Summary of the Review Group Report
Centre for Teaching and Learning
University College Dublin
Approved by the Governing Authority at its meeting on 25 February 2004
Centre for Teaching and Learning
Members of the Review Group
NAME
AFFILIATION
ROLE
Mr Jeff Weinberger
Director of Corporate Planning,
University College Dublin
Chair
Dr Ron Callan
Department of English,
University College Dublin
Rapporteur
Ms Bairbre Fleming
Director of Adult Education Centre,
University College Dublin
Cognate
Dr Jan Hellberg
Educational Consultant,
Extern
Lund University Learning and Teaching
Development Unit
Dr Erika Martens
Director, Academic Development Unit,
La Trobe University
Extern
Members of the Co-ordinating Committee
Dr Geraldine O’Neill, Head, Centre for Teaching and Learning
Ms Donna Carter-Leay, Executive Assistant
Ms Valerie Hughes, Course Administrator
Ms Fran Malone, Course Administrator
Dr Tim McMahon, Teaching Development Officer
Departmental Details
CTL shares a building with the Quality Assurance Office and the Credit Union. CTL’s
section of the building consists of three offices: the front office is currently shared by
the full-time Teaching Development Officer (TDO) and the two-day temporary
contract Educational Consultant. This arrangement will stand until January 2004when
the TDO will share the office with a second TDO who is currently on a career break.
The two “job-share” Senior Executive Assistants (SEA), one of whom is currently on
leave of absence, share the second office with the one-year contract Executive
Assistant (EA). The third office, smaller than the other two, is that of the Head of
CTL.
Other facilities such as a general workroom housing equipment and the CTL’s
Resource/Library collection, and the toilet and kitchen facilities are shared with the
other offices in the building.
Since its establishment in 1997, the Unit/Centre has never had a dedicated teaching
space. In short, CTL has no teaching space and no room to expand.
The Centre for Teaching and Learning currently provides courses in four separate
areas: Main Programme: Programmes and Courses for Academic Staff, Induction
Programmes, Postgraduate Programmes and Faculty Specific Courses. In addition,
CTL is planning to introduce a Higher Diploma in Teaching and Learning during the
academic year 2003-04. Other events include the President’s Teaching Awards
Forum and Ceremony and the President’s Teaching Grants Forum and
Presentations.
Summary RG Report, Centre for Teaching and Learning
2
Site Visit
The site visit took place between 8 April and 10 April 2003. The PRG met with the
Head of CTL, the Departmental Co-ordinating Committee, the Registrar and Chair of
the Telematics Committee, staff of the Centre, representatives of the President’s
Teaching Awards Committee, past recipients of the President’s Teaching Award,
CTL Blackboard and Induction course leaders, representatives of the Standing
Committee on Teaching and Learning, Induction Group representative, Main
Programme representatives, Postgraduate students on the Tutors/Practical courses,
representatives from an encouraging-active-learning-in-small-group-teaching project
in the Quinn School of Business and the Faculty of Agriculture Pilot Curriculum
Project and the Dean of the Veterinary Faculty.
The site visit was well planned and organised however the Review Group felt that a
two day site visit allowed insufficient time to reflect and discuss much of the
information presented. The meetings with key customer groups and with the Centre
for Teaching and Learning staff provided insights into the Self-assessment Report as
well as clarification on issues raised in the self-assessment.
Recommendations of the Review Group
General Comments
The RG found that CTL is a valuable resource for UCD and the academic community
has identified the need for such a unit within the University to develop programmes
related to teaching and learning.
It is not clear to the RG that CTL, at this relatively early stage of its organisational
development, can provide the necessary leadership in the progress of teaching and
learning activities in UCD. CTL recognises this in the SAR.
