An Coiste Feabhais Acadúil
The Committee on Academic Quality Improvement
The Academic Quality Assurance Programme 2002-2003
Report to Údarás na hOllscoile
Review of
Department of Ophthalmology
Self-Assessment
Review Group Visit
Follow Up Meeting
Sept 2002 to Jan 2003
11-13th February, 2003
3rd February 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, April 2005
2
Report to Údarás – Review of Department of Ophthalmology 2002–03
1. Overview of Department
1.1 Aims and Objectives of the Department
The stated Departmental teaching aims are
1. Delivery of excellent standard of Ophthalmological care to all patients.
2. Undergraduate and postgraduate education to standards set down by the Royal College
of Ophthalmologists to produce safe doctors with respect to the delivery of Eye care,
especially as GP’s and Casualty Officers.
1.2 Programmes currently contributed to
Undergraduate Programmes: 5th Year Ophthalmology ( as part of final MB examination)
Postgradulate Programmes: Pre- Fellowship formal training scheme approved by ICO and Royal
college
Post Fellowship formal training.
1.3 Student numbers
Fulltime equivalent (FTE) student numbers are difficult to calculate accurately for the small
departments in the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, and particularly in the ‘surgical
departments’.
1.4 Staff
There are four members of staff, the Head of Department, two other consultant ophthalmologists
(who are all full time consultants and clinical lecturers) and one clinical tutor. There is no
University appointed administrator and the Western Health Board secretaries help with
academic matters.
1.5 Costs
The cost of the Department per FTE student (€6,254 for direct costs and €10,010 for all costs)
was similar to the Medicine and Health Science Faculty average (€6,096 and €8044
respectively). However because of the complexity of resource allocation to the Medical and
Health Sciences Faculty, these figures cannot be compared with any confidence to those from
other faculties.
1.6 Accommodation and facilities
The Department is located entirely in the University College Hospital.
2. Review Group Visit and Report
This report arises from a visit by a review team to the Department of Ophthalmology on the
11th-13th February, 2003. 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.
Four Departments were reviewed during the visit: Anaesthesia, Otorhinolaryngology,
Ophthalmology and Radiology. A number of generic issues pertaining to all were identified and
are also discussed in this report.
OphthogyUdarRep3
4/25/2007
3
Report to Údarás – Review of Department of Ophthalmology 2002–03
The review team consisted of: Professor Brian Kavanagh, Dept. of Critical Care
Medicine, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto (Chairperson); Professor Helen Carty,
Department of Radiology, Royal Liverpool Children’s Hospital; Professor John Reynolds,
Department of Surgery, St. James’s Hospital, Dublin and Dr. Geraldine Gafney, Department of
Obstetrics & Gynaecology, NUI, Galway; and Dr. Iain MacLabhrainn of the CFA acting as
rapporteur.
2.1 Summary, and Main Recommendations from Report
The Department, represented by Mr Kinsella and Miss Harney, has a tenuous relationship with
both the Department of Surgery and the Faculty. With respect to undergraduate teaching, the
Department conducts a well- organised module given in the fifth medical year. Undergraduate
teaching has been assisted by the appointment of a clinical tutor and the course undergoes
regular undergraduate appraisal There are a number of problems within the Department that
need to be addressed
1. The appointment of an academic head of Department is necessary with defined
responsibility for undergraduate course delivery. The head of Department should also be
given time to facilitate the development of research activities.
2. The clinical tutor model is highly effective and receives good student feedback. The
tutor’s contract of employment and absence of salary should be dealt with as soon as
possible.
3. There needs to be greater consultation between the Dean’s Office and the Department
about the timing of undergraduate lectures.
4. The lecture programme is not being fulfilled with the vast majority of lectures being
cancelled.
5. There are serious concerns over the pressures on the limited space for clinical work that
may partially be addressed by a change of teaching methods that places less reliance on
direct patient contact, but will increasingly pose difficulties with rising student numbers.
6. The relationship to the Department of Surgery, as with the Department of
Otorhinolaryngology, should be clarified. The budgetary and administrative
arrangements should be maintained as a separate sub-section of the Department of
Surgery.
Generic issues pertaining to Departments within the Department of Surgery
Throughout the review process, several ‘generic’ issues became apparent to the review panel,
who were responsible for reviewing the Departments of Otorhinolaryngology, Anaesthesia and
Radiology and Ophthalomology.
1. Full-time Dean.
The Dean of the Faculty is a part-time position. The external members of the panel
believe that a full-time Dean is required at NUI (Galway), and indeed this common need
in all Irish Universities at this time is widely recognised.
2. Departmental Budgets
The system of linking departmental credit and budget to the curriculum-linked student
FTE is inappropriate for rewarding departments that are unable to achieve representation
in the final medical examination. It may discriminate against such departments, and
provide unfair advantage to departments whose curriculum is in part taught by ‘noncredited’ departments.
