An Coiste Feabhais Acadúil
The Committee on Academic Quality Improvement
The Academic Quality Assurance Programme 2003-2004
Report to Údarás na hOllscoile
Review of
Faculty of Arts
Self-Assessment
Review Group Visit
Follow Up Meeting
Sept 2003 to Jan 2004
23rd–25th February, 2004
8th July 2004
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.
Professor Jim Gosling, Director of Quality, September 2005
2
Report to Údarás – Review of Arts Faculty 2003–2004
1. Overview of Faculty
1.1 Background
The Faculty of Arts is the largest in the University with 15 core academic departments and
about 45% of all students. The present review of the Faculty of Arts and the B.A. Programme
comes at the end of a sequence of quality assurance reviews involving all of the core and
associated departments of the Faculty, and was conducted in parallel with a second review of
the Department of German.
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
English
Mathematics
Political Science and Sociology
Economics
German
French
Gaeilge
Spanish
Ancient Classics
Archaeology
History
History
Mathematical Physics
Philosophy
Centre for Nursing Studies
Psychology
Health Promotion
Information Technology
Education
Geography
BA Legal Science Programme
Comp. Stud’s & Math. Sc. B.Sc
Culture and Colonialism M.A.
Italian
Adult & Continuing Education
Gaeilge Labhartha
Ard-dioplóma i gCumarsáid Fheidhmeach
MA in Journalism
German (second cycle review)
Irish Human Rights Centre (founded 2000)
It should be noted also that individual reviews have been carried out also on interdisciplinary
and associated programmes offered by the faculty, including the BA Legal Science Programme,
the Culture and Colonialism M.A., the MA in Journalism, and an t-Ard-dioplóma i gCumarsáid
Fheidhmeach. The associated units Adult & Continuing Education and Gaeilge Labhartha (now
Acadamh na hOllscolaíochta Gaeilge) and the Irish Human Rights Centre have also been
reviewed.
The focus of the present review is on Faculty as a whole, on its activities that involve
multiple departments and, in particular, on the undenominated B.A. Programme.
1.2 Aims and Objectives of the Faculty of Arts
The Faculty has a dual orientation: both to students and to research. The intellectual, social, and
personal development of all its students is a major concern. The Faculty envisages that its
students should leave the University with an appreciation of the care and attention shown by
staff in all aspects of their development. In a complex, diverse and continually changing
environment, the Arts Faculty believes that quality education results in versatile, articulate, selfmotivated graduates, highly competent in specialized fields of study, aware both of the broad
File name, Print date
ArtsFacultyUdarasRep1.doc
2/13/2006
3
Report to Údarás – Review of Arts Faculty 2003–2004
multicultural and social contexts within which they operate, committed as enlightened, effective
citizens, to the well-being of others and to their own development.
The Arts Faculty believes that the realisation of this vision of quality education is achieved,
inter alia, through:
•
a commitment to a “balance of excellence” between high quality teaching an research
scholarships;
•
a commitment to the proposition that quality education and scholarship requires each
academic staff member to be operating from an active research platform;
•
a commitment to personal interaction with students, particularly in tutorial and smallgroup teaching contexts that enable the development of effective communicative skills
together with critical and creative thinking abilities;
•
a commitment to the principle of diversity and choice in its menu of offerings, matching
the diversity of interests and future career paths of its students and the multifaceted
needs of society;
•
a commitment to the region and community exemplified by outreach and distance
education initiatives plus the increasing provision of education for non-traditional
students, which include the socially disadvantaged, mature (other than school leaves)
and disabled;
•
a commitment to expansion of postgraduate education (Higher Diplomas, Masters and
PhD degrees) and research output that derives from taught Master of Arts theses and
M.Litt. and Ph.D. theses.
1.3 Student numbers
The majority of students in the Faculty are undergraduates taking the B.A. Programme. The
number of fulltime equivalent (FTE) students in the Faculty was 3480 in the year 2002/03,
representing an increase of 20% since 2000–01, and 40% since 1997–98.
1.4 Staff to Student ratio
In 2002–03, the number of fulltime equivalent (FTE) academic staff in the Faculty was 140.3,
giving a student: staff ratio of 24.8 in year ending 2003. This ratio was 20.8 in 1998–99 and
22.0 in 2000–01.
