0
An Coiste FeabhaisAcadúil
The Committee on Academic Quality Improvement
The Academic Quality Assurance Programme 2003-2004
REVIEW OF
FACULTY OF ARTS AND THE B.A. PROGRAMME
Final Report
13 May, 2004
0
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
1
This report arises from a visit by a Review Group to the Faculty of Arts on 22nd – 25th
February, 2004. The Faculty had already prepared and submitted a 'Self Assessment
Report' that, with other documentation, was made available to the Review Group in
advance of the visit.
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, National University of Ireland, Galway; and Dr.
Michael P. Carty, Department of Biochemistry, National University of Ireland, Galway,
acting as rapporteur.
The report covers the following main topics:
1. Aims and Objectives
2. Organization and management
3. Programmes and Instruction
4. Scholarship and Research
5. Community Service and the Irish Language
6. Summary and Concluding Remarks
1. Aims and Objectives
The Faculty of Arts at the National University of Ireland, Galway, is on a journey of
development from its historical role as a loose grouping of academics to a fully-fledged
academic unit headed by an executive Dean with clearly devolved resource
management (DRM) responsibilities. While the University has prescribed the ultimate
destination, the precise route has yet to be established.
The role of the Dean and Faculty is to identify the opportunities and challenges
so that the structures and practices of the Faculty are robust enough to cope with the
demands of DRM. The Faculty Academic Plan, the Progress Report and the SelfAssessment Report (SAR) provide the basis for the current review and give insight into
the progress made by the Faculty.
The Review Group endorses the bullet points on pp.3 and 4 of the SAR, which
lay down the key elements in achieving a vision of quality education. The balance of
excellence between high quality teaching and research scholarship and a commitment to
the principle of an active research platform to inform teaching are the fundamentals on
which the Faculty has chosen to build.
The Review Group notes the Faculty’s commitment to personal interaction with
students and endorses the Faculty’s view that seminar, or other student-centred teaching
modes for groups of 12-15 students, is the characteristic feature of provision for a
student of an Arts Faculty. Indeed, at our meetings with students NUI Galway was
praised as ‘a fantastic college’. The opportunity to acquire skills that are academically
well-founded is of great value in the personal development of students, and must not be
spurned. It is to the Faculty’s credit that despite high student loads in certain
departments (with some SSRs as high as 1:38) it continues to operate in this mode.
The Faculty rightly sets great store by the principle of diversity of choice in its
menu of offerings, with a keen eye to the future career needs of its students. This is
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
2
essential if the benefits of a liberal arts, non-vocational programme of the sort offered at
NUI, Galway is to continue to produce graduates who are sought after by employers.
The Group notes the extensive commitment to the region and to the community,
and the commitment to expand the numbers of research and post-graduate students in
line with overall University policy.
All in all then, as the Faculty moves forward, it has set itself challenging,
appropriate and achievable objectives. These are encapsulated in the academic plan,
which contains 22 Objectives, and 75 projects. Inevitably, perhaps, at the current stage
of Faculty development, the plan contains ‘something for everyone’, and would benefit
from a prioritisation of issues and a sense of strategic planning. As a result, there is an
absence of focus. It refers frequently to the need for resources to be provided by the
University, but makes no mention of the changed economic context in which the
University and Faculty are required to operate in the present funding regime.
The Dean faces a challenging task in the context of the evolution of his role
from ‘academic secretary’ to ‘Chief Executive Officer’ in taking colleagues with him in
the absence of robust information systems. It is clear to the Review Group that for the
Faculty to develop, the Dean needs the support of the institution, which we are assured
he has, and more importantly, the continued commitment of colleagues in the Faculty.
He can be reassured that as a Dean elected by members of the Faculty he already enjoys
their endorsement. A process of change, where lines of communication are increasingly
channelled through the Faculty to the central administration, rather than by a direct
approach, will require adjustments on all sides.
The Review Group is impressed by the expression of support for the Faculty as a
corporate entity by its members, and for the Faculty office staff, and is confident that
the Faculty can ready itself for the next stages of effective DRM.
Recommendation:
1.
The Faculty Academic Plan should be revised and updated, identifying priorities
and clear target dates.
