1
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
An Coiste Feabhais Riarachán agus Seirbhísí
The Committee on Administration and Services Quality Improvement
The Administration and Services Quality Assurance Programme
2006–07
REVIEW OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
(excluding Examinations)
Final Report
April 30th 2007
25/11/2008
2
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
The Report of the Review Group arises from a visit by the Group to the university on
27 February – 1 March 2007. The Review Group consisted of:
Mr. Con O’Brien, Academic Secretary, University College Cork (Chair);
Mr. Kevin Kelly, Director of Undergraduate Admissions, University of
Massachusetts, Amherst;
Dr. Pat Morgan, Department of Biochemistry, NUI Galway, and
Ms. Jennifer Lally, Buildings Office, NUI Galway (Rapporteur).
Timetable of the Visit
The Review Group found the timetable suitable and adequate though very demanding
given that the focus of the review covered a number of major offices within central
academic administration. At the request of the Review Group some changes were
made to the timetable; additional meetings were arranged with the Director of Human
Resources, a Senior Manager from Management Information Services (MIS), the
International Affairs Officer and the Assistant Secretary from the Office of the
Registrar and Deputy President. Additional time was also requested with the
Registrar and Deputy President, and with the Secretary for Academic Affairs.
Overall Analysis
Self-Assessment Report
A co-ordinating Steering Group had prepared Self-Assessment Reports of the
individual offices making up Academic Affairs, which, together with other
documentation, had been made available to the Review Group in advance of the visit.*
An overarching background note covering Academic Affairs as a whole was also
prepared. The Examination Office, which is also part of Academic Affairs, had been
covered in a previous review and was not covered in the current process. The SelfAssessment Report submitted to the Review Group formed the stepping off point for
the Review Group’s discussions. We consider it a significant piece of work on the
part of the participants. Each Office undertook a detailed SWOT Analysis and the
Review Group believe that this exercise was very useful to staff in developing an
understanding of the internal and external issues affecting performance and in
pointing the way to change and improvement. However, the Review Group
considered that the Self-Assessment Report would have benefited from more analysis
of the work performed by each area; this analysis ranging, for example, from
undergraduate and postgraduate applications and acceptance data to simple counts of
transactions at service desks, numbers of phone calls, numbers of transcripts issued,
replacement student IDs etc. The development of these business metrics would
greatly assist the current management and future Review Groups.
The self-assessments of the individual units would, in the Group’s opinion, have
benefited from a self-assessment of Academic Affairs as a whole.
*
The self-assessment of the Schools Liaison Office only became available on the second day of the site
visit.
25/11/2008
3
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
The Review Group noted that no benchmarking was undertaken as part of the
Self-Assessment. It is the view of the Review Group that benchmarking can provide
a useful comparison with best practice in other institutions, offering valuable insights
into how administrative processes can be better organised and services better
delivered. The Review Group recommend that in any future reviews, benchmarking
should feature as part of the Self-Assessment.
Each member of the Review Group read the 125 pages of the report and the
attached appendices thoroughly before the first meeting. This allowed the Group to
begin discussions with a common understanding of how the individual functions
viewed themselves.
Many of the priorities identified in the Self-Assessment reports of the
individual offices are of a detailed and local nature and were helpful in informing the
thinking of the Review Group. Priorities which can be implemented locally should be
progressed where appropriate. The main focus of the Group’s report is on addressing
major issues within Academic Affairs and at University level which affect
performance and which impact on services, and making recommendations for
improvement. However, a number of specific issues, which were raised by individual
staff members and by user groups during the site visit, were considered to be
sufficiently important to merit reference in the Report.
Context
Over the past ten years NUI Galway has experienced substantial development and
growth in student numbers and academic programmes, both undergraduate and postgraduate programmes. This accelerated expansion has placed enormous pressures on
academic administration and on the delivery of services. In particular, the
development of appropriate management and organisational structures has lagged
behind this growth. These pressures have been compounded by serious complexities
in curricular design and assessment. In the context of rapid institutional growth and
development, greater complexity in administrative processes and evolving
management structures, the Review Group was impressed by the performance of staff
members in Academic Affairs in successfully delivering core academic administrative
services. The Review Group was struck by the professionalism, hard work and
commitment of staff in Academic Affairs to NUI Galway. The Group was also struck
by the real commitment of staff to the change agenda. Indeed it sensed an impatience
on the part of staff members to proceed quickly with implementing restructuring.
Aims and Objectives of Visit
The aims and objectives were identified as follows:
- To ascertain the level of satisfaction with and the effectiveness of the services
provided by Academic Affairs
- To examine the functions in Academic Affairs and make recommendations for
improvements in the organisation and delivery of these functions in line with
best practice
- To explore the extent to which University structures and practices impact on
Academic Affairs, and to make appropriate recommendations
25/11/2008
4
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
Findings and Recommendations of the Review Group
Organisation and Management
Academic Affairs provides core academic administrative services to students, staff
and the general public. This area is organised along the following function lines:
o Admissions office (including post graduate admissions)
o Schools Liaison office
o Academic records
o Examinations office*
o Mature Students office
The Review Group acknowledges the improvements made to date in organisational
and operational procedures including:

the implementation of a new Student Record System

the development of IT-enabled services, particularly the move towards webbased services

the move to Áras Uí Chathail in 2002, which has improved front office
services to students

the plans to develop a Student Contact Centre in Áras Uí Chathail to provide a
‘one stop shop’ for all student enquiries, which are at an advanced stage

progress made in the documentation of procedures

the establishment of the Academic Records office in 2000 and the
appointment of an Academic Records Officer

the establishment of a section for post-graduate admissions within the
Admissions Office

the development of close links between the Mature Students Office and the
Access Office

the appointment of a staff member with IT skills to the Admissions Office

the introduction of extended opening hours
Recommendations for Improvement:
During the course of the visit various groups of users highlighted confusion about the
roles, responsibilities and decision-making authority of the different offices within
Academic Affairs. In meetings with staff members this confusion was also adverted
to. This led the Review Group to examine the structure of the offices within
Academic Affairs, the organisation of work and the communication of services to
users. Arising from this, the Review Group recommends a reorganisation and
restructuring along the following lines:
The Review Group noted that Academic Affairs is part of the Office of the
Registrar and Deputy President and is under the remit of the Secretary for Academic
*
The Examinations Office was reviewed in November 2005 and was not part of this process
25/11/2008
5
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
Affairs, who reports to the Registrar. The Secretary for Academic Affairs also carries
out the role of University Secretary. The Review Group was informed that the
University Secretary post was designated a part-time post, under the University
statutes. It was also informed by the Secretary for Academic Affairs that he devotes
some 60% of his time to Academic Affairs, and some 40% to the Secretary role. The
Review Group was briefed on and understood the historical background to this
arrangement. It was noted that the Registrar and Deputy President, and the Assistant
Secretary, devote a not insignificant amount of time to Academic Affairs operational
matters from time to time. The Group is of the view that the size and complexity of
academic administration, the importance of the services it delivers to students and
academic staff and the degree of interdependence among the various units require a
full-time commitment at senior level to this critical university function.
Accordingly the Group recommend that the current arrangement, whereby the
Secretary for Academic Affairs devotes only part of his time to Academic Affairs,
might be reviewed, as part of a wider review of senior University Management roles,
reflecting the growth and development of the University and necessary changes in
workloads and responsibilities of senior management.
[1]
The Review Group had regard to the recommendations in the Lande Report. It
agreed with the analysis of issues in that Report affecting Academic Affairs and
broadly endorses its recommendations. It noted that a number of these
recommendations had already been acted on.
The Review Group recommend that the proposal in the Lande Report to create a post
of Director of Student Administration to coordinate all student related administrative
activities at the operational level should be proceeded with as a matter of some
urgency.
[2]
The recruitment of students is a key priority for Irish universities in a very
competitive environment. The Review Group is of the view that there is insufficient
focus within the Admissions Office on student marketing and recruitment. It noted
that Schools Liaison was not part of the Admissions Office. There should be a change
of focus within Admissions towards student recruitment and applications processing,
reflecting the strategic importance of attracting high quality students to NUI Galway.
The Group recommend that the Schools Liaison Office should become part of the
Admissions Office and should be resourced adequately. 
[3]
An issue that arises around student recruitment is the need for a strong brand
image for NUI Galway. The Review Group was made aware of plans to establish a
marketing and communications position within the University.
The Review Group advise that there should be close connections between this function
and the recruitment of students.
[4]

