An Coiste FeabhaisAcadúil
The Committee on Academic Quality Improvement
The Academic Quality Assurance Programme, 2006–2007
Review of
Department of Zoology
Final Report
March 2007
Review Group Report: Department of Zoology
2
This report arises from a visit by a review group to the Department of Zoology, NUI
Galway on Wednesday 7th and Thursday 8th February, 2007. 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 Ann Burnell, Department of Biology, NUI
Maynooth (Chair); Professor Randall W. Phillis, Department of Biology, University
of Massachusetts; Dr Ken Whelan, an executive Director with the Marine Institute; Dr
Maura Grealy, Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, NUI Galway
(cognate) and Dr Máire Áine Ní Mhainnín, Department of French, NUI Galway,
acting as rapporteur.
This report is structured to cover the following main topics
1. Aims and Objectives
2. Organisation and Management
3. Programmes and Instruction
4. Scholarship and Research
5. Community Service and The Wider Context
6. Summary and Concluding Remarks
7. Comments on The Methodology of the Review Process
All relevant documentation was supplied to the Review Group, notably the
Department’s Self-Assessment Report, the University and Science Faculty Strategic
Plans and information regarding the restructuring at NUI Galway. Meetings took
place with all full-time academic, technical and administrative staff of the
Department. A representative range of under-graduate and postgraduate students
were consulted. Discussions were also held with University personnel providing
ancillary services and with senior members of the University management team.
These meetings, in conjunction with the carefully-prepared Self-Assessment Report,
impressed on the Review Group the professionalism, enthusiasm and dedication of all
members of staff of the Zoology Department NUI Galway. The overall impression is
one of harmonious teamwork and a Department where there exists a spirit of openness
and transparency in all aspects of its business.
1.
Aims and Objectives
The Review Group considered in detail, the aims and objectives of the Department.
The principal aim as outlined on page three of the Department’s Self-Assessment
Report is to teach and undertake research in Zoology to the highest possible standards
and to contribute to the overall integration of scientific knowledge and methods into
the fabric of society, in both Irish and global contexts. The recommendations in this
report, we hope, will provide the Zoology Department an opportunity for further
reflection, and help it to take advantage of the possibilities that the restructuring
process at NUI Galway will provide to a young, dynamic and ambitious department.
The aims and objectives of the Department were considered appropriate on the whole,
but it is the opinion of the Review Group that the central role of the student, an
important element in the University’s mission statement, should be highlighted in the
Department’s aims and objectives.
The Department of Zoology is now at a critical juncture as regards its future
development. New opportunities are now becoming apparent: the possibility that the
Review Group Report: Department of Zoology
3
whole Department my be located in the Martin Ryan Institute and annexe (currently
under construction); a new schools structure may allow for innovations in
undergraduate and post graduate programmes and a substantial new national research
initiative The Sea Change Programme, co-ordinated by the Marine Institute, will
target topics in which the Zoology Department has specialist (and scarce) research
expertise.
The Zoology Department has also assumed responsibility for the coordination of the
BSc in Marine Science Denominated Degree programme, with effect from January
2007. However the Zoology Department Student/Staff Ratio, at 24.7, places the
Department second last of nine departments in the Faculty of Science. The Review
Group notes that there were eight full-time members of Academic Staff prior to 2002,
there are now seven.
The Review Group recommends that the Zoology Department prepare a strategic plan
to outline its longer and medium term objectives and resource requirements. We
recommend that, where possible, linkages with sister Departments and units (e.g. MRI
and ECI) be explored to provide visionary and innovative research and teaching
programmes.
The Review Group strongly advocates the provision of at least one new member of
academic staff for the Zoology Department and we urge the University to address the
limited possibilities for promotion to Senior Lecturer, if it is to retain the excellent
staff currently working in the Zoology Department.
2.
Organization and Management
The Department of Zoology is a relatively small Department and five of its seven
academic staff (including the Head of Department) have been appointed since 2004.
The Head of Department has been pivotal in revitalizing and reorganising the
Department and in expediting the completion of the research theses of postgraduates
from the research groups of former members of staff of the Zoology Department. The
recently appointed members of staff are now well integrated and their research is
successfully underway and flourishing in terms of their publications, the winning of
research funding and the recruitment and training of postgraduate students. All
members of staff are clearly very committed and dedicated to their duties and the
atmosphere in the Department is excellent. It was obvious to the Review Group that
there is a very strong work ethic in the Department, along with a clear focus on multitasking and teamwork and that there is well-coordinated team planning in the
Department. The Review Group was impressed with the informative and attractive
website; it was up to date and relevant. It presents a very positive image of the
Department to the outside world and the Department is to be commended on this.