2. Organization and Management
As the largest Faculty at NUI, Galway, with over 900 first year students, and total
registration of over 6000, the links between the Departments as deliverers of
programmes, and the Faculty as co-ordinator of process and quality assurance will
necessarily be complex.
The Faculty’s position is clear. Management ‘extends only to the door of the Academic
Departments, each of which, as an independent unit within the Faculty structure, has its
own internal management system’ (SAR 2.1).
In addition to the Faculty secretariat, whose commitment to the needs of staff
and students is exemplary, the Dean has the support of a Faculty Administrator and two
Vice-Deans. The Group noted the commitment and professionalism of these
colleagues. There was concern that as the role of the Faculty expanded, consideration
would need to be given to creating space for the Vice-Deans to fulfil these duties to
maximum effect. This could, for example involve a measure of teaching relief. In other
institutions a system of honoraria is in place for Deans and Vice-Deans.
The Group noted the list of Faculty committees but was struck by the absence of
a ‘Curriculum Committee’ to deal with course development, approvals and related
matters. Course development, approvals and related matters are considered and
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
3
decisions taken by the Arts Faculty Standing committee, and minutes of these meetings
are forwarded to Arts Faculty meetings. Nonetheless, there was an overall sense of a
lack of clarity of formal procedures and processes. Documentation provided during the
review shows that the approvals process for new programmes, for example, produces a
robust outcome, but the Group felt that much was reliant on “a sequence of
conversations” rather than a minuted progression which would attest to scrutiny.
The Review Group was concerned that in such a large and complex
organisation, effective communication and discussions with HoDs as a group were
difficult to achieve, but it was clear to the Group that the Faculty meetings did not allow
for the raising of matters which would lead to policy development or issues that could
be ‘brainstormed’. The Group did not feel that it was its place to consider a
restructuring or division of the current Faculty into two Faculties, one more Arts and
one more Social Sciences based, although there will come a point, as DRM is
implemented, where it may be seen to be administratively cumbersome. Size and
multiplicity of academic units is not in itself a justification for restructuring, but the
implementation of DRM and the need to hold effective planning meetings may bring to
the surface different needs in respect of the Arts and Social Sciences disciplines, which
can only be resolved by the creation of smaller administrative units. In this respect, the
key factor has to be a process of effective decision making which allows the Dean to
lead strategically while at the same time ensuring that Heads of Departments and
Centres can have input to the decision-making process and share ownership of the
outcomes. The Faculty Executive Committee will provide a useful indicator of the need
to make such changes.
The Group notes, and applauds, the tireless efforts of the Dean to ensure that
HoDs are kept informed, but was struck by the views of colleagues in the Faculty that
they were not always aware of process and sought greater transparency.
In general, the Faculty applies itself well to the upholding of academic standards
and is seeking to ensure their consistent application. Consistency must necessarily be
achieved by consensus, and so progress may appear to be slow. The role of Dean of
Faculty as the individual responsible for all matters relating to Quality in the Faculty
should be explicitly stated and formally acknowledged by the University, either in
his/her job description or an equivalent authoritative document. Nonetheless, the
Review Group is confident that between the Faculty and the Departments there is
commitment to this end and that good quality outcomes will continue to be achieved.
The Group commends the Faculty for its initiative in developing a mentoring
and support programme for new members of staff.
The Group was made aware of the difficulties often encountered in
administrative offices across the Faculty, given the current University policy on the
funding of replacements as part of Maternity cover. The Faculty should raise this at
University level. The Faculty is also invited to consider that it, through the Dean,
consult with the University Administration on the issue of grade ceilings affecting its
senior administrative support staffing structure. Alternative reward systems within
current structures could also feature in this context.
Recommendations:
1. 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
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
4
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.
2. 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 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.
3. 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.
The Faculty is invited to consider:
1. How best to inform members of the Faculty of the financial context in which the
Faculty and the University at large are required to operate.
2. How best to support the Vice-Deans.
3. Whether, considering the importance to the Faculty and the University of the JYA
programme, a Vice-Dean for International Students should be identified from within
the Faculty, on the same basis as the other Vice-Deans.
4. The criteria appropriate for a workload measurement scheme which would identify
and quantify excessive pressure and allow claims for additional support to be
validated by strong comparable evidence.