The Group note that these recommendations had already been arrived at independently and agreed by
the Senior Management of the Office of the Registrar and Deputy President following their review of
the situation resulting from the vacancy in the Academic Records Officer post in 2006
25/11/2008
6
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
The Review Group noted that the Admissions Office was responsible for
delivering administrative services to both incoming and ongoing students. The Group
sees merit in the Admissions Office concentrating on providing services to incoming
students. It was struck by the high level of confusion among students and academic
staff about the functions of the Admissions Office, which ordinarily one would not
expect to include student registration.
The Review Group recommends that registration and student record functions should
be moved from the Admissions office and relocated within Academic Records in a new
office, Registration and Academic Records. This single office would provide a more
coherent service to registered students and allow the Admissions office to focus more
on prospective students and the admissions process. 
[5]
Mature Students were most complimentary about the services received from
the Mature Students Office. This is an outstanding achievement given that this oneperson office supports 850 mature students. The Review Group was made aware that
some services have had to be dropped due to the lack of resources.
Given the national priority to expand the numbers of mature students and the
particular needs of these students, there is a strong case for appointing a second staff
member to the Mature Students Office.
[6]
The Review Group noted that the three target Access groups namely socioeconomically disadvantaged students, mature students and students with disabilities
each had separate reporting lines. The Group believes that this makes it difficult to
achieve an integrated university approach to the totality of Access initiatives. In
particular it compromises the development of a cohesive university-wide plan for
Access. It also makes it more difficult in achieving a coherent university interaction
with the National Access Office. The Review Group believe that the university needs
to demonstrate greater coherence in its Access Programme (socio-economically
disadvantaged students, mature students, students with disabilities) as part of the
National Access Programme.
The Group recommends closer interactions between the Access Office, the Mature
Students Office & Disability Office to achieve important synergies.
[7]
The Review Group supports the creation of a Postgraduate Admissions Unit
within the Admissions Office in the context of Fourth Level Ireland and the priority
development of postgraduate education.
However, it recommends that consideration be given to establishing Postgraduate
Admissions as a separate office within Academic Affairs to give greater focus and
impetus to graduate studies including marketing and recruitment.
[8]
The Review Group was made aware of the lack of senior posts within
Academic Affairs. This has given rise to a situation where offices are dangerously
reliant on a small number of senior staff as opposed to building teams.