There is a transparent and equitable system for distribution of teaching and
administrative loads and the responsibilities of all staff are clear and unambiguous.
Internal communications are excellent; there is a good ethos of cooperation with
regular departmental meetings and informal contact between all members of staff.
The coffee room in Áras de Brún is very successful in allowing informal contact and
counteracting the fragmentation of the Department, as it is divided between two
locations namely the Martin Ryan Institute and Áras de Brún. Given this success,
should the department be united in the new space in the Martin Ryan Institute they
Review Group Report: Department of Zoology
4
should make every effort to recreate such a community space at their new site.
There is a strong emphasis on compliance with Health and Safety regulations in the
Department. The Department is very fortunate to have the support of excellent,
committed and highly qualified Technical staff. The Review Group was extremely
impressed by their enthusiasm and contribution to the overall functioning of the
Department. Their support to the research activities in the Department is extremely
impressive. Some of the key members of technical staff, however, are within a few
years of retirement. For succession planning and in order that their specialist skills be
passed on and not lost to the Department, we strongly recommend that a junior
technician be appointed who could be trained in the specialist skills required in the
Department, for example; diving, specimen collection and maintenance of the animal
museum.
The administrative assistant, Grade two, has a workload which is wide and varied and
which has clearly changed a lot over the past few years. The administrative assistant
is involved in all aspects of student examinations and student records, as well as
providing administrative support to postgraduate students involved in fieldwork and,
managing petty cash of €1 000 per month. The Board recommends that the post of
Administrative Assistant in Zoology be re-graded to that of Grade three.
A staff/student liaison committee is in place and meets each year, early in semester
two. We recommend that this committee meet at least once each semester, with two
or three members of academic staff representing the staff and that a more
representative number of students be included. Only issues of direct relevance and of
concern to students should be discussed and action points agreed and implemented.
This adjusted staff to student ratio and limited agenda will likely create a more
inviting environment for students to openly share their ideas and concerns.
We recommend that advice should be sought from CELT for development of a more
systematic and comprehensive system for evaluating student satisfaction with
teaching quality. This may include student satisfaction questionnaires with adequate
space for student comments for both lectures and practicals for each module in each
semester. Currently student feedback on the First Year programme is sought in
second year when considerable time has elapsed and many students are no longer
taking zoology.
Physical structure
The Review group was very impressed with the facilities and laboratories in the
Martin Ryan Institute where some members of the teaching staff are housed. The
Áras de Brún building is in a poor state of repair and although some of the
laboratories have been refurbished, there are others in a dilapidated condition. The
review group was encouraged to hear of the possible move of the whole Department
to the Martin Ryan Institute and annexe (currently under construction), which we
understand is under negotiation and we strongly recommend that this happen at the
earliest opportunity.
Review Group Report: Department of Zoology
3.
5
Programmes and Instruction
The Review Group was impressed by the extent to which students, both
undergraduate and postgraduate, were appreciative of staff support, approachability
and encouragement. Following the large turnover of academic staff in the last few
years, the Department has begun reform of the undergraduate syllabi and this
modified curriculum has been associated with an increase in the numbers of students
taking Third and Fourth Year Zoology. We note that the Third and Fourth Year
Zoology teaching programmes have been substantially revised and reorganised. The
students with whom we spoke expressed a very high level of satisfaction with these
revised programmes. Some course revision has also occurred at Second Year, mainly
in the reduction in the amount of taxonomic and systematic Zoology that is covered,
and the addition of some molecular biology and statistics to help prepare students for
Third Year material. The students that we met did not find the Second Year course
(in its old version) as interesting and stimulating as the Third Year course. The
review team have a concern that the apparent emphasis on taxonomic classification
and Latin terminology in the Second Year course may have contributed to student
disinterest and in their opting not to study Zoology in Third Year. Students also noted
that sometimes there appeared to be little correlation between the material covered in
lectures and practicals (particularly in First and Second Year). Changes to the Second
Year syllabus are recommended if students are to be engaged and motivated. One
suggestion is that some of the more difficult material covered in Second Year (e.g. the
Invertebrate Zoology course covered in Semester 1) could be moved to Semester 1 of
the Third Year programme (concomitant with the switching of the Third Year course
in Molecular Evolution and Evolutionary Development to Semester 1 of Second
Year). This would allow students to experience a wider variety of methodologies and
topics in Semester 1 of Second Year in order to excite and engage them earlier in their
academic programme.