5. Whether it can continue to launch new programmes, particularly at Masters level,
with consequent additional demands on staff time, without reducing provision in
other areas and whether it would be wise to develop a structured plan for academic
developments on a three-year rolling basis, so that resource implications and
recruitment trends may properly be taken into account and built into the planning
process.
3. Programmes and Instruction
The ethos of diversity in the Faculty and its goal of encouraging breadth of learning are
borne out by the wide range of courses currently on offer at the undergraduate level.
Students generally expressed high levels of satisfaction with their courses, subject
choices and many of the forms of assessment obtaining at present. They also applauded
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
5
the degree of interaction possible with members of staff and the extent of pastoral care
provided by lecturers and tutors in the Faculty (“staff are always friendly and
approachable”). The positive feedback from students on all aspects of the learning
experience in the Faculty merits special mention and acts as the strongest possible
endorsement of the quality and commitment of their professors and lecturers. Students
on study programmes abroad also reported on the beneficial aspects of the BA
international. The Faculty is clearly aware of disabilities issues and has taken steps to
address problems faced by students within its remit. Matters such as access to building
need to monitored and brought to the attention of the University. The variety of course
offerings in the BA degree has been enhanced by the development of innovative
Diploma and MA programmes such as the H.Dip. in Translation Studies, the MA in
Journalism and the MA in Drama and Theatre Studies which have already been
successful in attracting significant numbers of postgraduate students.
The overwhelming success of the JYA programme in attracting students to study
Arts at NUI, Galway is undoubtedly one the major achievements of the Faculty. This
programme contributes significantly to the organisational culture and to the finances of
the Faculty and of the University. The commitment of individual Departments and of
Faculty as a whole to this programme is to be applauded. It is important that there is
transparency in the resource allocation for the programme, both within the Faculty, and
between the Faculty and the central administration. However, the resource implications
of any further expansion of this programme, or of introducing other similar
programmes, need to be carefully examined, as there are inherent limits to growth of
such programmes.
The Group notes the discrepancy between the short revision period permitted for
Semester One examinations and the longer period of three weeks preceding Semester
Two examinations. This is a University-wide issue and requires a University-level
solution.
The Group was encouraged to hear that Faculty concerns with regard to the
narrow window of opportunity to review the outcomes before final decisions were made
at the Board Meeting were being addressed by the Examinations Office for the Summer
examination schedule. We are confident that the Dean’s Office will monitor progress.
Recommendations:
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. As a matter of course, all Departments should have established staff-student
committees, practices should be standardized, and common guidelines drawn up for
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
6
providing feedback to students on issues raised.
The Faculty is invited to consider:
1. The reduction of First Year requirements from four to three subjects. The fear that
such a change might lead to a further diminution of student enrolment in smaller
Departments is not borne out by experience elsewhere in Ireland.
2. How best to make available to students general training courses in areas such as
essay writing, IT skills and self-directed learning and Oral Presentations. The
Faculty might wish to engage the services of CELT in this process given the
Centre’s success with innovative developments in this area.
3. How to build on the success of the advisory service for First Year students. Fuller
participation in this advisory service by both staff and students should be
encouraged and students should especially be urged to visit their advisor for a
follow-up session later in the year after initial subject choices have been made. The
Faculty might wish to consider how best to extend similar forms of support into
subsequent years of study.
4. Putting in place Training courses for first-time tutors (especially postgraduate
students).
5. Providing an opportunity for a student counsellor of the University to attend and
address a Faculty meeting with a view to enhancing the student referral network.
4. Scholarship and Research
The Faculty “is committed to establishing research as a major priority” (SAR 4.1). It is
clear, however, that centres of research excellence are matched by other areas where the
research culture is less well developed. The Faculty does not address this issue of
selectivity in its documentation and while it is true that the principal demand by a
researcher in the Faculty is ‘time’, the aspiration in the Academic Plan that time be
apportioned 40% teaching, 40% research and 20% administration does seem unfocused
given the fact that the major income stream of the Faculty derives from the students it
teaches. The Faculty needs to evolve policies that will encourage research- active staff
to develop personal research plans and submit these for evaluation. Those with the best
prospects of quality outcomes should be supported as a priority. The Vice-Dean for
Research has a key facilitating role in this regard.
The Faculty should address the need for synergy between the Research Centres
and partner Departments.
The Faculty argues for a 4-year rather than a 6-year period between sabbaticals.
