An Coiste Feabhais Acadúil
The Committee on Academic Quality Improvement
The Academic Quality Assurance Programme 2005-2006
Report to Údarás na hOllscoile
Review of
Department of Archaeology
A SECOND REVIEW
Self-Assessment
Review Group Visit
Follow Up Meeting
September 2005 to December 2005
26th – 27th January, 2006
28th April 2006
This Report was compiled for members of Údarás na hOllscoile, NUI Galway and its
committees as a readily accessible but comprehensive source of information on the above
review, its context and its outcomes.
Quality Office, March 2007
ArchReviewUdarasRep06Final
Report to Údarás – Review of Department of Archaeology 2005–2006
2
1. Overview of Department
1.1 Aims and Objectives
The general aims of the Department are to:
• Attain academic excellence, rigorous scholarship and freedom of inquiry
• Teach and learn to the best of their ability
• Provide the student, by means of the teaching programme, with the best foundation in
archaeology in an environment which disciplines the mind in analysis, reasoning and
organization and assists them in realising and perfecting their potentialities.
• Further understanding and knowledge of the archaeology of the prehistoric and historic
periods in Ireland
• Promote appreciation of the archaeological heritage of Ireland in a European context.
• To emancipate and empower students via educational discourse, policy and practice,
mindful of the fact that the contemporary identity of NUI Galway is being forged in a
different environment from the past.
• Provide students with a critical consciousness and assertive point of view that encourages a
wise and considered utilisation of knowledge, achieving this in a pedagogical atmosphere of
commitment, dialogue, tolerance and responsible inquiry.
1.2 Developments since Last Review in 1999-2000
The Department of Archaeology prepared and adopted its Strategic Plan 2001-2006 in 2000 and
is now in the process of reviewing this plan and preparing another operational plan for 20062012. In common with the University’s Strategic Plan for NUI Galway 2003-2008 which
identifies the need to develop and deliver new innovative courses, the Department of
Archaeology’s Strategic Plan 2001-2006 identified a number of objectives under the following
four categories:
Undergraduate Teaching Programme
• Introduction of a new Third Year course on excavation theory and methodology in 2004-05
(AR317 Archaeological Methodology 2)
• Introduction of a new course partly based on published (2004) results of the Galway
Excavations Project
• Re-introduction in 2005-06 of a Minor Dissertation (AR325) in Third Year
• Participation in a 4-year evening BA programme in Ennis, Co. Clare, initiated in 2000-01
• Commencement of a 2-year Diploma in Galway (02-03), Ennis (04-05) and Sligo (05-06)
• Exploring participating in evening degree programme in NUI Galway
• Improved information regarding Archaeology postgraduate degrees
Postgraduate Studies
• Introduction of MA in Landscape Archaeology (2002-03), with appointment of Field Officer
• High-achieving M.Litt. students encouraged to proceed to Ph.D. programme
• Increased numbers of postgraduate students, significantly exceeding Faculty objective
• Satisfactory completion rates
• Six postgraduate students awarded Government of Ireland Scholarships since 2000 (one in
receipt of Lady Gregory Fellowship)
• Introduction of peer review for postgraduates as part of their supervision
Report to Údarás – Review of Department of Archaeology 2005–2006
•
•
3
Production of standard academic programme by 2000-01 review of Diploma in Archaeology
Introduction of Higher Diploma in Archaeology in 2005-2006
Academic Research
• Continuation of active support of staff research, both financial and timewise
Resources
• Formation of a Budget committee reporting on finances to the Departmental Committee
• Provision of full-time Departmental administrative assistance
• Relocation to new premises (2003) and acquisition of off-campus storage facilities (2004)
1.3 Student Numbers
The total number of fulltime equivalent (FTE) students in the Department was 133 in the year
2004/2005, representing an increase of 1.5% in the five years since 1999-2000.
1.4 Staff to Student Ratios
In 2004-2005, the number of fulltime equivalent (FTE) academic staff in the Department of
Archaeology was 7.6, giving a student:staff ratio of 17 in year ending 2005 (this ratio was 21 in
1999-2000). For the same academic year, across the Faculty of Arts, the average student:staff
ratio was 21.
1.5 Accommodation and Facilities
In 2003, the Department of Archaeology moved to extensively refurbished facilities and in
2004, it acquired off-campus storage facilities. This has served to resolve, to a great extend, the
exceptional constraints imposed on the Department by inadequate accommodation.
2. Review Group Report Overview and Recommendations
The Review Group consisted of: Dr Alison Sheridan, National Museums of Scotland (Chair); Professor Terry
Barry, Trinity College Dublin; Mr. Conleth Manning, Department of the Environment, Heritage & Local
Government, Dublin; An tOllamh Dáibhí Ó Cróinín, Department of History and CSHSHC, NUI Galway (as
representative from a cognate Unit); and Dr Piaras Ó hEachteirn, Department of Civil Engineering, NUI Galway
acting as Rapporteur.
