Hamil, Management Department,
Birbeck College, London (Chair); Ms Carmel Brennan, Business Studies, GMIT; Mr
Donal Flynn, Bank of Ireland, Galway; Ms Pat Byrne, Department of Information
Technology, NUI Galway; and Dr Kathryn Moore of the Department of Earth and
Ocean Sciences, 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. Community Service
5. The Wider Context
6. Summary and Concluding Remarks
8. Comments on the Methodology of the Review Process
Preamble
The Panel found that the scope, breadth and standard of the curriculum for the
modules offered on the programme, and the quality of their delivery, were appropriate
and to the standard of what one would expect in an institution of NUI Galway’s
standing. The programme had enjoyed a good reputation in this regard amongst the
students who had enrolled over the years as demonstrated by the fact that recruitment
was largely on the basis of word-of-mouth amongst NUI Galway students. Similarly
the students who were interviewed on the day of the review were very positive
regarding the overall quality of the individual module delivery. It is therefore the view
of the committee that the underlying standard of the curriculum and its delivery is
robust.
However, the Panel felt that there were a number of aspects relating to the
general administration of the programme which need to be addressed by the course
team and the University.
1.
Aims and Objectives
The Higher Diploma in Business Studies (HDBS) was established over fifteen years
ago (with the assistance of the Digital Equipment Corporation [DEC], Galway) in
order to provide a business qualification to graduate employees who did not hold a
degree in Commerce. Over time, the student cohort changed to be drawn almost
exclusively from NUI Galway graduates and, until recently, the DBS has been
consistently successful in recruiting healthy student numbers. The DBS has a clear
objective as a conversion programme to facilitate the progression of individuals that
have qualified in disparate (non-Commerce) fields to a career in Business.
The programme appears to have developed organically as a general business
studies course following the withdrawal of DEC. There has therefore been no
systematic review of the programme since its inception and no re-assessment of the
aims of the programme. As a result clear learning outcomes are not currently
File name:
BusStudiesHDipFinal Report 2008
Higher Diploma in Business Studies Programme 2008: Review Report
3
available for the HDBS (although they are available for individual module courses).
It is good practice to institute a review of all programmes and the University
has initiated a review of the HDBS in the light of this imperative. Added impetus has
been added to this review by the fact that the numbers of recruits to the programme
has recently shown a sharp decline and, if the trend continues, the Programme will
reach a critical point. There is currently no strategy in place to redress the trend and
there is no documentation pertaining either to the current operation, or to a plan for
the future activities, of the Programme. No aims have been defined.
The Review Group recommends that a key element of the course team’s
response to the Review should be a re-statement of the original aims and objectives
for the programme in the light of the new environment. Clear aims and learning
outcomes for the Programme and strategies for course development should be
devised.
2.
Organization and Management
The DBS is directed by a member of academic staff, who is drawn (on a rotating
basis) from the four core departments teaching the programme (Marketing,
Accounting, Management and Economics). The duration of directorship by any one
department is currently three years and the director is currently a fulltime academic
from the Department of Economics. The operational management is currently
delegated to a dedicated course co-ordinator. The Department of Economics has a
budget of €10,000 to support the Programme, the academic year 2007 -2008 being the
first year of this allocation. For the preceding two years a postgraduate student was
employed as a course co-ordinator. The co-ordinator will change next year as
management moves across departments. Provision of information with changing
management has been through the Faculty administrator. There has not been a
Programme Board that has had regular minuted meetings in the last three years.
There are no formal staff-student meetings. There is no formal reporting procedure
with respect to external examiners and no ongoing review or internal quality
assurance. The underlying quality of the curriculum structure and delivery, as stated
in the preamble, does not appear to have been significantly impaired by the essentially
informal nature of the administration and academic leadership of the programme.
Nevertheless, it is the view of the Review Group that a more formal management
structure needs to be put in place in line with best management practice in the
University, and as a catalyst to re-invigorate the programme and recruitment to it.
The direction of the Programme with respect to its long-term development is
currently a matter of great concern. The Review Group recommends that the
following specific administrative issues need to be addressed.

There were staff who taught on the Programme that were not involved in the selfassessment procedure. They need to be incorporated into the on-going
management processes.

There does not appear to be efficient communication with contributing staff,
particularly those who are not located in NUI Galway on a full-time basis. Formal
communication mechanisms with external lecturers need to be introduced.

Student evaluation of the programme was undertaken in order to construct the
self-assessment report, but this is not undertaken on a regular basis. A class
representative has been elected to relay the views and concerns of the student
File name:
BusStudiesHDipFinal Report 2008
Higher Diploma in Business Studies Programme 2008: Review Report
4
body but there is no formal minuted forum at which this can occur. Reporting is
on an informal basis to the Director of the Programme. A formal staffconsultative student committee needs to be established, the proceedings of which
are minuted.