However, it offers no rationale for this proposal, nor a suggestion of how such a
proposal might benefit the institution. If the Faculty wishes to move to a different
period for sabbatical it might wish to consider how this can be sustained at a costneutral position. It might wish to consider a less extensive period of study leave, say
one semester every seven semesters – not least as a way of encouraging younger
members of staff or those less research-active to develop focused research with clearlydefined objectives.
The cost to any institution of an extended period of sabbatical is high. The
Faculty, working with the Departments, must develop a programme of monitoring and
support which allows staff to prosper without detriment to the student learning
experience.
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
7
Alternatively, the Faculty might like to consider the introduction of light and
heavy teaching semesters – to allow colleagues to prepare the ground for a short or long
sabbatical.
The most crucial challenge to the Faculty is the need to increase its enrolment of
Ph.D. students. If this population expands as projected, the Faculty will be under severe
pressure and it needs to make its preparation now. Best practice should be identified,
codified and used as a template for all research students.
Retention of students will be crucial and supervision is a key aspect. It may be
that a formal adoption of a system to ensure good cover and protect students from a
hiatus in supervision due to staff leave or absence is required. Given the practice at
Galway of a year’s sabbatical and the implications this has for proper supervision, such
considerations must be given high priority.
Completion rates will become a key performance indicator, and the Faculty will
need to address these issues now, so that potential recruits can be confident that
procedures and structures are in place to support their programme of study. The
projected expansion in postgraduate recruitment must be matched by an equivalent
expansion in library and other resources. Decisions will need to be made in the Faculty
to ensure that all incoming postgraduate students can be adequately resourced.
In discussions with postgraduate students, resource issues emerged as a
significant aspect of postgraduate student experience at Galway. Students also noted
the lack of dedicated space. The Faculty also needs to consider investment in PCs
and/or laptops for its research students. Provision of these facilities would constitute a
significant additional incentive to study at Galway.
As the Faculty Academic Plan notes, the main disincentive to recruitment of
research students is the low level of financial support. The Faculty is also desperately
in need of part-time teaching assistants to provide the small-group seminar teaching to
which the Faculty points with pride. A solution which would go a considerable way to
easing both problems, and for which the Faculty already has the means, is a structured
programme of Research Fellowships.
If it chose, the Faculty could prioritise its share of the JYA support and other
unattached income to establish an investment fund of some significance. A policy of 10
new Research Fellows for each of the next three years would achieve a steady-state
cohort of 30, and would materially improve the teaching support situation. These
fellowships would need to be funded at or around 15,000 euro p.a., so the total cost
would be 450,000 euro. Given University policy, it would be surprising if the
University declined to contribute significantly to such a fund and it should certainly be
approached to match the Faculty input. It is highly likely that the presence on campus
of 30 Research Fellows will flag the existence of a strong research culture to national
and international funding bodies and attract further investment in the Faculty’s research
programmes. A key feature of this programme must be award on strict merit and stated
strategic aims.
At the internal level, it will be vital to ensure that the process for awarding these
fellowships is timely. The Faculty should instigate a process of identifying potential
candidates either during their final year of undergraduate study or while enrolled in
relevant Masters programmes. As a related consideration, the Faculty should, as a
matter of urgency, consider the extent to which it conforms to NUI, Galway marking
guidelines and ensure that it awards First Class degrees at a level which does not place
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
8
the institution or its graduates at a disadvantage in national or international competition
for research funding.
The Centre for the Study of Human Settlement and Historical Change is an
outstanding example of the development of research in the Faculty. Its success in
attracting PRTLI funding and its contribution to doctoral programmes and enhancing
the research environment in the Faculty at large are highly commendable.
Recommendations:
1. The Faculty establishes effective mechanisms to ensure continuity of supervision
should the named supervisor be unavailable for extended periods.
2. 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.
3. 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.
The Faculty is invited to consider:
1. The benefits of an adjunct sabbatical system which involve one semester’s leave
after each period of six semesters rather than a full year after each period of four
year’s service as proposed in the Academic Plan.
2. The provision of enhanced computer facilities as an aid to the recruitment of high
calibre research students.