1.5 Accommodation and Facilities
The academic departments of the Faculty of Arts are located the Arts Sciences Building
(constructed in the late 1970s), the Arts Millennium Building (2000), St Anthony’s College and
in a number of former private houses.
2. Review Group Visit and Report
The Review Group consisted of: Dr. Alan Best, Dean, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences,
University of Hull, U.K. (Chairman); Professor Peter Carr, Academic Advisory Office, National
University of Ireland, Maynooth; Dr. Anne Fogarty, School of English, University College
Dublin; Professor Roy Green, Department of Management and Dean of Commerce, NUI
Galway; and Dr. Michael P. Carty, Department of Biochemistry, NUI Galway, acting as
rapporteur.
File name, Print date
ArtsFacultyUdarasRep1.doc
2/13/2006
4
Report to Údarás – Review of Arts Faculty 2003–2004
2.1 Summary, and Main Recommendations from Report
A Quality Review of a Faculty is different in kind from reviews of Departments. In a Faculty
Review the emphasis must lie on processes, systems and structures and an assessment of the
manner and extent to which a Faculty may be said to ‘add value’ to the student experience.
As will be evident from the Report, the Review Group has confidence that the student
experience in the Faculty of Arts at NUI Galway is, indeed, positive. Meetings with
Administrative Heads confirmed the Group’s view that the Faculty is sensitive to student needs,
responds well to issues when they are raised and is generally supportive. Across the campus
there was praise for the way in which the Faculty, in the person of the Dean and his Faculty
Office support Group, interact with students and other areas of the University. It was also clear
to the Group that when asked to explain a particular process, members of the Faculty Group
showed that in terms of the student experience and quality issues good practice was in place.
The caveat has to be that much of the explanation came by word of mouth, rather than by a
clearly established set of procedures. This can lead to a lack of transparency. While there is
evidence that the Faculty ‘works’, the lack of formal procedures, easily accessible, has the
potential to undermine its ability to lead on issues of quality and academic development.
The Group did not pursue the relationship between the Faculty and its constituent
departments, nor that between the Dean and Heads of Departments and Centres, but it is clear
that the size of the Faculty and the number of competing interests must have the potential for
confusion unless procedures are in place and can be seen to be in place. If the Faculty is to
prosper under Devolved Resource Management (DRM) it must move expeditiously to a set of
principles and practices that all parties recognise and accept. Unless this is the case, the size of
the Faculty will begin to work against progress and implementation of strategic initiatives. That
would not be to the advantage of the institution as a whole.
DRM brings with it added responsibility at devolved levels. Without robust information
systems, this responsibility will be difficult to carry through. The Review Group noted the
concerns expressed both in the Academic Plan and at meetings with Heads of Department on
this matter, and was heartened by reassurances from the University that the matter is recognised,
is being addressed and that improvements in key areas will shortly be visible. As the Faculty
must see to its own processes, so the institution must continue to refine its information systems
so that they are both timely in delivering the information Faculty and departments need, and are
reliable in providing accurate information.
Recommendations:
1.1.
2.1
2.2
The Faculty Academic Plan should be revised and updated, identifying priorities and
clear target dates.
As the Faculty moves further towards DRM it will need to have confidence in its
processes and systems. Systems across the board should be codified and processes
written down, both as instances of good practice and to ensure effective succession
planning or emergency cover. A Faculty Handbook should be produced, initially for
new members of staff but suitable for all colleagues, in which key processes are
documented (e.g. assessment criteria, module parameters, protocols for research
support). The Faculty should engage the resources of the Quality Office in this process.
The Dean should move towards the creation of a formal Executive of c. 8/9 members of
staff (four of whom might be HoDs) to help evaluate progress, consider the impact of
University policy on the Faculty and develop initiatives for the Faculty to adopt. This
Group will function as the policy-making body of the Faculty, with terms of reference
that give it the authority to act as a genuine executive in support of the Dean and
committed to the realisation of the University’s strategic aims and mission. Periods of
membership should be established, and summaries of its meetings should be circulated
to all HoDs as an information channel. The Faculty should take advice from the
University and other Deans to ensure it can adopt best practice for the conditions
File name, Print date
ArtsFacultyUdarasRep1.doc
2/13/2006
5
Report to Údarás – Review of Arts Faculty 2003–2004
2.3
3.1
3.2
3.3
4.1
4.2
4.3
prevailing at NUI, Galway and for decisive action as DRM is implemented. Two models
need to be explored: a) a policy committee accountable to Faculty made up of the Dean
and representatives of Departments (who may or may not be HoDs); b) an executive
group providing advice and responsible directly to the Dean, again with representatives
of Departments and/or the Faculty.