The Review Group strongly recommends that greater emphasis be given to
undergraduate practical courses. The Group feels that the practical classes could be
better used to develop targeted skills. Our discussions with current undergraduates
and recent graduates in Zoology suggest that much of the practical time in First and
Second Year is given to drawing and observing specimens, sometimes without the aid
of instructional documents or laboratory manuals. In general the Group felt that a
higher demonstrator/student ratio was desirable in undergraduate practicals. It seems
that the post-graduate students are an under-utilised resource for demonstrating and
the Group suggests that individual postgraduates could be engaged as demonstrators
for a particular module each semester. At present it appears that members of the
academic staff engage demonstrators on an ad hoc basis for specific practicals.
Because of the large number of students taking first Year Zoology, the Review Group
suggest that the Department might consider employing a part-time Senior
Demonstrator who would co-ordinate the allocation of demonstrators for these
practicals, brief the demonstrators on the material to be covered in each practical and
co-ordinate the continuous assessment of students’ practical work. The Group
recommends that a practical manual be provided for students in Years 1-3 at the
beginning of each semester. The departmental website could be used to facilitate this,
if desired.
It was apparent that Zoology students do not have any field trips until Fourth Year,
and then only if their research project necessitates this. Similarly the Marine Science
Review Group Report: Department of Zoology
6
students appear to have very little ship time or field-teaching elements (The Review
Group appreciate that the Zoology Department is not responsible for the ship-time
component of the Marine Science Degree). The Review Group recommends that the
Department should strongly consider the incorporation of field trips and field-teaching
elements into the undergraduate syllabus, especially in Second and Third Year, in
order to excite and engage students.
The Review Group was pleased to note that in Third Year, some of the practical
classes incorporate components of molecular biology and data acquisition and
analysis. However the Group feels that more could be done to promote generic
competencies, especially communication skills (written and oral), science writing and
information retrieval. All students in Fourth Year Zoology should have the
opportunity of presenting a seminar on their final year projects. At present this only
happens for the Marine Science Students. There appears to be a lack of contact with
industry regarding the undergraduate syllabus and a lack of cognizance of employers’
needs. We suggest that the Department engage in more contact with industry and
other potential employers to prepare students for the world of work. Other
possibilities that might be explored by the Department in this regard would be the
organisation of work placements for students, particularly senior undergraduate and
postgraduate students, or a taught M.Sc. programme with a more vocational bias. The
Group is aware that these recommendations have significant resource implications.
With the current emphasis in the Irish University system on creating graduate schools,
the Group suggests that there is an opportunity for the Zoology Department to interact
with cognate departments at NUI Galway to explore the viability of interdisciplinary
taught MSc programmes, for example in marine science, environmental science or
developmental biology. This would provide additional income, create useful linkages
with industry and employers and also prepare students for PhD programmes.
The Zoology Department notes in its self-assessment that attendance at lectures,
particularly in the First and Second Years can be poor. We strongly recommend that
the Department, as a unit, engage with CELT to assist it in its development of
teaching and learning and to gain advice on the use of audiovisual and technological
aids for teaching purposes, and current ideas on best practice in large group teaching
and assessment methods. We recommend that Continuous Assessment be
incorporated into all undergraduate programmes as a means of assessment, and that
students obtain regular feedback on their performance in practicals and in other taught
components of the programme. Continuous Assessment has been demonstrated in a
wide array of education environments to greatly improve learning, and its use across
the Zoology curriculum could transform the learning experience for students.
Interactions with the experts in CELT will facilitate this transition of teaching
approach, and create exciting opportunities for the adjustment of the Zoology
curriculum to meet the needs of students and the scholarly interests of the staff.
The Review Group appreciates that many of the above recommendations have
substantial resource implications. We strongly advocate the provision of at least one
additional academic staff member for the Zoology Department, as well as additional
funding to support the recruitment of a part-time Senior Demonstrator and more
demonstrator teaching hours. We also recommend an increase in the Departmental
Budget as this is currently inadequate to cover the cost of equipment and consumables
for Molecular Biology and field-work.