5. Community Service and the Irish Language (Irish version below)
Historically the Faculty of Arts provided for non-conventional learning through
programmes such as its “weekend” BA offered in the 1960s and subsequent decades,
the evening degree and latterly outreach degree programmes. Its long-established adult
and community education investment in the region, its link forged with St. Angela’s,
now a recognized College of NUI, Galway, its Ennis outreach, and embrace of the
Burren Art College as a potential College of the University are testament to a
commitment of Faculty and University which leaves little to be desired.
Currently, Adult and Continuing Education at NUI, Galway draws on the Arts
Faculty for delivery of 90% of its programmes to almost a thousand students in its
various centres. A possible threat to the continued success of this enterprise is the
prospective retirement of established Group members. Recruitment of replacement staff
in the current climate may prove difficult due to perceived pressures on younger
members of Faculty. Although promotion criteria do include recommendation for such
service, perhaps its’ weighting, in light of the university’s record and mission in this
area, should be revisited. The Faculty might like to consider the levels of support
required by the Centre for Adult and Continuing Education and the desirability of
keeping this before the University.
Recently, the Faculty has combined service to its region with support for native
Irish speaking communities through its degree programme initiatives that are delivered
through Irish in the Gaeltacht areas of Ulster and Connacht. These, representing
partnerships between NUI, Galway, HEA, Údarás na Gaeltachta and the Department of
Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, are well supported by the Departments of the
Faculty. The current and planned resourcing of both individuals and academic
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
9
Departments involved appear to be fair.
At this time the EU is acknowledging numerous new languages among its suite
of official languages and efforts are currently afoot to finally include Irish in this suite.
In this climate, there is a need to ensure provision of University courses through Irish,
not simply for the compelling reason of revering and cultivating a heritage but also as a
matter of extending access to Irish speakers. Some departments of the Faculty currently
offer their programmes through Irish from within their own staff resources
The University has endeavoured to honour its special role under the 1929 Act,
and to further this goal of extended access by establishing Acadamh na hOllscoilíochta
Gaeilge which develops programmes in a number of disciplines for delivery through the
medium of Irish within the University and in the Gaeltacht areas mentioned earlier.
Relevant programmes of an tAcadamh are currently submitted for the academic
approval of the Faculty of Arts, and thence, the other University bodies. This process
will in time yield to one of initial co-operative consultation between an tAcadamh and
the Faculty prior to submissions from an tAcadamh to Academic Council. Given that
some departments are already well practised in programme delivery through Irish, that
an tAcadamh will in future be playing a growing role in this area and that mechanisms
and paths of course approval are scheduled to evolve in the intermediate future, the
Group recommends that a small group representing the interests of the Faculty and an
tAcadamh monitor the transition and attend to the related Quality issues.
A separate feature relating to the cultivation of Irish through the Faculty of Arts
is the challenge to maximise the potential of native speakers whose
technical/grammatical competencies may be incomplete. It is desirable that the wealth
that otherwise such students bring with them be further enhanced through supports akin
to those available to English speakers embarking on Irish or German for example.
Scoil na Gaeilge has in recent years successfully delivered the Masters in Irish
Studies, an interdisciplinary programme involving other Arts Departments. It would
appear, as a Quality guarantee, that a satisfactory funding structure be established to
allow the course Directorate develop and expand its offerings to a student cohort which
already includes significant non-EU representation. Other such Masters initiatives
would also benefit from a provision of this sort.
Irish in its various aspects is currently the responsibility of Scoil na Gaeilge, an
tAcadamh, and Bord na Gaeilge. It is desirable for its further development that a
synergy be achieved through the harmonisation of resources and talent residing in these
bodies of the University. A periodic review of advances under this heading is
recommended.
Recommendations:
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.
2. Students who are native speakers should be provided with appropriate technical
language support where required.
3. Satisfactory funding structures for the interdisciplinary Masters in Irish Studies and
other such programmes be established.
4. Periodic review of the emerging synergy between Scoil na Gaeilge, an tAcadamh,
and Bord na Gaeilge be put in place.
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
10
The Faculty is invited to consider:
1. The degree of support required by the Centre for Adult and Continuing Education
and the value of keeping this before the University on an annual basis.
