Response by DCU to the Consultation Paper on a National Academy for the Enhancement of
Teaching and Learning
Executive Summary
In general, DCU welcomes the opportunity to respond to the HEA proposal to review, consolidate and
exploit the wealth of activities in Teaching and Learning that have been funded to date. The
establishment of a National Academy could provide a valuable and worthwhile vehicle to build on the
expertise already developed, the alliances formed and the well-established good-will and co-operation
that has underpinned successful collaborative initiatives such as the DRHEA, the Framework
Implementation Network and Campus Engage amongst others.
It is vital that such beneficial and fruitful interactions, which have clearly demonstrated their value at
both regional and national levels be supported, and the key outcomes achieved be fully exploited to
optimise their value, share expertise and experiences and, ultimately, achieve the best learning
environment and teaching quality possible. It is also our view that the Academy should have a
research focus and ensure that any initiatives taken or policies developed are strongly evidence-based.
It is very important that there be constructive discussions with all parties to ensure that there is
support and ‘buy-in’ from academics, students and all members of institutions. The university is fully
aware of and totally committed to the need to maximise the return on resources and to ensure the best
educational opportunities for Ireland.
DCU has played a major role in teaching and learning developments at all levels and members of the
University are continuously involved in a variety of approaches to enhance teaching as evidenced by
the very active participation in the Academic Framework for Innovation1, in the activities of the
DRHEA, where we leads the Enhancement Of Learning (EOL) strand), involvement in NAIRTL
amongst others. It is vital that any new initiatives are seen as a continuation and development of those
activities in which many have already invested significant effort.
Financial support will be necessary at institutional and national levels to achieve the aspirations of the
Academy. However, there is full realisation that sources such as the EU and other international bodies
must be actively approached for funding. There is also very considerable scope to develop
international collaborations that could provide advice on approaches and best practice, expertise and
access to consortia with enhanced associated funding opportunities. However, it is vital that such
initiatives receive some levels of pump-priming as this both motivates individuals and enhances their
capacity to successfully gain funding.
Careful consideration needs to be given to the title chosen for the body and its structure and focus,
taking full consideration of what already exists and successes to date. DCU supports the proposed
governance structure of a Board with an independent Chair and senior level representation, focussing
primarily on strategy and policy. In addition, we suggest, that reporting to the Board, there should be
‘The National Committee or Centre for Teaching and Learning’ which would be responsible for
implementation. The composition and remit are of this group discussed in this document, along with a
suggested support structure.
1
DCU’s major curriculum reform process
This document comprises general comments and suggestions from DCU and direct answers to the
questions posed in the consultation paper.
General Comments:
An appropriately designed body could facilitate the sharing of expertise, collaborative approaches to
continuing professional development, benchmarking of good practice and increased
professionalization of the teaching role, all underpinned by a strong evidence base. This body could,
provide leadership and research to contribute to policy development and combine appropriate
academic development with achievement of critical mass, economies of scale and demonstrable
outcomes. However, such a body is not without risk – in particular to actual or perceived
institutional autonomy, and perceptions of a directive, monitoring or quality assurance rather than an
enhancement and development focus. There is a risk of that the engagement which has been gradually
build up amongst academics via institutions’ centres for Teaching and Learning, may reduce if there
is a perception of these being replaced with an external ‘agency’ approach. Tensions between
national, sectoral and institutional as well as disciplinary teaching and learning priorities also
represent areas for careful consideration.
Having led the largest and most complex strand of the DRHEA SIF Projects, Enhancement of
Learning (EOL), DCU fully appreciates the challenges but also the opportunities and potential for
collaboration across a range of common teaching-related areas. DCU has also successfully led or
coordinated the development of new and unique areas of collaboration which will be outlined later.
The HEA consultation paper highlights four successful SIF-funded collaborative groupings, three of
which are regionally-based. It is strongly recommended that such existing groupings are enabled to
continue, each focussed on the high impact, successful aspects of their activity to date. These
groupings, as well as being the national lead for a particular theme, would have the additional
responsibility to disseminate findings and to maintain regular exchange and discussion with the other
groupings, to ensure sharing and avoid duplication. A huge amount of energy, goodwill, discussion
and organisation (as well as funding) has been invested in the creation and establishment of these
collaborations. It would be damaging to disband these existing groupings2 and would most likely set
back or even undo the significant progress, especially involving ‘ordinary’ academics, which is now
beginning to build.
Clarifications:
There are a number of matters arising from the paper which require clarification before the
establishment of a Academy should proceed. Below is a list of issues which DCU feels need to be
clarified:

Evidence that this proposal will enhance teaching and learning
2
This does not preclude the expansion of existing groupings to include more partners but this will build on the successful existing
groupings rather than disbanding and reforming
While it is clear that this proposal aims to consolidate activity, achieve greater economies of scale and
efficiencies a strong evidence-based case that such an approach will actually enhance the student
experience needs to be made.

