An Coiste Feabhais Acadúil
The Committee on Academic Quality Improvement
The Academic Quality Assurance Programme 2003 – 2004
REVIEW OF
DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY
Final Report
24 May 2004
ChemistryReportFinal04
0
Review Report 2004: Department of Chemistry
This report arises from a visit by a Review Group to the Department of Chemistry on 810 March 2004. The Department had already prepared and submitted a 'Self Assessment
Report' that, with other documentation, was made available to the review team well in
advance of the visit.
The Review Group consisted of:
Professor John Corish, Professor of Physical Chemistry and Head of Department,
Department of Chemistry, Trinity College, Dublin (Chairman);
Professor D. Lyn H. Williams, Department of Chemistry, University of Durham;
Dr. Ann Gillan, Production Plant Manager, Roche (Irl.) Ltd, Clarecastle, Co.
Clare; Professor Stephen G. Jennings, Department of Experimental Physics, NUI,
Galway; Mr Fergal Costello, Head of Policy and Planning, Higher Education
Authority, Dublin, acting as an observer;
Dr Philip Dine, Department of French, NUI, Galway, acting as Rapporteur.
The report is structured to cover the following main topics:
1. Aims and Objectives
2. Organization and Management
3. Programmes and Instruction
4. Scholarship and Research
5. Community Service
6. The Wider Context
7. The Future
8. Summary and Concluding Remarks
Comments on the methodology of the review process
1. Aims and Objectives
The Review Team believes the Department of Chemistry to have clear aims and
objectives in its current teaching and research programmes and to be committed to
achieving excellence in each of these core activities. It provides teaching for a degree in
Chemistry that follows largely traditional lines and that is highly regarded by external
examiners and by potential industrial employers of its graduates. The members of staff
carry out research in their specialist areas and there is a steady output of refereed research
papers in reputable international journals. The Department has so far successfully
maintained its complements of undergraduate and postgraduate students despite the
worldwide decline in interest in the physical sciences and, in particular, in the numbers
being taught these subjects at second level in Ireland. Some members of the Department
have made significant contributions to the preparation and operation of the strategic
research plan of the University and there is certainly ample scope for further participation
in the future.
Chemistry is one of the fundamental science subjects and a strong and active
Department is vital to the well being of the Faculty and for the provision of service
teaching. The Department will undergo major changes during the upcoming five years
because of the impending retirements of six of its senior staff. This will represent a
1
ChemistryReportFinal04
Review Report 2004: Department of Chemistry
serious loss of dedicated and very experienced teachers and researchers, but will
simultaneously provide an opportunity for renewal and readjustment. The Department
has, in conjunction with senior officers of the University, drawn up a draft plan for its
future that sets out a schedule of the replacement appointments that will be vital if its
programmes are to be maintained. It is clear to the review team that this planning process
and its integration into the overall strategic plans of the Faculty and of the University will
be crucial to the continuation of the excellent ongoing work of the Department.
2. Organisation and Management
While the organisation and management of the Department has remained constant over
the last two decades, this model has proven to be very successful over the years. The
division of the Department into the three Chemistry core areas of Organic Chemistry,
Inorganic Chemistry, and Physical Chemistry is also traditional. The budget is divided
equally between these three traditional areas and first year laboratory science. There is
devolved responsibility on the spending but a consensus is reached on current equipment
spending at departmental meetings. The Review Group felt that the Department, together
with other departments and institutions in the sector, is currently under-funded, and that
this is reflected both in its recurrent and capital budgets.
Departmental meetings, subcommittee meetings, and course curriculum
committees are used as a means of debating organisational and management decisions.
However, there is no evidence that the management structure is periodically evaluated
and improved. Although the current structure has been very successful in the past, this
does not mean it can remain so in the future, especially with the shift in focus in the
University and in its strategic plans for research.