3. Curriculum Review Committee
The structure of the curriculum review committee is small and does not represent many
departments (e.g. anaesthesia, radiology) that are not featured as distinct elements in the
traditional curriculum. This is inappropriate, and reflects (apart from medical
OphthogyUdarRep3
4/25/2007
4
Report to Údarás – Review of Department of Ophthalmology 2002–03
informatics) a binding of undergraduate teaching to a traditional medical degree
construct (Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery, etc).
4. Faculty Research Strategy
All departments should be welcomed as members of the faculty research committee
5. Skills Teaching and Facilities
The teaching facilities that we visited were uniformly archaic; the space and facilities for
teaching need to be developed along modern lines. There are particular opportunities for
all Departments involved in this review process and this theme should be driven through
cross-Departmental strategy within the Faculty and curriculum review group.
6. Communication, Transparency, & Concordance in Perceptions
The panel was struck by some discordance in perspective as portrayed by the Dean
compared with that portrayed by some of the consultant staff.
7. Student Numbers
The panel was concerned that the plans for increased student enrolment were not
accompanied by adequately developed plans for teaching space and resources
8. Academic Contracts
There were serious staff contract issues in two of the four departments reviewed.
9. Arrangement with Department of Surgery
The nature of the affiliation between the department of surgery and the Departments of
Otorhinolaryngology, Ophthalmology, Radiology and Anaesthesia is unclear, and has
been that way for a considerable time. There is an urgent need to revisit this problem and
establish an actionable and measurable agreement between Surgery, for those
departments that would remain within the department of surgery. The expected
appointment of the Chair in Surgery in the near future may assist in establishing such
arrangements.
10. Stipend for Clinical Lecturers - potential for creative development
An approach to financial issues, suggested by Dr Flynn (Anaesthesia), was that
departmental clinical lecturers’ stipends be pooled and directed to the departments for
academic purposes. The panel viewed this as imaginative and creative.
11. Training the Teachers
The consultant staff need to be offered, and to engage in, formal processes designed to
learn and maintain teaching skills.
12. Academic Promotion
The consultant staff need to be offered a process of academic promotion for teaching and
or research, based on validated and accepted criteria. There is no incentive (aside from a
stipend that is essentially negligible relative to overall income) for consultants to teach
medical students, and from what the panel can discern, many consultants do not teach.
OphthogyUdarRep3
4/25/2007
5
Report to Údarás – Review of Department of Ophthalmology 2002–03
3. Follow up Meeting
Tuesday, 3rd February 2004
Present: Professor Jim Browne - Registrar, Dr Tony Carney – Dean of Medicine & Health Sciences (the Dean),
Professor Gerard Hurley - Dean of Research, Mr Frank Kinsella – Head of Department, Dr Geraldine Gaffney –
Review Group Cognate, Professor Jim Gosling - Director of Quality (Chair), Ms M Linnane (in attendance)
3.1 Action Plan for the Department:
1. The Clinical Tutor’s appointment was regularised shortly after the Review Visit, with
the appropriate contract and salary, and this arrangement is working satisfactorily.
2. The Department will work with the Dean and the new Professor of Surgery to develop a
system of cooperation and governance among the group of surgical departments, a
system that will avoid fragmentation of resources and respect the autonomy necessary
for the efficient facilitation of student learning and research.
3. The Department will consult with the Dean of Research in the development of a fiveyear research plan, with a view to finalising it by December 2004
3.2 Action plan for University Management:
1. The Registrar and Dean agreed that the relationship with the Department of Surgery
would be clarified after the new head of Surgery has been appointed, while respecting
budgetary and administrative arrangements necessary for the efficient facilitation of
student learning and research in ophthalmology.
2. The Registrar recognises that all departments in the Faculty of Medicine and Health
Science should be based on a suitable ‘academic model’, that allows for ‘protected time
for teaching, research and academic administration, and will work with the Dean to
achieve the appointment of a Senior Lecturer in Opthalmology on a 3/11 model by
January 2005.
3. Through the Faculty Curriculum Committee, the Dean will work with the Department to
enable clinical teaching in ophthalmology and other appropriate areas to be spread over
much longer period than the current nine months, thereby facilitating smaller groups of
students and better use of facilities.
4. The Dean and Registrar agreed that there is space problems within the department that
inhibits direct student-patient contacts, and will raise this matter with the Western Health
Board at all appropriate meetings.
5. The Dean of Research will work with the Department/Faculty in providing/developing:
•
•
•
•
•
An information session on grant applications/proposals to the Millennium fund and to the main
funding bodies, with emphasis on support for younger staff and for proposals involving other
departments in the Faculty and University
Contacts between the Department and the SFI Professor of Adaptive Optics.
Appropriate support for staff wishing to establish a research programme.
Research methodology training.
A register of research projects in the Faculty of Medicine and Health Science
Approved by: Head of Department, Mr Frank Kinsella, 25 February 2004
Approved by: Dean of Medicine & Health Sciences, Dr P A Carney, 20 April 2004
Approved by: Dean of Research, Professor Gerard Hurley, 10 March 2004
Approved by: Registrar, Professor James Browne, 9 March 2004
Finalised: 23 April 2004, Jim Gosling, Director of Quality
OphthogyUdarRep3
4/25/2007