Conflicting Roles of the Academy - Funding and Professionalisation
The primary purpose of the academy should be to function as a professional body for academics w.r.t
their teaching role. It would be inappropriate for the Academy to combine a dual role in relation to
enhancement and funding. The Academy should be designed around well-established academic norms
of peer review and policy development and should have no role in making funding decisions.

Goals of the Academy
There are potential differences between what HEIs might see as the role, function and value of an
Academy and what the HEA or the Government might ensilage it to be. These to be discussed openly
and an agreed model arrived at.

Alignment with Regional Clusters
There is a need to properly sequence the different activities planned to implement the National
Strategy. In particular the establishment of regional clusters, the subject of a consultation paper
currently being considered, will impact the shape and operation of a National Academy, which should
be structured in such a way as to align with the regional clusters once established. Consideration
should be given to waiting until the regional clusters have been agreed and then structuring the
Academy to ensure alignment.

Funding
How the Academy will be funded, in particular post 2012, is critical and it is unrealistic in the current
climate to expect institutions to fund this body, either through top slicing or in other ways.
Specific Comments:
(i)
DCU recommends that time is taken to consult in depth with the key actors in Irish T&L,
namely the senior management responsible for teaching and learning, academics in T&L
leadership roles, the Heads of Teaching and Learning, the SIF project leads and other key
figures, in advance of making any definitive decisions about the strategy, shape or structure of
the proposed body. The availability of a relatively small, short-term (to end 2012) funding
source should not be allowed to constrain the ability to consider all alternatives and arrive at a
suitable, agreeable, body which will have a long-term impact on Irish HE.
(ii)
In relation to the functions outlined in the consultation document (page 8) DCU wishes to
comments specifically on two:
 Procurement of teaching and learning software for use in Irish higher education
DCU suggests that this role is better suited to HEANet and should be located with that group in
consultation with the Academy.
 Professional standards framework,
While an academic professional standards framework is welcome (and discused later), it is strongly
recommended that all CPD should be based on ECTS and aligned with the National Framework of
Qualifications (NFQ) rather than developing an alternative approach. Use of minor, special purpose
and supplemental as well as major awards and single subject certification can provide for the flexible
type of accreditation processes necessary.
(iii)
Student Focus
There is little, if any, reference to the student experience in the document. The learner focus needs to
be made central to any further discussion of the Academy.
(iv)
Infrastructural Matters:
In order to achieve the coherence espoused in the proposal, significant attention will need to be
invested in infrastructural matters to support credit transfer, mutual credit recognition and multiple
registration of academic staff on accredited courses etc.
Response to specific questions posed
1. Do you agree that the time is opportune for the creation of a National Academy for the
Enhancement of Teaching and Learning?
There is an increased appreciation for, and awareness of, the need to professionalise the teaching role
in third level. Consolidation of existing activity to achieve critical mass, develop a pool of expertise
and eliminate unnecessaryi duplication is timely. Recognition and further development of existing
collaborative groupings will be critical.
2. How can the National Academy best complement each institution’s own work to enhance the
quality of teaching and learning?
The focus of the Academy should be to achieve acceptance amongst academics and institutions. An
emphasis on research and evidence, acknowledgement and support for disciplinary differences and
space for academic debate and discussion are essential. Utilising peer review processes, engaging with
and commissioning relevant research and utilising appropriate evidencing, development and
measurement processes, will be critical.
The activities of the Academy will need to allow for sectoral, institutional and disciplinary differences
and to facilitate tailoring and customisation. Institutional autonomy should be maintained. Allowing
institutions and consortia to continue successful initiatives will also provide a mechanism to share
experience, reduce duplication and avoid the ‘reinventing of the wheel’ which often characterises
Irish HE initiatives. Examples of existing success in this area include:
 the development by DCU of online modules in digital pedagogy with funded places for all
DRHEA institutions;