There are two major concerns for the student body. The first is the identity of the
Programme, which is not clear because classes are shared variously with
undergraduates from first year to final year level, Masters students, or visiting
students. The difficulties with staff-student relations that arise from this situation
are exacerbated by the fact that class sizes can vary from 5 to 400. While it is
accepted that it is reasonable practice to place HDBS students in such classes to
avoid repetition of subject material where possible, this approach requires
additional support in the form of tutorials and greater orientation in the first two
weeks of the programme.

The second major concern is that, while HDBS students are registered as
postgraduates and pay postgraduate fees, they do not have the same status as the
rest of the postgraduate body. They report that they receive undergraduate (or
lower) levels of access to library, computer and copier resources. Both recent and
current graduates expressed great dissatisfaction with this situation. The coupling
of DBS students with a variety of other classes and the inadequate recognition that
they receive combine to affect the quality of the learning experience and lead to
the perception of students that they are a marginalised group. The Review Group
recommends that the students should be given status equal to other postgraduates
within the faculty, including extended library borrowing and access to the
computer suites reserved for postgraduate students. Ideally, a dedicated study
space might be provided.

The general duties and responsibilities of the Programme Director were not clear
to the Review Group and need to be clarified. The Review Group recommends
that there should be one member of fulltime academic staff responsible both for
the direction and co-ordination of the programme, with responsibility for ensuring
that the student experience across the University is positive. The responsibilities
of the Director should be clear and should include chairing of regular minuted
Programme Board meetings, staff-student and pre-Examination board meetings,
and liaison with the various service provision areas of the University.
Furthermore, the Programme Board should undertake to develop a strategy for the
future development of the programme.
3.
Programmes and Instruction
The quality of the individual course module material is excellent, with clearly stated
objectives, and there is a wide variety of choices regarding course options in Semester
II, both of which are appreciated by the students. Continual work and assessment
initiatives from individual lecturers were also welcomed by students. The lecturers
responsible for the different modules gave their views to the Review Group, who
recognised many examples of excellent practice and dedication of staff to their
teaching. Given that there is very little explicit evidence of specific marketing, and
given that the vast majority of the students are from NUI Galway, the Review Group
has developed the impression that the course has been traditionally taken up on the
basis of personal recommendation.
While individual staff are exceptional, the Review Group obtained the
File name:
BusStudiesHDipFinal Report 2008
Higher Diploma in Business Studies Programme 2008: Review Report
5
impression that few staff had an overview of the overall programme and that
problems occurring are being addressed on an ad-hoc basis by conscientious
individual lecturers. The HDBS evolved without a clear design process. Modules are
offered because of their timing rather than the appropriateness of their content. The
students and lecturers alike noted a disparity in the workloads of Semester I and
Semester II. Programme design and content was not reviewed as part of this process.
The course currently appears as a collection of modules rather than a coherent
programme. The relevance of modules to the target market, within the context of
clear programme objectives should be reviewed. A unifying project- or skills-based
module running throughout the programme to link the multidisplinary courses may
help to provide greater coherence to the HDBS. The start of the programme is
accompanied by a handout listing modules and a short description of each, but there is
no coherent information detailing the pathways for progression through the course to
a variety of careers. The provision of a comprehensive course booklet could
effectively help to provide students with realistic expectations, inform them of the
demands that will be placed on them by the course, and lay out paths for their career
progression. This might help to improve retention of students through to completion
of the programme. The Review Group noted anecdotal evidence for a significant
drop-out rate in the first semester and that there is no evidence of a mechanism in
place that could be employed to address this problem. The programme is not
regularly reviewed by students, past graduates or employers.
The Review Group cannot comment on the marking schemes and special
needs of students as this information was not provided. There were no examiners
reports available and the Review Group request clarification regarding the procedures
that are in place to deal with marginal cases.
The Review Group recommends that the programme be reviewed to provide a
more coherent programme with clear objectives and transparent routes to further
qualifications and careers. This should include looking at the relevance and timing of
individual course modules, and might ideally be done in conjunction with employers.
We suggest, in particular, looking at the feasibility of a linking module (or project)
through which students might put into practice a variety of the skills they have gained
through the various taught modules. This should become part of a regular internal
review process which includes external examiners reports.
4.
Community Interaction
The programme has recruited very well until recently on the basis of very little
marketing. As marketing is centrally administered, this will require a more developed
relationship with the postgraduate admissions office. Recruitment should also be
proactively addressed by the programme coordinator and faculty, and should be
informed by target market research.
Students have requested more external stimuli: more field trips or short
duration work placements and guest lectures. The possibility of an advisory board
from local industry might also be investigated.
5.
The Wider Context
Most HDBS students are recent graduates who have not worked in business and have
no prior experience of Business Studies. The one-year HDBS conversion programme
File name:
BusStudiesHDipFinal Report 2008
Higher Diploma in Business Studies Programme 2008: Review Report
6
can provide a base from which to proceed to Masters courses in the Faculty of
Commerce. The level reached by students completing the DBS is not equal to that of
the Masters programmes and is not a level 9 course. While some Universities have
taken the step of extending a conversion programme from two semesters to twelve
months in order to market the course as a Masters programme, the Review Group
concur with the majority of academic staff teaching the HDBS, that this is not viable
for this Programme. An alternative model is suggested, whereby non-Commerce
graduates can opt for a two-year Masters in Business Studies, the first year of which
comprises the DBS. Students may then, on attaining an honours grade, proceed
should they choose to the second year of the Masters programme.
6.
Summary and Concluding Remarks
The DBS is essentially a strong programme, which for a variety of reasons, has lost
focus and this is reflected in declining student recruitment in recent years. However,
the Review initiated by the University, of which this Panel review is a part, offers an
opportunity to re-focus and re-invigorate the Programme. Critically, it is the Review
Groups’s view that any such re-focusing calls for a the development of a written
strategic plan for the programme, and a move towards a much more formalised
system of programme management and administration. This is particularly important
in the context of a programme such as this where there are a number of departments
involved and therefore a greater need for pro-active co-ordination between the
lecturers in the various departments delivering the programme, in addition to a
significant number of external lecturers. Major concerns of the Review Group, in
addition to those of course co-ordination and long-term direction, are the issues of
class identity and status: access to resources and recognition of HDBS students as
postgraduate students.
The Review Group feels that many of the challenges faced by the programme
can be met at the level of local management and recommends that:
 One member of fulltime academic staff should be responsible for both the
direction and co-ordination of the programme, with clear defined
responsibilities.