The Departmental meetings, which are held at least once a term, are essentially
meetings of the academic staff with the technical staff being represented by the chief
technician. The minutes of these meetings appear quite brief. There was no mention of the
staff-student committee meetings in the departmental meeting minutes. The staff-student
committee meeting occurs every semester. The students indicated that this was too
infrequent. The postgraduate students also raised the specific issue of demonstrating and
4th Year projects (see 4. Scholarship and Research below). Although this was raised at
two staff-student committee meetings no action has apparently been taken. The Review
Group recommends that one representative of the postgraduate students should be invited
to attend the departmental meetings (although not necessarily for all items on the agenda).
With changes anticipated to the Department’s statute, a rotating headship is
assumed in future and would seem to be advantageous. The Department also needs more
administrative help with its heavy and ever increasing workload, for instance as regards
the provision of safety data, examination data, and material due to increasing demands
from central administrative offices. The current departmental secretary should be
upgraded to reflect more accurately the nature and volume of her work.
In the course of the Review Group’s introductory meeting with all staff members,
concerns were raised in relation to the imminent retirement of six of the more experienced
members of staff, both in relation to teaching and to the examination load. This is clearly
the single most important problem facing the Department and will be addressed
separately in Section 7 below. The Review Group noted that departmental staff appraisal
and feedback mechanisms appear to be weak and not to be applied universally.
The Departmental Brochure is outdated and badly needs to be updated. It is not
sufficiently comprehensive.
2
ChemistryReportFinal04
Review Report 2004: Department of Chemistry
3. Programmes and Instruction
The Department provides a four-year BSc Honours degree course in Chemistry with the
option of a General degree at the end of the third year. The course is run on the traditional
lines of Inorganic, Organic, and Physical Chemistry. In addition, a very large serviceteaching element is provided in the first year to students in the Medical and Engineering
Faculties. There is also the opportunity to study the first year course through the medium
of the Irish language.
In accordance with University policy the 2nd and 3rd years are semesterised since
the 1997 review. Recent introductions are the optional courses on “Computers in
Chemistry” (CH 207) in year 2, “Analytical and Industrial Chemistry” (CH304) and
“Cheminformatics and Validation” (CH 314) in year 3.
The fourth year (entry into which requires a 55% examination result in year 3)
includes the completion of two research projects, which will be reduced to one project in
2004-5, together with courses in Inorganic, Organic, and Physical Chemistry. The
Denominated Degree in Chemistry and Applied Chemistry was suspended in 2000-1
because of the low numbers and lower calibre of students selecting this option.
The Review Group considered all of the documentation provided by the
Department and discussed various aspects with appropriate groups of staff and students
(including past students, current postgraduates, and undergraduates) and wishes to make
the following observations:
•
The academic standards are high and fully equivalent to those in other Irish and UK
universities (as demonstrated through the extern reports submitted to the group).
•
The academic staff is clearly totally committed to the delivery of a high quality
course.
•
The examination papers were fair and of a high standard and were reported on
favourably by the external examiners.
•
The Department is to be congratulated on the production of high quality graduates in
good numbers, many of whom proceed to higher degrees, and others to employment
in industry and other areas.
•
This has been achieved in spite of serious under-funding, both for recurrent and
notably capital costs, and also when faced with a major space shortage problem,
particularly in the laboratories, where, for example, the 4th year project students have
to share bench space with postgraduate students.
•
Student recruitment is a concern from time to time, although there appears to be no
significant trend at this time. However, future developments as regards both
competition from other institutions and demographic changes should be anticipated
and monitored carefully.
•
There is a problem, recognised by the Department, in the provision of tutorials,
particularly for 1st and 2nd year students, where recruitment to the 3rd/4th years is
important. This may follow from the lack of Departmental resources, given the very
large numbers in year 1. There is also a need to review tutorial timings, so that they
are placed towards the end of, rather than throughout, the year.
•
Those members of the student body who met with the Review Group expressed
general satisfaction with the courses being taught by the Department. Within that
context, some concerns did emerge. These included particularly the need for enhanced
procedures of student feedback. Although a staff-student committee is in operation,
3
ChemistryReportFinal04
Review Report 2004: Department of Chemistry
and although there is a good culture of staff approachability within the Department,
there were concerns that some improvements in course delivery in certain areas would
be welcomed. In this respect the Department may be a victim of its own success as the
generally high levels of student satisfaction with courses means that where problems
do emerge, they are more likely to be tolerated than confronted.