The Group note that these recommendations had already been arrived at independently and agreed by
the Senior Management of the Office of the Registrar and Deputy President following their review of
the situation resulting from the vacancy in the Academic Records Officer post in 2006
25/11/2008
7
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
The Review Group recommends that there should be a higher number of senior posts
in Academic Affairs with a view to building effective work teams. This would also
have the advantage of increasing the number of individuals who had authority to
make decisions, leading to greater efficiencies.
[9]
As part of modern management practice in service organisations, surveys of
levels of satisfaction are undertaken regularly to measure performance against
customer requirements and expectations. Such surveys are becoming a regular feature
in the Irish university sector.
The Review Group recommends the regular use of surveys of customer groups as a
management tool.
[10]
Communications
The Review Group discussed the different facets of communications relevant to
Academic Affairs and to the University. These can be described in terms of
communications within individual offices and between individual offices in Academic
Affairs; communications with other administrative areas within the University;
communications with MIS; communications with students and academic staff and
communications external to the University. The Group was made aware of
shortcomings in communications during the site visit and make recommendations to
address same.
Recommendations for Improvement:
Communications within Academic Affairs
Communications within individual functional areas seem to be working well and
individual staff members seem to be well informed of issues relevant to their area.
Each functional area should hold regular staff meetings to maintain effective
communications within their area. This will facilitate two-way communications and
staff participation in the workings of the office.
[11]
Communications between functional areas, however, were judged to be of an
ad-hoc nature and dependent on personal relationships. As a result, each office seems
unaware of the operations of other offices. Consequences include duplication of
effort and a lack of overall coherence within Academic Affairs. There appear to be
bottlenecks in regular communications between Heads of Office and Senior
Management.
Heads of Offices and Faculty Administrative Officers should meet weekly with the
Secretary for Academic Affairs and these meetings should have an agenda and
minutes with action points.
[12]
Communications with MIS
The importance of communications with MIS was emphasised throughout the visit.
MIS provides critical IT support for many of the processing functions in Academic
Affairs as well as assisting in the development of systems to better meet office IT
needs as well as meeting the IT needs of students and the academic community. The
Review Group formed the view that there were deficiencies in communications which
25/11/2008
8
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
need to be addressed in the short-term in order to successfully support the
development of IT systems.
The Review Group recommend the establishment of a User Group with MIS,
comprising representatives from Academic Affairs, academic staff and students, as a
means of identifying priority areas for development and the progression of current
projects.
[13]
Communications with Students
The meeting with officers of the Students’ Union and class representatives
highlighted communications issues with students, including difficulties in transacting
business over the phone with Academic Affairs. Documentation produced by
Academic Affairs was not found to be user-friendly by students; for example the start
and finish dates for terms could be found under Academic calendar which was not
obvious to students.
The web should be developed as a major communications vehicle for students. In that
regard the Group suggest that the planned one-stop-shop facility might be
reconsidered in the context of the web being the major source of student information
[14]
The Review Group also recommends improvements in the drafting of official
documentation which students consider terse and difficult to understand. The
proposed restructuring of the offices should address students’ confusion about which
office to go to to access services.
[15]
Communications with Academic staff
The lack of clear two-way communications channels between the academic
community and Academic Affairs has led to a lack of understanding of each other’s
needs. This has led to difficulties in providing for curriculum changes on the syllabus
file and coping with overly complex rules for assessment. The inclusion of
presentations by Academic Affairs in the Diploma in Teaching offered by CELT is to
be applauded. Academic staff taking this course were much more aware of the impact
of the structure of delivery and examination of modules on the work of Academic
Affairs. It is noted that the Academic Records Office has also given presentations (7
to date) to groups of course directors and departmental administrative staff and more
such are planned.
Thought should be given to putting in place further mechanisms to ensure good
communications with academic staff.
[16]
Communications external to the University
At meetings with students and career guidance teachers there was criticism of the
content and availability of prospectuses and the amount of information available from
and usability of the website.
The Review Group recommends a complete overhaul of the Academic Affairs website
and a review of the content and availability of the prospectuses.
[17]
25/11/2008
9
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
IT Support and Development
The Review Group recognises the importance of IT support for the efficient discharge
of core academic business functions. Rolling out of the new Student Record System,
Quercus, has been a major achievement but has severely stretched staff resources in
Academic Affairs. They were made aware of the fact that priority has been given to
rolling out Quercus to the Examinations area over the last number of years. This has
led to some neglect in meeting the needs of Admissions and Academic Records and
difficulties in addressing issues raised by academic staff members.
Large-scale transaction processing systems used in Academic Affairs require
staff to have the appropriate set of computer skills. Moreover, modern office
administration requires a certain set of office computer skills. In order for Academic
Affairs to continue to improve, staff members will need to possess a wide range of IT