Review Group Report: Department of Zoology
7
We commend the efforts that have been made by the members of the Zoology
Department to revise and develop the undergraduate curriculum and teaching
programmes in Zoology over the past three years. We realise that this process of
change is still ongoing and that the Zoology Department has been constrained to date
from implementing several of the recommendations being made by the Review Group
because of large turnover of academic staff in recent years, an unsatisfactory staff
student ratio and a limited recurrent budget.
4.
Scholarship and Research
The Review Group is extremely impressed with the research output of the Zoology
Department in terms of quality and quantity. All academic staff in the Department
have been very successful in obtaining prestigious grants (including two recent SFI
grants) and in attracting postgraduate students to the Department and the Department
has a well-deserved strong international profile. The group was also very impressed
by the hosting of conferences on a regular basis and contribution to journals in the
field. The Research in the Department is exciting, ambitious and innovative and
combines traditional taxonomy and ecology with molecular biology. We commend
the Academic and Technical staff on this and on the speed with which the new
members of the Academic staff were able to establish active funded research
programmes.
The Group was very impressed by the Annual Research Colloquium for Postgraduate
research students and the fortnightly departmental research seminars given by external
speakers. Postgraduate students are very happy with the level of support from their
supervisors and the Department. Some would like to undertake more demonstration
work and we feel that the Department should avail of this enthusiasm and experience
to a greater level than it has in the past. This obviously requires an increase in the
Part-time teaching budget.
There is a very vibrant and active research ethos in the Department, and this
outstanding potential needs to be nurtured and encouraged over the coming years.
This could be further developed by strengthening research links and synergies with
other research centres and Departments in the University (ECI, Environmental
Science, Botany and REMEDI etc.).
5.
Community Service and The Wider Context
Departmental staff members are very active on Faculty and University committees:
Policy committee, Executive committee, Curriculum committee, Science promotion
group, Student Affairs committee and Research committee, Scientific Steering
committee of the MRI and the Disability committee to name but a few.
Externally departmental staff members are active as editors or referees for prestigious
journals and members of national and international scientific fora and committees
such as British Myriapod and Isopod Group, National Eel Review Group, RIA
Praeger Committee, ESB Fishery Advisory Group.
The Department also has strong links with the community, contributing regularly to
radio and TV programmes and newspaper articles on a variety of issues including
evolution and development, and ecology and biodiversity both in the marine and
Review Group Report: Department of Zoology
8
terrestrial spheres. Several members of staff also contribute to education in the
broader community including in-service courses for primary teachers, involvement
with the Fionn Science projects, the Atlantaquarium, and the GSPCA. Thus the
Department makes a significant contribution to the University’s participation in these
areas.
6.
Summary and Concluding Remarks
The Review Group commends the Zoology Department for its performance in all
areas of its practice. Excellent progress has been made by the Department since the
previous Quality Review Report, particularly in research and research-related activity
and departmental organisation, but also in the diversification of the Department’s
teaching programmes, some of which are still undergoing review. Following the large
turnover of academic staff in the last few years, the Department has begun reform of
the undergraduate syllabi and this modified curriculum has been associated with an
increase in the numbers of students taking Third and Fourth Year Zoology. We
commend the efforts that have been made by the members of the Zoology Department
to revise and develop the undergraduate curriculum and teaching programmes in
Zoology over the past three years. We realise that this process of change is still
ongoing and that the Zoology Department has been constrained to date from
implementing certain changes to its academic programme because of large turnover of
academic staff in recent years, an unsatisfactory staff student ratio and a limited
recurrent budget.
All members of staff are clearly very committed and dedicated to their duties and the
atmosphere in the Department is excellent. It was apparent that there is a very strong
work ethic in the Department, along with a clear focus on multi-tasking and
teamwork. There is a transparent and equitable system for distribution of teaching
and administrative loads and the responsibilities of all staff are clear and
unambiguous. The Department is fortunate to have the support of committed and
highly qualified technical staff and an administrative assistant who competently
carries out a wide and varied workload.
Departmental staff members are very active on Faculty and University committees.
Externally departmental staff members are active as members of national and
international scientific groups and committees. The Department also has strong links
with the community, contributing regularly to radio, TV and print media. There is a
strong emphasis on compliance with Health and Safety regulations in the Department.