•
The staff-student committee meets twice yearly. There was a feeling amongst students
that this was not working as well as it might, in that some matters did not appear to
have been addressed, including the question of occasional criticisms of individual
lecturers. Student questionnaires are distributed, but rather unevenly – not all courses
were covered. These are analysed and discussed by the Departmental Committee.
•
The use of visual aids by lecturers was varied, ranging from power-point
presentations to “old, faded transparencies that were difficult to read”.
•
Student comments noted include the following: “the staff are always very
approachable”, “validation –a good experience”, “the library seminars were good –
why are they being stopped?”, “too much supervision of undergraduate practicals by
postgraduates”, “tutorials could be better timetabled [i.e. later]” (from 3rd/4th year
students), good reports from mature students.
•
Postgraduate students. A matter of concern is the average length of time taken to
complete a PhD. The Review Group recommends a more formal assessment (e.g. a
short report and oral examination) for PhD students at the end of year 1. The Review
Group felt that the PhD degree should not be allowed to exceed 4 years (including the
writing of the thesis), and the supervisor and the postgraduate student should regularly
review progress against a 3-year target. The workload of the postgraduate students in
demonstrating needs to be examined and reduced particularly in relation to 4th year
projects. The Review Group felt that the postgraduate students should avail of the
Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (CELT) course on demonstrating and
technical writing: the first on induction and the latter just before thesis writing.
Student feedback indicated that in a small number of cases technicians could help the
postgraduates more.
•
The Review Group recommends that the Department takes action to improve the level
of mathematics attained by students of chemistry. This could be achieved if a special
year 1 course of relevant mathematics were introduced into the Faculty or through
remedial teaching in the Department in later years.
•
The role of presentation-based courses was highlighted; while students recognised in
hindsight the value of these seminars in terms of the development of workplace skills,
some concern was expressed that this was not properly put into context for students at
the time of delivery.
The Review Group also had an opportunity to meet with the Director of CELT, who
described developments in relation to teaching and learning in the University including:
the development of programmes to support teaching capacity among academic staff; the
development of teaching portfolios among staff; the application of technology to enhance
teaching and learning.
The Review Group notes that the Department has already been innovative in
enhancing the process of teaching and learning, through initiatives such as the new course
in Computers and Chemistry, the development of the Higher Diploma in Chemistry
which provides particular support for students entering industry, and the participation by
4
ChemistryReportFinal04
Review Report 2004: Department of Chemistry
some staff in the University’s grouped student evaluation of teaching exercise. The Group
also noted that some members of the Department have already been in contact with the
CELT to discuss their work. The group recommends that this contact be maintained and
enhanced with a view to utilising the CELT as much as possible to assist the Department
in its development of teaching and learning.
The Department benefits from support from the HEA-funded student retention
service operated in the Faculty of Science. In view of the concerns expressed in both the
Faculty of Science vision statement and in the Self-Assessment Report about the
declining points level being required for entry to science, this may become an
increasingly important service for the Department. There was relatively little discussion
of this service in the self-assessment report or in the Departmental plan, and it is
recommended that some attention be given to integrating the service into the Department
in a more systematic way.
4. Scholarship and Research
It is clear that the Department has a strong ethos and culture of scholarship and learning
which strongly supports research activities. Members of the Department are actively
involved in the three traditional areas of Chemistry, as indicated in the Self-Assessment
Report. The Department is well positioned to play a significant role in research initiatives
of the University although it has not yet optimised this participation.