2.1 Summary and Main Recommendations from Report
The Group reiterated that the Department started from a position of excellence and asserted that
achievements of Professor Waddell and his staff since the previous review, could not be
overstated. The Department received praise from its students, from the University authorities
and from many archaeologists in the outside world, for (variously) the quality of its teaching,
research and publication; for its outreach activities; for the dynamism and dedication of its staff;
and for Professor Waddell’s skill and diplomacy in having made excellent use of the limited
resources available to him.
The Group determined that the Department had reached a turning point in its development,
whereby it had achieved a critical mass of staff and students, and was ambitious to develop its
activities further. They deemed Department to be a significant contributor to the success of the
University as a whole, and stated that it was in the interest of both the Department and of the
University, that it be given every help and encouragement to achieve these ambitions.
Report to Údarás – Review of Department of Archaeology 2005–2006
4
Accordingly, the Group offered the following key recommendations for actions by the
Department and by the University:
Recommendations to the Department
a) Introduction of a more formal system of management, featuring in particular:
i)
Strategic planning that more closely aligns Departmental aims and objectives, and
those of individual staff members, with those of the Faculty and University
ii)
Management structures, policies and procedures that are clearly communicated to,
and understood by, staff. Procedures are to include the regular, systematic review
of Departmental and individual staff performance against objectives, using
unambiguous measures of achievement and of activity; regular, systematic review
of the distribution of staff workload (using a transparent, quantitative measure to
aid this assessment); and the drafting and implementation of action plans to effect
improvements. Such plans should specify what resources are needed from the
University in order to effect these improvements
iii) Better mechanisms for obtaining student feedback (including the use of improved
questionnaires to assess the success of each course). This can also be addressed at
the University-wide level
b) Build on the practice of making best use of the resources and opportunities available within
the University and beyond, to achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness. This should
include:
i)
Making more use of facilities and expertise elsewhere in the University (e.g.
CELT, CSHSC etc), to address accommodation issues; to continue developing
inter-departmental initiatives; and to improve teaching technique, and possibly to
relieve teaching workload
ii)
Producing publicity material (ie a glossy brochure, regularly updated) about the
achievements and activities of the staff and students, to ‘sell itself’ in the
University and beyond as a centre of excellence and to enhance its (and the
University’s) chances of securing increased funding from various sources
iii) Maximising use of the discretionary funds available elsewhere in the University
(notably the Library and Faculty), and maximising opportunities for staff
promotion.
c) Increase the vocational element in its under- and postgraduate teaching programmes
(something that could be facilitated, at BA level, by a switch to a single-subject
Archaeology BA degree), and give serious consideration to the introduction of a singlesubject, explicitly vocational BA in Irish Archaeology.
Recommendations to the University
a) Ensure that the provision of External Examiners’ reports to Departments is mandatory, and
that the inclusion of such reports covering the past 5 years’ activity in the Self-Assessment
Report is mandatory
b) As a matter of urgency, take steps to provide additional funding for outreach activity, with a
view specifically to making at least one permanent full-time outreach appointment
c) Revisit its current quota policy for promotions to senior grade in order to fulfil the
aspirations of Strategic Priority 3
d) Ensure that the level and type of resourcing to the Department is appropriate to a Unit with a
strong practical IT and fieldwork-associated element in its teaching. This relates particularly
to:
i)
Regular renewal and (where appropriate) upgrading of IT and fieldwork
equipment, and efficient maintenance of AV equipment. In particular, provision
of a larger and consistent laboratory grant (for fieldwork costs and equipment),
Report to Údarás – Review of Department of Archaeology 2005–2006
5
more closely in line with the current 1.7 funding weighting as provided for
laboratory-based subjects. This is regarded as essential to facilitate proper
strategic planning
ii)
Provision of accommodation – with the University to work closely with the
Department to identify solutions to current accommodation problems. Any scope
for generating external funds for accommodation-related capital projects should
be exploited
iii) Provision of sufficient funding to allow postgraduates to provide 2nd and 3rd year
tutorials
iv)
Maximising of opportunities for grant-aiding postgraduate study
v)
Revisiting of possibility of the Department’s provision of Irish-language
archaeology teaching through Acadamh na hOllscolaíochta
vi)
Ensuring that the Hardiman Library has the necessary resources to support
Departmental research – and in particular, that it acquires digital UK OS maps
vii) Provision of funding to produce the publicity material alluded to in point 2b of the
Departmental recommendations, above.
e) Develop improved mechanisms for obtaining and acting upon student feedback.