Recommendations
 UCD should prioritise the formulation of a leadership and infrastructural
framework which will enable it to achieve its institutional teaching and learning
objectives, and in so doing, clarify the role of CTL.
 A “root-and-branch” examination of the internal operation and the external
relationships of CTL to the University and its teaching and learning objectives
should be instituted as a matter of urgency.
5.2
Working Environment
Recommendations
 Woodview should be seriously considered as a permanent home for CTL, but that
urgent consideration is given to the re-housing of QAO or the Credit Union to
provide extra offices for CTL. (Re-housing QAO and/or the Credit Union within a
faculty would not have the implications it would for CTL.)
 Urgent consideration is given to the use being made of the “Meeting Room” in
Woodview. The “Meeting” room, which houses CTL library and the equipment
shared with QAO, is overcrowded, serves far too many functions, offers a poor
library space, and presents a non-professional image to callers who might be
seeking to use one or other of the services.
5.3
Centre Planning and Organisation
5.3.1 CTL and the University
This focuses on CTL’s relationship with UCD at academic and administrative levels.
In developing the changes suggested below, the University would recognise CTL’s
unique role on campus and the special benefits which would accrue from a Centre
Summary RG Report, Centre for Teaching and Learning
3
which can offer a University-wide service in terms of research, support and training in
teaching and learning.
Recommendations
 The RG supports the need for CTL to remain a “free-standing” unit. In being so, it
was felt that CTL will serve the faculties in UCD most efficiently. Should this
status change, the University should address the considerable disadvantages for
CTL in such a development.
 A clear system should be instituted to reflect CTL’s status within the
administrative structures of UCD, to ensure that CTL has ready access to Deans
of Faculties, and to guarantee that promotion prospects for CTL staff is on a par
with other UCD staff.
 Special provisions should be made to allow CTL to develop postgraduate courses
in accordance with its new non-Faculty status.
 The inclusion of the Head of CTL on UCD senior committees (for example, the
Academic Council as a “non-voting member” to begin), given that CTL’s current
status is not technically constituted as an “Academic Centre.”
 The title “Teaching Development Officer” should be deemed redundant and that
CTL’s academic staff be termed “Lecturers in Educational Development” or some
equivalent which is acceptable to the staff.
 The RG notes the University’s policy on the rotation of the Heads of Department.
However, RG recommends that the duration of the headship should be extended
to maintain the continuity of recent developments and planning in the Centre.
5.3.2 Administration of CTL
The RG recognises the unique role played by the administrative staff in the
development of CTL in terms of the organisation and presentation of courses. This
has led to the creation of one full-time administrative position and one full-time
contract position.
Recommendations
 The work of the current administrative positions should be assessed and defined
as a matter of urgency to ensure against excessive workloads.
 Both administrative positions are clearly needed and full-time contract position
should continue to be funded for the immediate future.
 The work of the administrators should be carefully assessed in a longer-term
review of the aims and objectives of CTL, and particularly in any consideration
given to a rationalisation of current courses.
5.3.3 CTL and SCTL
Recommendation
 The RG again stresses (under this heading) that the Head of CTL be invited to
join committees such as the Academic Council in order to offset criticism of the
“junior” status of SCTL, and to ensure the representation of CTL’s interests at the
highest levels so that change can be effectively and speedily introduced.
5.3.4 President’s Teaching Awards
Recommendations