The main research thrust of the Department lies in the training and supervision of
its strong postgraduate student cohort. The Department is to be commended on having
one of the highest, if not the highest, number of postgraduate student researchers in the
University. The Self-Assessment Report suggests that between 20-25% of postgraduates
take more than four years to complete their Ph.D. studies – this may be partly due to
inadequate funding for some students, resulting in their having to undertake part-time
work; and/or an over-involvement (as perceived by a sample of postgraduate students) in
undergraduate laboratory supervision compared to other cognate departments. An
examination of the Chemistry web site suggests: a) a fall-off in new postgraduate student
numbers for the academic year 2003-2004 (this may be just a temporary decline, possibly
due to lack of funding opportunities); and b) a relatively smaller number opting for the
Inorganic Chemistry area in particular.
The Department has largely retained its Library holdings of Chemistry journals
and this, coupled with increasing electronic access to journals, means that it is well served
to support advancements in research in the Department. The Department has built up a
broad range of major items of equipment for research (and for teaching) in the three
Chemistry sectors, and this again places the Department in a relatively good position to
carry out its research functions. The Self-Assessment Report refers specifically to the
vital importance of a multinuclear NMR spectrometer and it reflects a clear anxiety to
replace the current instrument (purchased in 1995). We accept that this instrument is
essential and that it cannot be purchased within the recurrent funding provided and we
recommend that the University should take steps to ensure a replacement of this
instrument in the near future.
The Review Group note the input to the Department of visiting senior and postdoctoral researchers although the number of contractual post-doctoral researchers is
relatively low. The Review Group recommend that the Department consider ways of
increasing the cohort of post-doctoral researchers, which plays an important role in the
research activities of a Department and would certainly relieve some of the pressures on
postgraduate students in respect of the supervision of fourth year projects.. It is noted that
5
ChemistryReportFinal04
Review Report 2004: Department of Chemistry
the opportunity for sabbatical leave has not been widely taken up by staff – this could be
encouraged more, and would serve as a valuable means for exchange of new ideas and
initiatives from external research institutes and groups.
Given the level of research activity in the Department and the number of
postgraduate researchers, the publication rate is possibly lower than might be anticipated
(of the order of 2 refereed journal publications per staff member per annum, over the past
5 years).
Research income has seen a substantial increase over the past 3 years (1999-2002)
and is a clear reflection of the increases in research funding at the national level (through,
for example, the HEA PRTLI, Basic Grant schemes, and the Environmental Protection
Agency) and EU-FP5 Projects. This increase in research funding should provide
opportunities for increased numbers of post-doctoral scientists and more postgraduate
students, as well as income for the replacement of capital equipment.
The Review Group commends the Department for its important contribution to the
University research profile, and would recommend, where appropriate, increased
participation in multidisciplinary and cross-faculty research projects and proposals as well
as both national and international involvement.
Maintenance and improvement of the Department’s current research base, in view
of impending retirements, requires a well-managed and structured replacement plan of
retiring staff, in areas which are aligned at least in part to strategic research areas of the
University. However, the choice of replacement staff must be made within the overall
context of getting the best candidates in acceptable research areas, while also bearing in
mind the need of the Department to continue to teach its core subject.
At a general level, the Review Group considers that the high quality of teaching and
scholarship in the Department, (illustrated by the continuing professional recognition of
the Department, and the high success rate of graduate employment) taken together with
the recent increase in research funding means that there are rich opportunities for the
Department to expand its research programme. The Review Group accepts the concerns
of the Department regarding the need to maintain the linkage between teaching and
research, but feels that this can be maintained, and indeed enhanced, as new research
opportunities should enrich teaching at undergraduate and postgraduate levels.
5. Community Service
The Review Group noted the valuable contribution made by the Department to the
University and the broader community. The involvement of academic staff in University
and Faculty-related activities is very commendable. Involvement in second-level
Chemistry syllabi, and interactions with second-level teachers is significant and is to be
lauded. There has also been involvement of staff with promotion of the physical sciences
and related research at national level. These activities, while they are time-consuming, are
nevertheless viewed as being extremely important from the perspective of both the
Department and the University. Liaison with numerous chemical industries is also clearly
evident.