5. Seirbhís Phobail agus an Ghaeilge.
Ó thaobh na staire de, sholáthraigh Dámh na nDán oideachas neamhchoinbhinseanach
trí chláracha mar an BA ‘deireadh seachtaine’ san 1960í agus ina dhiaidh; an chéim
oíche; agus sna blianta deireanacha trí chláracha céime seachtracha / rochtana. Is
fianaise ar dhúthracht na Dáimhe agus na hOllscoile i mbun an chúraim seo an t-ionchur
atá déanta san oideachas aosach agus pobail sa réigiún, an ceangal atá déanta le Coláiste
Naomh Aingeal, atá aitheanta mar choláiste de cuid Ollscoil na hÉireann anois, clár
seachtrach na hOllscoile in Inis, agus an plé atá á dhéanamh faoi láthair, féachaint le
haitheantas a thabhairt do Choláiste Ealaíne na Boirne.
Faoi láthair tá Aonad Oideachas Leanúnach agus Aosach Choláiste na
hOllscoile Gaillimh ag brath ar Dhámh na nDán chun 90% dá chláracha a theagasc sna
hionaid éagsúla. D’fhéadfadh gaisce an fhiontair seo a bheith i mbaol má éiríonn cuid
de na baill foirne fadbhunaithe as. Faoi mar atá cúrsaí faoi láthair ní bheadh sé chomh
furasta sin ionadaithe a earcú, toisc go dtuigtear go coitianta go bhfuil brú breise anois
ar bhaill óga na Dáimhe. Cé go gcuirtear critéir mar seo san áireamh d’ardú céime,
b’fhéidir nár mhiste, i bhfianaise éacht agus misean na hOllscoile sa réimhse seo,
athscrúdú a dhéanamh ar an luacháil a chuirtear leis. Níor mhiste don Dámh, b’fhéidir,
féachaint ar leibhéal na tacaíochta atá riachtanach don Ionad Oideachas Leanúnach agus
Aosach, chun go dtuigfí a thábhachtaí is atá sé go dtuigfeadh an Ollscoil seo.
Le déanaí tá an Dámh tar éis cur leis an tseirbhís a sholáthraíonn sí sa réigiún
seo trí thacú leis na pobail Ghaeltachta sna cláracha céime a chuirtear ar fáil trí mheán
na Gaeilge i nGaeltachtaí Chonnacht agus Uladh. Páirtnéireachtaí atá sna cúrsaí seo idir
OnhÉ, Gaillimh, An tÚdarás um Ard-Oideachais, Údarás na Gaeltachta agus an Roinn
Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gnóthaí Gaeltachta, agus faigheann siad tacaíocht mhaith ó na
Ranna agus ón Dámh. Tá cuma na cothromaíochta ar an soláthar atá á dhéanamh faoi
láthair, agus atá beartaithe amach anseo, do baill den fhoireann teagaisc agus Ranna
acadúla.
Faoi láthair tá an tAE ag tabhairt aitheantais do scata teangacha nua i measc na
dteangacha oifigiúla agus tá iarrachtaí idir lámha leis an nGaeilge a áireamh ina measc.
Tá, dá bhrí sin, gá le cúrsaí Ollscoile trí mheán na Gaeilge a sholáthar, ní toisc an
tábhacht a bhaineann le meas a chothú agus caomhnú a dhéanamh ar ár n-oidhreacht,
ach chun bheith istigh a thabhairt do chainteoirí dúchais. Tá cuid de Ranna na Dáimhe
ag tairiscint a gcláracha trí Ghaeilge as a n-acmhainn féin.
Rinne an Ollscoil a dícheall i gcónaí a ról faoi leith faoi Acht 1929 a
chomhlíonadh agus rinne iarracht aidhm seo na rochtana a chur i gcrích trí Acadamh na
hOllscolaíochta Gaeilge a bhunú. Déanann an tAcadamh cláracha in ábhair éagsúla a
fhorbairt trí mheán na Gaeilge laistigh den Ollscoil agus sna ceantair Ghaeltachta luaite
thuas. Faoi láthair cuirtear cláracha oiriúnacha an Acadaimh faoi bhráid Dhámh na
nDán agus as sin go boird eile na hOllscoile, d’fhonn iad a mheas. De thoradh seo beidh
an tAcadamh agus an Dámh ag comhoibriú i gcomhairle le chéile sul a gcuirtear moltaí
an Acadaimh faoi bhráid na Comhairle Acadúla. Toisc, a fheabhas is a sholáthraíonn
cuid de na ranna cúrsaí trí mheán na Gaeilge cheana féin; forbairt ar ról an Acadaimh sa
réimse seo amach anseo; agus na hathruithe atá beartaithe i bpróiseas measúnaithe na
gcúrsaí, molann an Fhoireann go ndéanfadh grúpa beag monatóireacht ar chúram na
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
11
Dáimhe agus an Acadaimh san idirthréimhse agus aire a thabhairt do na nithe sin a
bhaineann le cúrsaí Feabhais.