3. Action Plans
Follow up Meeting
2.30 p.m., Friday 28th April 2006
Room 202, Library, Department of Archaeology
Present: Professor J Gosling – Director of Quality (Chair), Dr P O’hEachteirn – Review Group Rapporteur,
Professor D O’Croinin – Review Group Cognate, Professor T Barry & Mr C Manning – Review Group, Mr M
Kavanagh – Registrar’s Office, Dr I MacLaren – Director CELT, Professor J Waddell - Head of Department, Mr C
Newman, Dr E Fitzpatrick, Ms A Gallagher, Dr C Jones, Ms M Ronayne, Ms Maureen Linnane (in attendance)
Apologies: Professor J Browne – Registrar, Professor J Marshall – Dean of Arts, Professor N Canny – Vice
President for Research, Dr K D O’Conor, Dr S Bergh, Ms B Broderick, Mr J Fenwick, Dr W O’Brien, Dr M
Comber.
3.1 Action Plan for the Department of Archaeology
a) The Department is actively formulating its strategic plan for 2006-2012 with a view to
completing it by the end of 2006. Departmental aims and objectives complement those of
the Arts Faculty and the University. As part of this process, an ‘away-day’ funded by the
Quality Office has taken place.
b) The Department will review its management and committee structures. A new Curriculum
Committee has been established to review courses and programmes systematically and more
formally, and initiate systematic student evaluations of all teaching modules, with the
assistance of CELT.
c) The Department will continue to make every effort to achieve a balance of staff workloads
and will continue to review this issue on a regular basis. It will demarcate more precisely the
duties and responsibilities of the technical staff and has established a balanced working
group to undertake this task.
d) The Department will become more actively involved in the marketing and studentrecruitment strategies of the Faculty and University through contact with the Schools
Liaison Officer.
e) The Department is committed to academic undergraduate programmes grounded in research
and scholarship, and the same approach will be embodied in any future proposal to offer a
single-honours degree in Archaeology. However, resources permitting, the Department will
Report to Údarás – Review of Department of Archaeology 2005–2006
6
continue to improve the vocational aspects of the current BA programme, whilst at the same
time striking a balance between education and training.
f) The Department will make a detailed case via the Dean for greater funds from recurrent
funding for practical and technical support for archaeological teaching and research, by way
of equipment maintenance and replacement, as well as for undergraduate and postgraduate
fieldwork.
g) In association with the development of its new Strategic Plan, the Department will estimate
its precise immediate and medium term needs for extra space and dedicated teaching
accommodation, and after consultation with the faculty and the Registrars Office, submit
these to the Buildings Office.
3.2 Action Plan for University Management
a) The Registrar’s Office is highly aware of the points made by both sides in the debate on
‘benchmarked’ versus ‘quota-based’ systems for promotions to senior lecturer and will
ensure that the maximum number of promotions are made, consistent with the system, the
quality of the candidates and budgetary constraints. Feedback from staff and from other
universities will be taken into account as the current agreed system is applied and revised
for later rounds of promotions.
b) The Registrar’s Office recognises the substantial roles of the Department not just in the
mainstream areas of the Faculty and the University but also in the extramural educational
activities of the University, and will support the careful consideration of a plan (agreeable to
Faculty) that outlines what needs to be done to maintain and, if possible, expand these
contributions.
c) The University’s commitment to the development of the resources of the James Hardiman
Library, so that it can support better all academic departments, is explicit in the Action Plans
associated with the recent review of the Library.
d) Because of the potential advantages associated with ‘active’ and ‘self-directed learning’, the
Dean of Arts will establish a small working group to examine the space requirements of the
Faculty in relation to ‘small group teaching’ and ‘group study’, particularly for first year
students.
e) The Director of Quality has begun working with the Registrar’s Office to ensure that the
receipt of External Examiners’ reports is monitored and that they are made available to
departments. This will also facilitate the routine inclusion of such reports in the
documentation supplied to incoming review group members.
f) The Director of Quality is working with the Director of MIS to purchase and install
hardware and software that will facilitate and simplify the the design and analysis of
(completed) student feedback forms (and multiple choice questionnaires), and the
preparation of summary reports.
g) Within the limits of available resources, the Director of Quality and the Dean of Arts will
provide support to the Department as it updates and improves publicity materials
h) The Director of Quality will consider all recommendations in relation to the ‘Methodology
of the Review Process’ made in the Review Group Report when modifying the Guidelines
for Academic Reviews for 2006-07.
Approved by: Head of Department, Professor J Waddell, 23 June 2006
Approved by: Dean of Arts, Professor K Barry, 27 July 2006
Approved by: Registrar, Professor J Browne, 28 July 2006
Approved by: Vice President, Prof. N. Canny, 25 July 2006
Approved by: Director of CELT, Dr I MacLaren, 27 July 2006
Finalised: 28 July 2006, Professor Jim Gosling, Director of Quality