The Department has been and will continue to be centrally involved in delivering
undergraduate courses to students across the Faculties of Science, Engineering, and
Medicine. Additionally, members of the Department have played an important role in the
management of the Faculty of Science (for instance as Vice-Dean) and of the University
through service on University committees. The Department has also played a significant
6
ChemistryReportFinal04
Review Report 2004: Department of Chemistry
role in promoting chemical and molecular science at both regional and national levels.
The Review Group commended the contribution made by the Department in University
Open Days, regional and national science festivals, and visits to and from second-level
institutions. The support provided by the Department to second-level teachers was felt to
be of particular value in this regard, as was the continued success of the recruitment of
mature students through a programme of “second-chance” education.
The valuable contribution made by members of the Department acting as external
examiners, both within Ireland and abroad, was also noted, as was the Department’s
continued strength as a source of consultants to industry and advisers to national
educational policy-makers. The Review Group felt that all of these contributions were
likely to have benefited the University in ways that, although by their nature not
straightforwardly measurable, were nevertheless real and should be recognised
accordingly. The Department has also played a significant role in relevant professional
bodies such as the Institute of Chemistry in Ireland and the Royal Society of Chemistry.
All of these activities were felt by the Reviewers to have served to reinforce the
Department’s widely acknowledged excellence in both teaching and research. However,
there appears at present to be a lack of engagement at international level on research
steering committees or other international bodies.
The Department currently provides a first year course in Chemistry through Irish,
with accompanying tutorials, though not practicals. This supports a key university
objective of the provision of courses through Irish, and has particular relevance to the
Gaeltacht communities served by the University. Concerns were expressed during the
visit about the resources required to maintain such a course, though the issue was not
raised in the plan setting out proposals for the future development of the Department. The
Review Group accepts that the Department cannot do more without the provision of
additional resources.
6. The Wider Context
The exchange of third and fourth year students worldwide through the IAESTE is
commendable. The Validation, Industrial Chemistry and Computers in Chemistry
modules are excellent and very applicable to the needs of industry. Involvement in
industry could be strengthened further in the context of student placements in third year.
The Department should also advertise to the industrial community the extent of
instruments that they have available if needed.
As regards research, the involvement of the Chemistry staff in the National Centre
of Biomedical Engineering and Science and Environmental Change Institutes is positive
and congruent with the University’s strategic plan.
7. The Future
Even within the climate of very rapid change currently evident in the university sector in
Ireland, the Department of Chemistry, because of the number of its impending
retirements, will be a vastly different place in 2009. Planning for this transition clearly
represents its greatest and most immediate challenge. The Review Group has seen the
draft planning document prepared by the Department and, while acknowledging that it
was prepared to a restricted brief, considers it to be inadequate on a number of fronts.
Although the Chemistry Department has a very good track-record, and has been very
successful in the past, it needs to undergo a paradigm shift in relation to the Department’s
strategic plan. There is too large a focus on trying to get molecular science incorporated
into the University’s strategic plan rather than using the opportunity to get involved more
7
ChemistryReportFinal04
Review Report 2004: Department of Chemistry
in strategic target areas identified in the University plan. Chemistry and chemists can
contribute handsomely in Biotechnology, Material Science, Biomedical Science, and
Environmental Science, without diluting the core principles of Chemistry.
a) The revised planning document should lay out a strategy for the period 2004 – 2009
and not just for 2009. The plan should be visionary and have a wider remit than
appears in the present document. It should cover undergraduate teaching with some
new initiatives being explored, subject to suitable demand from prospective students
and employers: for instance, a new combined degree in Biomaterials Chemistry and
Pharmacology, or a combined degree in Environmental Chemistry and Physical
Science. The necessity of providing core Chemistry areas can be emphasised. A
recruitment strategy is needed, particularly targeting second and third year students.