It is necessary to clarify the relationship between the Director and the Dean’s
Office, and to establish who is ultimately responsible for academic quality
assurance and resources on the HDBS. The issue of programme ownership
and accountability is currently unclear.

A Programme Board should meet regularly (once a semester) to provide a
regular internal review process and produce a strategy to invigorate the HDBS,
involving programme development. The programme board should also review
input from an annual student evaluation.

Procedures for reviewing examination results should be formally established
and external examiners reports should comprise part of the ongoing internal
review process.

Staff-student liaison should occur on a more formal basis.

Minutes should be produced for all the above feedback mechanisms to inform
the decision-making process.

Clear and comprehensive course documentation should be provided each year
File name:
BusStudiesHDipFinal Report 2008
7
Higher Diploma in Business Studies Programme 2008: Review Report
at the start of the Programme and should include clear aims and objectives,
learning outcomes and generic skills, and progression paths through courses
and potential careers.

The identity of the HDBS student cohort can be reinforced by a more formal
programme-wide tutorial scheme.

The provision of more site-visits and guest lectures specifically for HDBS
students should be investigated.

There should be proactive recruitment of non-Commerce graduates within
NUI Galway with a clear strategy to develop fourth level education, in line
with the University’s Strategic Plan and based on research of the target
market. This will require specific attention from the faculty in the next few
years in order to restore the class size.

A two-year Masters course be established which comprises the DBS and
extant Masters programmes that complement the optional courses taken in
semester II of HDBS.
8.
Comments on the Methodology of the Review Process
It would have been helpful if the Programme Board had used the report template from
the Quality Office in constructing the Self-Assessment Report, so as to ensure that
adequate documentation and information was provided. There was a general lack of
information in the Self-Assessment Report, which did not identify potential solutions
to the challenges faced by the programme. The Review Group felt that they should
have been in a position to review an existing draft strategy for improvement, rather
than be requested to suggest such a strategy. The Review Group believed that its
work would have been greatly assisted if everyone who contributes to teaching the
HDBS had been involved in the consultation process that resulted in the SelfAssessment Report. As a number were not consulted, so there were potentially gaps
in the information available to the Review Group on which they based their
recommendations.
Mr Sean Hamil (Chair)
Ms Carmel Brennan
Mr Donal Flynn
Ms Pat Byrne
Dr Kathryn Moore (Rapporteur)
File name:
13th May 2008
BusStudiesHDipFinal Report 2008