skills.
The Review Group looked at progress in developing Self Service Registration
(SSR) as a means of providing a modern interface to the student body. It expresses
some concern about the time it is taking to roll out SSR to all students. Web-based
services are increasingly more available to students at other universities and NUI
Galway needs to keep pace with these developments.
Staff drew the Review Group’s attention to the lack of dependability of IT
infrastructure and cited the example of servers going down during critical transaction
processing. This has adversely affected the confidence of the users in the reliability
of their system.
We note the plans to roll out Quercus to academic departments, and support
this development. However, careful attention will need to be paid to the level of
support required for a much wider user base.
Recommendations for Improvement
The Review Group recommends that as a priority, IT development support needs to be
redirected towards Admissions and Academic Records.
[18]
It is recommended that an IT training needs assessment be undertaken to identify the
level of IT skills of individual staff members and related training needs. [19]
It is recommended that sufficient resources be assigned to successfully completing the
full rollout of SSR.
[20]
The Review Group recommends that MIS address the issue of dependability of
infrastructure as a matter of urgency.
[21]
More generally, the Review Group recommends that Service Level Agreements be put
in place between MIS and Academic Affairs.
[22]
Specific Issues Raised during the Site Visit
A number of specific issues were raised by staff members and user groups during the
site visit. The Review Group consider it important to make recommendations on
these issues and these follow:
25/11/2008
10
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
Conferring falls within the remit of Academic Affairs and constitutes a very
important aspect of public relations. This function has greatly expanded as the
numbers of graduates have increased significantly. Because of its seasonal nature,
there is a limited number of permanent staff dedicated to the work. These
arrangements and limitations in physical resources are threatening the smooth running
of conferrings.
The Group recommend improvements in the provision of physical and human
resources to better support the operational side of this important function. [23]
There seems to be multiple sources of information for updating the academic
records and producing Calendars and Prospectus.
There should be single source of information for the production of the syllabus file,
the academic calendar and the undergraduate and post-graduate prospectuses. It is
envisaged that this function would lie with the new Registration and Academic
Records Office.
[24]
The Group noted that opening hours in the different offices servicing students
in Áras Uí Chathail varied from office to office. Some offices, for example, opened
during lunch hour.
It is recommended that all of the offices serving students in Áras Uí Chathail should
have the same opening hours. Opening hours may need to be extended in the
evenings to provide services for the non-traditional students such as evening and
distance students.
[25]
Career guidance counsellors considered that the prospectus was of high
quality. However, a number of issues arose, such as the difficulty in getting an
adequate number of copies. This difficulty was particular to NUI Galway and not
experienced with any other third-level institution. They also considered that the
inclusion of the number of places on degree courses and a summary of information at
the beginning of each course would be useful.
The Group recommend that these changes be made and suggests that a benchmarking
exercise with promotional material from other institutions would also be helpful. [26]
Concerns were raised by academic staff about the way students were
registered on Quercus and how examination results are returned on the system. This
is particularly a problem in modules offered to students from multiple classes, e.g.,
examiners in Mathematics may have to return up to 30 white sheets for students
taking a single module.
The Group recommend that students be listed for a module, rather than a course
instance, as a means of immediately resolving and deceasing the administrative load
on academics. Improved communications between academic staff and Academic
Affairs would better allow for easy resolution of small, but significant, problems. [27]
The roll out of the PAC system for postgraduate applications has had
implications for academic course directors. The increased volume of applications and
the need to print at least some applications for review and ranking of applicants
passed the burden from Academic Affairs to individual academics, without any
25/11/2008
11
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
increase in administrative support.
The Group recommend that the concerns of academic staff in relation to PAC should
be addressed, as far as possible, as part of the ongoing review of PAC and evaluation
of desirable enhancements.
[28]
Students complained of long queues in Áras Uí Chathail and frustration at
joining the wrong queue and on reaching the counter having to join another queue.
It is recommended that information boards be developed which would help students
select the right queue.
[29]
Students have no privacy at the counters in Áras Uí Chathail. They indicated
the need for an area where they could discuss confidential matters in private.
The Review Group support this development.
[30]
The perspex roof in the public area of Áras Uí Chathail is very noisy when it
rains and very hot in the summer time.
It should be replaced with a more suitable roof.
[31]
Summary and Concluding Remarks
The Review Group offer its recommendations, both for Academic Affairs and the
University as a whole, with the objective of improving the overall performance of an
Office which it found to be stretched but functioning well, due in no small part to the
professionalism and commitment of staff. Its overall finding is that Academic Affairs
is in need of a new dynamic in order to serve the University in its current stage of
development and future ambition. The Review Group are confident that the
recommendations for improvement will create this new dynamic and provide a more
rational basis for Academic Affairs to discharge its functions more efficiently and
more effectively. Most of the recommendations have both strategic and management
implications and, with few exceptions, have relatively modest resources requirements
for their implementation. The Review Group hope its recommendations will assist