The Review group was very impressed with the facilities and laboratories in the
Martin Ryan Institute where some members of the Teaching staff are housed. The
Áras de Brún building is in a poor state of repair and although some of the
laboratories have been refurbished there are others in a dilapidated condition. The
Review Group was encouraged to hear of the possible move of the whole Department
to the Martin Ryan Institute and annexe (currently under construction), which we
understand is under negotiation and we strongly recommend that this happen at the
earliest opportunity.
It is obvious to the Review Group that the Zoology Department is now at a critical
juncture regarding its future development. New opportunities are now becoming
Review Group Report: Department of Zoology
9
apparent: the possibility that the whole Department my be located in the Martin Ryan
Institute and annexe; a new schools structure may allow for innovations in
undergraduate and post graduate programmes and a substantial new national marine
research initiative, The Sea Change Programme, will target topics in which the
Zoology Department has specialist research expertise.
The Review Group makes the following recommendations:
1. The Zoology Department requires a new strategic plan which would outline its
longer and medium term objectives with regard to teaching and research along
with associated resource requirements. We recommend that, where possible,
linkages with sister Departments and units (e.g. MRI and ECI) be explored to
provide visionary and innovative research and teaching programmes. The
Department should also consider as part of their planning process how the new
school structures can be used as an opportunity for the Department to develop
and grow.
2. Greater emphasis needs to be given to undergraduate practical courses and
field-teaching elements. The practical classes should be focused at developing
targeted skills in the practise of Zoological Science. Manuals for practicals
should be available at the beginning of each semester, with clear guidance on
expectations and continuous assessment of all practicals.
3. Further curriculum reform is required in the second-year of the programme
and the promotion of transferable skills, especially communication skills
(written and oral), science writing and information retrieval needs more
emphasis throughout the curriculum.
4. We recommend that the Department, as a unit, engage with CELT to assist it
in its development of teaching and learning and to gain advice on the use of
audiovisual and technological aids for teaching purposes, and current ideas on
best practice in large group teaching and assessment methods. Advice should
also be sought from CELT on development of a more systematic and
comprehensive system for evaluating student satisfaction with teaching
quality. Student feedback sought from all students while courses are ongoing
(i.e. not in the following Academic Year.)
5. We suggest that the Department engage in more contact with industry and
employers in order to prepare students for the world of work. Other
possibilities that might be considered by the Department in this regard would
be the organization of work placements for students, or the provision of a
taught M.Sc. programme with a more vocational bias. With the current
emphasis in the Irish University system on creating graduate schools, the
Group suggests that there is an opportunity for the Zoology Department to
interact with cognate departments at NUI Galway to explore the viability of
interdisciplinary taught M.Sc. programmes. The Group is aware that some of
our recommendations have significant resource implications.
6. Funding should be provided to enable the Department to increase its academic
staff by at least one member, to allow successful implementation of many of
the recommendations above, especially curriculum revisions and the possible
introduction of taught M.Sc. programme/s.
Review Group Report: Department of Zoology
10
7. We recommend that the post of the Administrative Assistant should be
regraded to Grade 3, to acknowledge the changes in workload and
responsibility.
8. There is an urgent need to appoint a junior technician for succession planning,
so that skills will not be lost to the Department due to retirements of highly
skilled technical staff.
9. Additional funding is required to support the recruitment of a part-time Senior
Demonstrator and more demonstrator teaching hours.
10. We recommend that an increase in the Departmental Budget be provided, as
this is currently inadequate to cover the cost of equipment and consumables
for Molecular Biology and field-work.
8.
Comments on The Methodology of the Review Process
The Review Group found the Self-Assessment Report and the additional material
provided prior to the visit informative and of great value in evaluating the Zoology
Department. Other data and materials were provided during the visit upon request.
This worked extremely well and provided clear information to the Review Group.
The Review Group met with staff members of the Department individually and in
groups and also with senior members of the University. The Review Group greatly
appreciated the open, friendly and helpful approach of all members of the Zoology
team and their strong engagement with the review process. These meetings were very
helpful and enabled the Group to obtain an insight into the work ethos, management
structure, teaching and research programmes of the Zoology Department, its staff
student relationships and its relationship with sister Departments in the Faculty of
Science, with University management and with service providers within the
University.
Professor Ann Burnell (Chair);
Professor Randall W. Phillis
Dr Ken Whelan
Dr Maura Grealy
Dr Máire Áine Ní Mhainnín (Rapporteur)
(March 2007).