The Faculty should reassess its current committee structures, and further, in the light of
the above, establish a Curriculum Committee. The Faculty should take this opportunity
to include more junior members of staff in committee membership, other than the
Executive, both to give wider experience and also to encourage participation in
administrative matters.
As disparities exist between the content of modules offered by individual Departments
and their means of assessment, there is a need to systematize assessment levels and
course requirements to ensure that students have balanced workloads. The establishment
of what might be termed an ‘assessment tariff’ (relating assessment load to modular
weighting). Consistency across subjects between the amount of contact hours, student
input and quantity of assessment per module should be achieved. Discrepancies in the
weightings of modules by language Departments also need to be tackled.
The choices and possibilities offered to BA students could be further widened by the
introduction of a single-honours degree in certain subject areas after successful
completion of the first year of study. Furthermore, consideration should be given to the
introduction of Major/Minor Options in Second and Third Year to allow students greater
flexibility in the weighting of their degree programmes.
As a matter of course, all Departments should have established staff-student committees,
practices should be standardized, and common guidelines drawn up for providing
feedback to students on issues raised.
The Faculty establishes effective mechanisms to ensure continuity of supervision should
the named supervisor be unavailable for extended periods.
The Faculty should draw up, cost and identify the source of Faculty funding for a
dedicated programme of 30 Research Fellows in key strategic areas, and approach the
University with a request for financial support.
The Faculty should address, as a matter of urgency, its policy for awarding First Class
degrees to ensure that it is not disadvantaging its students in external competition.
5.1
That a group representing the interests of Faculty and an tAcadamh monitor the
transitional situation concerning course delivery through Irish and attend to the related
Quality issues.
5.2
Students who are native speakers should be provided with appropriate technical
language support where required.
5.3
Satisfactory funding structures for the interdisciplinary Masters in Irish Studies and other
such programmes be established.
5.4
Periodic review of the emerging synergy between Scoil na Gaeilge, an tAcadamh, and
Bord na Gaeilge be put in place.
File name, Print date
ArtsFacultyUdarasRep1.doc
2/13/2006
6
Report to Údarás – Review of Arts Faculty 2003–2004
3. Action Plans
Follow up Meeting, Thursday, 8th July, 2004
Arts Millennium Building
Present: Professor Jim Gosling - Director of Quality (Chair), Professor Gerard Hurley (Acting Dean of
Research), Mr Michael Kavanagh (Registrar’s Office), Dr Michael Carty (Review Group Rapporteur),
Professor Peter Carr (Review Group), Professor John Marshall (Dean), Dr AnnMarie Graorke (ViceDean), An tUasal Seosamh Mac Donnacha, Professor Chris Curtin, Mr Declan Ashe, Ms M Linnane (in
attendance)
Action Plan for the Dean and Faculty:
1. The Faculty’s Strategic Plan will be revised and updated taking into consideration Review
findings and recommendations, commencing in September 2004. The revised Plan will
have discrete projects with schedules of actions and timelines.
2. The Dean will propose to Faculty, before the Christmas break 2004, the formation of the
“Dean’s Advisory Committee”, responsible directly to the Dean, that will provide advice
and propose initiatives on the impact of University policies and developments in the Faculty.
As with the faculty’s Development Committee, established four years ago, the membership
of the Advisory Committee will be representative of the Faculty’s constituencies and will be
on a rotating basis.
3. A Faculty Handbook is currently being produced and will be finalised with help from staff
appointed in recent years to identify significant information gaps. The Quality Office has
sought support for this project from the HEA/NDP Quality Improvement Programme.