the development of Academic Affairs and ongoing quality improvement.
The Recommendations
1. The current arrangements whereby the Secretary for Academic Affairs devotes
only part of his time to Academic Affairs might be reviewed, as part of a wider
review of senior University Management roles, reflecting the growth and
development of the University and necessary changes in workloads and
responsibilities of senior management.
2. The proposal in the Lande Report to create a post of Director of Student
Administration to coordinate all student related administrative activities at the
operational level should be proceeded with as a matter of some urgency.
3. The Schools Liaison Office should become part of the Admissions Office and
should be resourced adequately.
25/11/2008
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
12
4. There should be close connections between the proposed Director of Marketing
and Promotion and the recruitment of students.
5. The registration and student record functions should be moved from the
Admissions office and relocated within Academic Records in a new office,
Registration and Academic Records. This single office would provide a more
coherent service to registered students and allow the Admissions office to focus
more on prospective students and the admissions process.
6. Given the national priority to expand the numbers of mature students, and the
particular needs of these students, there is a strong case for appointing a second
staff member to the Mature Students Office.
7. There should be closer interactions between the Access Office, the Mature
Students Office and the Disability Office to achieve important university-wide
synergies.
8. Consideration be given to establishing Postgraduate Admissions as a separate
office within Academic Affairs to give greater focus and impetus to graduate
studies including marketing and recruitment.
9. There should be a higher number of senior posts in Academic Affairs with a view
to building effective work teams. This would also have the advantage of
increasing the number of individuals who had authority to make decisions, leading
to greater efficiencies.
10. Regular use should be made of surveys of customer groups as a management tool.
11. Each functional area should hold regular staff meetings to maintain effective
communications within their area. This will facilitate two-way communications
and staff participation in the workings of the office.
12. Heads of Offices and Faculty Administrative Officers should meet weekly with
the Secretary for Academic Affairs and these meetings should have an agenda and
minutes with action points.
13. A User Group should be established with MIS, comprising representatives from
Academic Affairs, academic staff and students, as a means of identifying priority
areas for development and the progression of current projects.
14. The web should be developed as a major communications vehicle for students. In
that regard the planned one-stop-shop facility might be reconsidered in the context
of the web being the major source of student information.
15. Improvements should be made in the drafting of official documentation which
students consider terse and difficult to understand. The proposed restructuring of
the offices should address students’ confusion about which office to go to to
access services.
16. Thought should be given to putting in place further mechanisms to ensure good
communications with academic staff.
17. There should be a complete overhaul of the Academic Affairs website and a
review of the content and availability of the prospectuses.
18. As a priority, IT development support needs to be redirected towards Admissions
and Academic Records.
19. An IT training needs assessment should be undertaken to identify the level of IT
skills of individual staff members and related training needs.
20. Sufficient resources should be assigned to successfully completing the full rollout
of SSR.
25/11/2008
13
Academic Affairs 2007: Review Report
21. MIS should address the issue of dependability of infrastructure as a matter of
urgency.
22. Service Level Agreements should be put in place between MIS and Academic
Affairs.
23. The Group recommends improvements in the provision of physical and human
resources to better support the operational side of this important function.
24. There should be single source of information for the production of the syllabus file,
the academic calendar and the undergraduate and post-graduate prospectuses. It is
envisaged that this function would lie with the new Registration and Academic
Records Office.
25. It is recommended that all of the offices serving students in Áras Uí Chathail should
have the same opening hours. Opening hours may need to be extended in the
evenings to provide services for the non-traditional students such as evening and
distance students
26. Changes suggested by the Career Guidance Teachers should be made and a
benchmarking exercise with promotional material from other institutions would also
be helpful.
27. Students be listed for a module, rather than a course instance, as a means of
immediately resolving and deceasing the administrative load on academics.
Improved communications between academic staff and Academic Affairs would
better allow for easy resolution of small, but significant, problems.
28. The Group recommends that the concerns of academic staff in relation to PAC
should be addressed, as far as possible, as part of the ongoing review of PAC and
evaluation of desirable enhancements.
29. Information boards should be developed in Áras Uí Chathail which would help
students select the right queue for services.
30. Provision should be made for students to be able to discuss issues in private in Áras
Uí Chathail.
31. The perspex roof in Áras Uí Chathail should be replaced with a more suitable roof.
Comments on the Methodology of the Review Process
The Quality office should be commended for very quickly responding to requests for
additional meetings with members of the University administration. It is worth
considering a Human Resources representative in future reviews of administrative
offices. Considering the issues raised by the self-assessment report, the need to meet
with Human Resources and Management Information Services personnel became
evident.
Given that student recruitment was part of the activity under review, it would
have been useful to have sight of all of the marketing material utilised for undergraduate
and post-graduate recruitment.
Future review groups, in particular the external reviewers, would also benefit
from a tour of the campus as well as the offices under review.
Mr. Con O’Brien (Chair)
Mr. Kevin Kelly
Dr. Pat Morgan
Ms. Jennifer Lally (Rapporteur)
April 30th 2007
25/11/2008