The promotion of a more active role (in terms of the work of CTL) from
President’s Teaching Award winners on return from their leave. Each should be
involved in mentoring, lecturing and writing in areas related to their award.

CTL should have a significant role in establishing and monitoring this
development.
Summary RG Report, Centre for Teaching and Learning
4
5.3.5 Registrar
Recommendations:




Meetings with the Registrar (approximately one every two months) be held more
often.
The relationship between the Registrar, SCTL, and CTL be re-assessed to define
clear lines of responsibility.
The relationship between the Registrar, SCTL, and CTL be examined to minimise
duplication.
The relationship between the Registrar, SCTL, and CTL be developed in ways to
promote the progress of CTL.
5.3.6 Staff Meetings
It is felt that the aspiration for a “fortnightly staff meeting” is much too high.
Recommendations
 Time-tables for staff meetings should be rationalised.
 A system should be considered to allow input from staff in setting the agenda.
5.4
Functions, Activities and Processes
5.4.1 Recommendations – Operational Priorities
In general terms, the RG felt that the Operational Priorities (OPs) should be aligned
to the general aspirations of the University. For example, the RG would like to see:
 A clear link being developed between CTL and the Registrar in relation to the
development and expression of OPs.
 A means to assess and address OPs on a annual basis.
 A system by which OPs are signed-off each year.
 The use of OPs to build critical analysis into the planning and development of
taught programmes.
Recommendation
 A narrower, better defined and clearly planned range of activities, which leaves
room for developments and scope for expansion later, should be considered as a
matter of urgency. This should create a more positive attitude (drawn from goals
which have been attained), and act as a counter to the self-defensive “feel”
clearly evident in parts of the SAR.
5.4.2 Recommendations – Operating Priority Specific
Operating Priorities not discussed in this section are discussed either directly or
indirectly in other sections of this report.
OP6
Collect and disseminate information regarding best practice in teaching and learning.
Recommendations
 The staff of CTL should use this collection and implement some of the findings
derived from their usage in their meetings with UCD staff. This resource may then
be perceived as valuable and well used. This would, in turn, strengthen the case
for better library facilities.
 A librarian is not required, nor is a new reading room if the current multi-purpose
usage of the room is re-considered in order to prioritise CTL’s requirements.
 Dissemination has been implemented by publishing information and advice on
the Web-page. This could be expanded to include interactive list-serves (listserves allow subscribers to share information and participate in discussions
through email lists), brochures, placards, bookmarks, advertisements and
newsletters.
Summary RG Report, Centre for Teaching and Learning
5

The effect of the Web-page should be closely monitored. An abundance of Webbased material is now available on these topics world-wide and the benefits of
writing extensive material for a Web-page as distinct from having face-to-face
discussions with groups of staff in the institution needs to be carefully assessed.
OP7
In co-operation with the Educational Technology Officer and Computer Services
Department, provide support for academic staff in the application of telematics and
other new technologies in teaching and learning.
Recommendations
 Consideration might be given to ways in which this relationship might be formally
structured in order to clarify responsibilities.
 The RG does not recommend any merger of CTL, AVC and/or Computer
Services. These are distinct and valuable resources in UCD and should be
allowed to develop as co-operative but independent centres and services.
 The RG suggests that such competency and expertise evident in the work of an
Educational Technologist would be a significant and important addition to the
development of CTL. The RG recommends that serious consideration be given to
creating such a position within CTL. Such a move would add substantially to the
profile of CTL’s courses and services, as it will inevitably help CTL to develop
further as a centre for teaching and learning.
OP10
Ensure that those responsible for academic strategic development, academic
resource allocations and academic promotions are fully informed as to the
conclusions to be drawn from current research and, in particular, what constitutes
good practice in teaching and curriculum design.
Recommendations
 Consideration should be given to a “Senior Development Programme” to examine
the management of high quality Teaching and Learning for departmental heads.
 A workshop should be initiated for the Promotions Committee which would
examine the interpretations of “good teaching.”
 CTL should contribute to the development, implementation and monitoring of
such innovations. RG supports the thrust of this OP while recommending that it
has to be seen within a careful reassessment and prioritisation of all activities of
CTL.
OP12
Provide support for quality assurance and quality improvement, career development
and academic promotions within the University.
Recommendations
 The ad hoc and case-by-case approach used so far has been very well managed
by CTL, but is in RG’s view untenable in the future.
 CTL should also, with support from the Personnel Department, develop a
programme for senior managers and heads of departments to support them in
relevant areas of responsibility. This would provide a good opportunity to deal
with OP16 (Develop a closer working relationship with the Personnel Office) in
order to:
- Co-ordinate the provision of courses and programmes on teaching and
learning with wider staff development activities for academic staff.
- Seek ways to enable support professionals to engage more effectively with
the teaching, learning and processes of the University. By developing a closer
Summary RG Report, Centre for Teaching and Learning
6
co-operative relationship with the Personnel Department in the area of
training and teaching, issue of overlapping services will be addressed.
OP14
Develop a national and international reputation as a centre of research into teaching
and learning.
Recommendations