4. The Dean will propose to Faculty that a ‘curriculum development group’ be established to
consider proposals for, (i) new and reformed academic programmes before the December
meeting of Faculty and (ii) the finalisation of programme offerings in advance of the April
syllabus deadline each year.
5. The Dean and Faculty Executive will evaluate the supports available to international
students, while considering the necessity of a Vice-Dean for International Students.
6. Taking into account matters of discretion and confidentiality, the Dean will take all
appropriate opportunities to explain to members of Faculty the processes for the allocation
of funds from central University to Faculty and the subsequent re-allocation of funds within
the Faculty.
7. With respect to single-honours degrees in certain subject areas, a Working Group has made
recommendations that have been accepted by the History Department, which will make a
proposal to Faculty in September 2004.
8. The Faculty is monitoring closely subject registrations to encourage balance across all
subjects.
9. Two issues respecting examinations are highlighted in the review Report and the Faculty is
acting on both:
a. The standardisation of student workloads (contact hours and student inputs),
assessment levels and module weightings. The University Examinations Committee
is to report shortly on disparities in assessment tariffs and, in the light of this report,
Faculty will consider all of these issues and initiate actions that will lead to reform
by the academic year 2005–06.
b. The Faculty Office has produced comparative tables on the awarding of first class
honours degrees for consideration at the September 2004 meeting of Faculty. The
Faculty, with support from the Quality Office and CELT, will then organise a series
of workshops on best practice in examination marking.
File name, Print date
ArtsFacultyUdarasRep1.doc
2/13/2006
7
Report to Údarás – Review of Arts Faculty 2003–2004
10. The Faculty is developing its advisory service further to provide support for undergraduate
students, particularly with respect to the further support of first year students through the
academic year, and the provision more advice on postgraduate opportunities
11. The Faculty Office, in consultation with CELT, will prepare common guidelines on
mechanisms for obtaining and providing feedback from/to students and will remind all
departments that they should have staff-student committees.
12. The Faculty will continue to liaise with the CELT to make general training courses in areas
such as essay writing, IT skills and self-directed learning and oral presentations available to
students and to develop an integrated plan.
13. The Faculty will continue to work with CELT to develop training projects/courses for tutors.
14. The Faculty has developed and expanded its financial support for research students. Three
Lady Gregory Special Fellowships were advertised in February 2005 and will commence in
September 2005.
15. Faculty has formed a group representing the interests of Faculty and an tAcadamh to
monitor the transitional situation concerning course delivery through Irish and quality
related issues.
16. The Centre for Adult and Continuing Education appears as a Standing Item on the Faculty
Agenda.
Action Plan for University Management:
1. The Registrar agrees that an approved and detailed protocol for Devolved Resource
Management will be provided in advance of any further progress in this area.
2. The Registrar supports reform of the grading and promotional systems for administrators
working in academic departments and faculty offices.
3. The Registrar will ensure that more formal and explicit funding structures for the
interdisciplinary programmes are established by June 2006.
4. The Registrar will work to ensure that quantitative and statistical information on all its basic
activities is more readily available to Faculty, and to this end will:
a. Support the completion of an information audit of the University by October 2005,
b. Support the provision within the coming academic year of adequate resources to a
new institutional research function in accord with Strategic Priority 1.1. of the
Strategic Plan.
5. The Registrar agrees that workloads on academic staff have increased as a result of
increased requirements for legal compliance and agrees with the need to develop a system of
workload models. The University will act on the report, expected in late 2005, from an
IUQB sectoral project on this subject.
6. The Registrar will ensure that the regulations and guidelines for research degrees will be
revised in light of the report for the IUQB project on ‘Good Practice in the Administration
of PhD Programmes which was published in January 2004
7. Working in cooperation with the Faculty Vice Dean for Research, the Research Office will
continue to support measures to improve the number of applications for research funds from
the Faculty of Arts, such as training and advice sessions for applicants.
Approved by: Dean of Arts, Professor John Marshall, 23rd June 2005
Approved by: Administrative Officer in Research Office, Dr Maura Hiney, 30th June 2005
Approved by: Registrar, Professor James Browne, 13th July 2005
Finalised, 13th July 2005, Jim Gosling, Director of Quality
File name, Print date
ArtsFacultyUdarasRep1.doc
2/13/2006