The plan should also contain a proposal for a postgraduate school in key new areas of
Chemistry aligned with areas where younger staff members have particular strengths
and which will help strengthen existing strategic research areas in the University. This
school should have provision for an increase in post-doctoral research scientists, more
visits and more exchanges (sabbatical leave/shorter term exchange visits). The
Review Group would suggest drawing up a Strategy Committee involving not just
section heads, to plan for the future of the Department. The revised plan should
contain a clear strategic research plan for the next 4 to 5 years. It appears to the
Review Group that such a plan or vision has not yet been properly formulated. The
plan should state what research areas the Department will concentrate on, what new
directions it will take up, and name the personnel who will be committed to these
areas of research.
b) The Review Group recommends that the Department, in the preparation of its revised
plan to the University, take into account or incorporate into its plan the following:
i. In view of the number of retirements taking place over such a short period, we
(the members of the Review Group) agree and strongly recommend that a
schedule for the replacement appointments be agreed with the University in
advance and that at least some of these appointments be made before the
corresponding retirements take place to enable continuity in the teaching
programmes.
ii. The six senior staff due to retire carry some 50% of the lecturing load, much of it
at senior level. We strongly recommend that planning for the redistribution of
these lectures begin now and that the agreed redistribution be effected as soon as
is practicable. Senior retiring members of staff need to mentor junior members of
staff.
iii. The loss of so many senior staff makes it imperative to renew leadership within
the Department, and the Review Group strongly recommends that at least one of
the new appointments be made at the Professorial level.
iv. As part of the broader reorganization of responsibilities within the Department, an
effort should be made to bring about a more equitable distribution of
administrative duties between academic staff. This might be achieved by using the
principle, adopted in many institutions, that every promoted member of staff
carries a defined administrative role (e.g. admissions/progression, examinations,
safety, perhaps a director of undergraduate studies and also of postgraduate
studies, finance, etc).
v. More broadly, given that, in the longer term, funding pressures will remain in the
system, and that the scope for extra resources will inevitably be limited, both the
8
ChemistryReportFinal04
Review Report 2004: Department of Chemistry
Department and the University should explore possibilities for rationalisation and
the sharing of resources to deal with increasing administrative and operational
burdens. This might be possible, for instance, through shared administrative and
technical support for academic participation in the stated strategic research
initiatives.
vi. To ensure maximum participation by the Department in the strategic research
effort of the University, while at the same time maximising the possibility of
attracting the best candidates, the Review Group strongly recommends that the
new appointments be made in areas that can immediately contribute to strategic
efforts. These should be chosen with a view to maintaining balance within the
sub-disciplines taught in the Chemistry degree programme.
8. Summary and Concluding Remarks
The Department of Chemistry is an effective Department producing graduates that are
very well received by industry and who are also well prepared to undertake research
leading to higher degrees. It also has a good research profile both inside the University
and internationally, and publishes regularly in reputable journals. It is well organised and
managed, and accomplishes all of this under very severe pressure and within budgets that
are quite inadequate to service the very high laboratory costs associated with the subject.
It is now entering a period of very rapid change and faces major challenges of renewal
and realignment. There are many opportunities for the Department to increase its profile
within the research structures of the University, while maintaining its core commitment to
its subject and to the quality of its degrees. The Review Group believes that these can be
made compatible through careful planning and choices for new appointments.
Comments on The Methodology of the Review Process
The Review Group was generally very satisfied with the procedures, documentation, and
organization of the self-assessment and review processes. However, the base room
provided for the review visit was felt to be not wholly suitable due to the high level of
noise from adjoining corridors, particularly between lecture slots.
The Review Group noted that the additional workload involved in preparing the
Self-Assessment Report and other documentation required for the review appeared to
have fallen inequitably within the Department, with some individuals carrying very heavy
burdens in addition to their normal duties. The Review Group recommends that the
Quality Office give consideration to the provision of guidelines and assistance to
Departments in order to help them to manage this aspect of the review process more
equitably.
The Review Group expresses its thanks to the University and the Department of
Chemistry for the hospitality and helpfulness received by all.
Professor John Corish (Chair)
Professor D. Lyn H. Williams.
Dr. Ann Gillan
Professor Stephen G Jennings
Mr. Fergal Costello (Observer)
Dr. Philip Dine (Rapporteur)
24 May 2004
9
ChemistryReportFinal04