5.5
CTL should undertake an extensive analysis of the direction and extent of
existing research programmes in order to address this important issue.
A research focus, which takes up a “gap” defined in recent literature, might be
best identified and developed if linked to areas of teaching expertise. (Such
planning and development should lead to a research focus and attract research
students and grants).
Taught Programmes
5.5.1 General Recommendations
 There is a need for the University to evaluate critically what role it wishes for CTL,
especially considering that no additional resources were made available for it in
2001 when the University decided to make the Induction programme mandatory
for all staff.
5.5.2 Taught Programme (Academic)
Recommendations
 It might be prudent to include some basic topics such as “What is student
learning”, “Course Design”, “Assessment” and “Small and Large Teaching
Situations” in the Main programme for staff who want to update their approaches
to teaching. “Assessment” and “Course Design” seem obvious omissions from
the Induction programme considering it takes four full days and is designed for
beginners.
 A system should be instituted whereby critical evaluations given by participants
should be taken into consideration for the next teaching round, in relation to topic
choice and approach.
Taught Programme (Postgraduate Diploma)
Recommendations



The new Higher Diploma is intended to be a critical part of the future of CTL. It is
ambitious to introduce a significant additional programme without having resolved
the resource-related issues that are of such great concern to CTL.
The current CTL teaching programme should be completely modularised and
delivered both as stand-alone single units and as parts of the Higher Diploma.
In order to link both programmes, the Diploma’s conceptual framework should be
developed and the depth and range of the current programme should coincide
with the range and levels offered for graduate diplomas in higher education
elsewhere.
Taught Programme (Administrative)
Recommendations
 Administrative side of the Taught Programme should be assessed to ensure that
training opportunities and access to software packages are available to
administrative staff.
 More should be done to improve the efficiency of the booking process in terms of
procedures and room allocations.
Summary RG Report, Centre for Teaching and Learning
7

5.6
The lack of a dedicated seminar room is particularly problematic for small
developmental type projects, follow-up sessions, etc. after courses, or for more
informal ad hoc meetings.
Research and Scholarly Activity
Recommendations
 The RG considers that research should not be prioritised nor should it be set
aside at this stage of the development of CTL. With so much to do in terms of
CTL’s place within UCD, the Taught Programme, and the general examination of
the aims and objectives of the Programme, it was felt that CTL should develop its
role in terms of a strict and practical set of achievable priorities.
 RG suggests that the obvious limitations of the current status of research in CTL
should be recognised officially at University level as a consequence of being
under resourced.
 RG suggests that it should be recognised officially at University level that CTL
academic staff have the ability and desire to promote research within the field.
 RG suggests that a programme of research should be promoted within the terms
existing in CTL at present.
5.7
Customer Perspective
Recommendations
 A careful assessment of customer evaluations should be undertaken. These
evaluations will be critical to any re-evaluation of the work of CTL. In broad terms,
it was clear to RG that CTL offers too many courses and asks too much of itself
given its current staffing levels. RG recommends that any response to customer
evaluations should be predisposed to cut some of the existing programme. Such
decisions should be made on what CTL considers are the important priorities for
such a Centre in UCD and on responses to the priorities evident in customer
evaluations. A more focussed and limited programme should improve staff's
opportunities to advance their careers in significant ways, develop the services
being offered in a systematic way, and add to CTL's reputation in UCD and
abroad.
 CTL's programme with the Faculty of Agriculture should become the basis of a
thorough review of the process by which this scheme was initiated, developed
and finalised by CTL. The RG is particularly keen to see how CTL's future
involvement with faculties can maximise the use of its expertise in response to
the particular needs of a faculty. This will only happen if the current scheme is
subject to a particularly rigorous examination.
5.8
Resource Management
Recommendations
 Regardless of the decisions made about what activities CTL should undertake in
the future, CTL should be provided with financial planning assistance to enable it
to prepare activity-based budgets (which in turn may inform the financial
assessment of the activities that CTL actually does).
 The financial planning of CTL should embrace the non-University funded
activities as well and then be combined in an integrated management information
system that enables CTL to manage the revenue and expenditure of all of its
major categories of activity discretely and collectively.
 It will be necessary, for example, to be able to distinguish between courses with
fees and those without fees to determine whether fees “support” other activities
Summary RG Report, Centre for Teaching and Learning
8
Response of the Departmental Co-ordinating Committee to the Review Group
Report
The Departmental Co-ordinating Committee submitted a 5 page response to specific
details of the Review Group Report and this is included as Chapter 8 of the Report.
A copy of the full Review Group Report is available from the Quality Assurance
Office.
Summary RG Report, Centre for Teaching and Learning
9