Ceist faoi leith a bhaineann le forbairt na Gaeilge i nDámh na nDán, is ea an
dúshlán tógaint ar chumas na gcainteoirí dúchasacha a bhfuil gá acu, b’fhéidir, le
hoiliúint bhreise sa ghramadach agus sa teicneolaíocht. Tá sé le moladh go dtacófaí lena
saibhreas oidhreachta sa tslí chéanna ina dtugtar tacaíocht do chainteoirí Béarla, ar
thosnú dóibh ar an nGaeilge nó ar an nGearmainis, mar shampla.
Tá forbairt déanta ar MA sa Léann Dúchais, clár idirdhisiplíneach a bhfuil
Ranna eile ó Dhámh na nDán rannpháirteach ann, ag Scoil na Gaeilge le blianta beaga
anuas. Dhealródh sé, mar bharántas Feabhais, go mbunófaí struchtúr sásúil maoinithe,
chun go mbeadh ar chumas Stiúrthóireacht an chúrsa a bhfuil á dtairiscint acu a
fhorbairt agus a leathnú le freastal ar an ngrúpa mac léinn sin lasmuigh den AE, grúpa
atá ag fás i gcónaí. Ba mhór an chabhair soláthar dá short do chúrsaí nua Máistreachta
eile freisin.
Is iad Scoil na Gaeilge, An tAcadamh agus Bord na Gaeilge atá freagrach as
gnéithe éagsúla na Gaeilge faoi láthair. Ar mhaithe le dul chun cinn na Gaeilge tá sé le
moladh go bhféachfaí le hacmhainní agus buanna na n-eagras seo a fhorbairt chun tacú
agus oibriú as láimh a chéile. Moltar reiviú ó am go chéile faoin gceann teidil seo.
Iarrann an Fhoireann ar an Dámh machnamh a dhéanamh ar an bpointe seo a leanas:
1. Léibhéal na tacaíochta a theastaíonn ón Ionad Oideachas Leanúnach agus Aosach
agus an tairbhe a bhaineann le seo a choimeád os comhair na hOllscoile ar bhonn
bliantúil.
Moltaí:
1. Go ndéanfadh grúpa de chuid na Dáimhe agus an Acadaimh monatóireacht ar
sholáthar cúrsaí trí mheán na Gaeilge agus na nithe sin a bhaineann le cúrsai
Feabhais, sa tréimhse idirmheánach seo.
2. Cabhair oiriúnach teanga agus teicneolaíochta a chur ar fáil do chainteoirí
dúchasacha, de réir mar a theastaíonn.
3. Go mbunófaí struchtúir shásúla maoinithe don MA idirdhisiplíneach sa Léann
Éireannach agus cláracha eile dá short.
4. Na socruithe cuí a dhéanamh d’fhonn scrúdú a dhéanamh go tráthrialta ar an
gcomhoibriú atá molta idir Scoil na Gaeilge, an tAcadamh agus Bord an Gaeilge.
6. Summary and Concluding Remarks
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 above, 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
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04
Faculty of Arts Academic Quality Review 2003–04
12
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 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.
Devolved Resource Management 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.
Comments on The Methodology of the Review Process
1. While the length of the review visit was appropriate, the visit should be conducted
completely during weekdays. To facilitate the review process, the Quality Office
should draw up a ‘checklist’ for the progress of the actual review.
2. Formal meetings with large groups may not the most effective approach. In
addition, more time should have been made available to talk to the Faculty
secretariat.
3. The rapporteur system was very effective, and the inclusion of a cognate Dean was
invaluable in the Faculty review.
Dr. Alan Best (chair)
Professor Peter Carr
Dr. Anne Fogarty
Professor Roy Green
Dr. Michael P. Carty (rapporteur)
May 13, 2004.
ArtsFacultyFinalReport04