the development of DCU and NUIM of an online module in assessing online to be piloted in
February 2012;
the opening up of places across the DRHEA on each institutions’ training and development
activities;
the collaborative DRHEA publication on ‘The Dynamic Curriculum’;
the undergraduate research conference, extended beyond the DRHEA to include all Irish
HEIs;
the trialling and subsequent purchase of Palgrave Study Skills;
the development of the NDLR around communities of practice;
the national teaching awards under NAIRTL;
the use of institutional teaching fellowships by a number of DRHEA institutions.
Questions 3 and 4 are addressed together.
3. How can the National Academy support the continuing professional development of academics in
Irish higher education?
4. How can the National Academy assist in closing the loop between the identification of good
practice and the mainstreaming of this practice across the broader academic community?
DCU acknowledges the need to ensure that academic staff continually improve their teaching
practice, but also welcomes the avoidance of a simplistic, blanket requirement for all academics to be
accredited, similar to that espoused in the UK by the Dearing Commission Report (1998). There is
significant evidence that the UK has experienced box-ticking and ‘feeding the beast’ in relation to
mandatory teaching qualifications. The Academy should be seen as a valuable organisation with
which academics want to be associated through a variety of forms of membership should as
Fellowships, Associate membership etc and should offer the development opportunities that
academics want and need.
DCU has already completed a survey of academic interest in professional development across the
DRHEA with plans to extend this nationally. This provides evidence-based, rather than anecdotal,
knowledge of the professional development interest areas for academic staff and indicates a high level
of interest in CPD amongst academic staff. This is further evidenced by the numbers participating in
DCU’s online module in Teaching Online (developed in collaboration with the DRHEA) – 37 from
across the DRHEA with an additional 90 from DCU will have completed by summer 2012. The table
below presents the top ten ranked areas for professional development and it should be noted that
disciplinary research and networking as well as peer exchange feature very highly, reinforcing the
international research findings cited earlier.
Response Indicated
Respondents
(%)
Rank
Innovative Delivery Methods
84.5%
=1
Access to research findings on T&L in
84.4%
=1
my discipline
Alternative Assessment Methods
79.7%
3
Obtaining useful feedback from students
79.6%
4
Peer exchange on good practice
78.6%
5
Connecting with others in my own
discipline
77.2%
6
Use of new technology
76.9%
7
Inquiry and problem based learning
75.5%
8
Integrating research into the UG
curriculum
73.5%
9
Access to research findings on T&L in
general
73.1%
10
Note, that 47% of the overall respondents ranked accredited T&L courses highly, with this rising to
65% for those with 5 year’s experience or less. It should be noted also that many of the individual
areas ranked most highly would usually be included in a formal course.
DCU recommends the development of a teaching career framework with, for example, structured,
formal, accredited training for early career academics (less than 5 years’ experience), less formal,
perhaps portfolio-based and research-focussed development activity for mid-career academics, with
later-career academics engaging through mentoring, leadership activities. See figure below.






Early Career
< 5 Years
Mid Career
5-20 Years
Later Career
20 Years +
Orientation/
Induction
Professional
Development
Leadership
Introductory Training
Teaching basics
Assessment & feedback
Learning Technology
Curriculum Development
Academic structures,
processes and procedures






Peer Exchange
New pedagogies
Blended/online
provision
Teaching portfolios
Leadership in T&L
Engagement with T&L




Leadership
Act as mentors/observers
Engage in education research
Lead on key aspects of
disciplinary
and
cross
university curriculum, T&L
development

Supported pathway
through ‘first’ encounters

research/literature
Playing championing or
fellowship roles in
disciplinary pedagogy

Providing
leadership
and
support locally and across the
university
Focus on single
modules/minor awards
Focus on major awards –
PG Certs/Dips/Masters
Focus on leadership mentoring
development roles
Target: Accredited T&L
Award
Target: Portfolio &
Publications
Target: Mentoring & Leadership
5. How can the National Academy further the existing linkages and partnerships with international
practitioners in this field, and facilitate new partnerships with equivalent entities in neighbouring
and other jurisdictions, to contribute to and benefit from the development of a “global
interdisciplinary perspective on teaching and learning”?3
The Academy should aim to leverage international funding schemes such as FP7, Tempus etc, as well
as perhaps creating an Irish scheme which incentivises international HEIs to collaborate with Irish
institutions. The academy should pay special attention to supporting existing collaborations, MOUs
and strategic alliances between individual Irish HEIs and international partners. The National
Academy should also investigate linkages with SEDA and The Higher Education Academy in the UK,
ICED in the US and HERSDA in Australia.
6. Should the National Academy continue all activities of the existing teaching and learning
networks and projects, funding permitting, or should it review all existing activities and start
afresh following the review?
Having conducted an interim evaluation of all SIF projects in 2010 and with the wealth of data
available from the regular progress reports to the HEA, there is a significant amount of data already
available from which to identify high impact, scalable, effective activities upon which to base the
initial activity of the academy. However a thematic evaluation, similar to that conducted in Scotland
by Lancaster University, may be a valuable approach to identifying or confirming the initial areas
upon which to concentrate activity. Alternatively, such evaluation could comprise the intensive,
consultative process to inform the establishment of the Academy, recommended earlier.
Starting afresh will risk losing the already high degree of engagement with existing activities, have
the potential for further duplication and replication and will slow down the pace of possible progress.
7. Should the National Academy be a virtual platform with a physical base in an existing HEI, or
does it need a physical presence of its own that is independent of any individual institution?
3
Higher Education Teaching and Learning Association (HELT), http://helt.org/
It is important that any new structure or organisation for the National Academy considers the
following:







The ethos, norms and purpose of a professional body or association
Membership should be made valuable and desirable by the academic community
There should be a number of membership routes and types
The extensive work already undertaken by the centres for teaching and learning in the institutions
The need to be a credible organisation focussed on enhancing the student learning experience and
in particular to be credible to the academic community
The existing successful collaborative groupings and what critical success factors for the Academy
can be identified in advance
The role of regional clustering in achieving manageable collaboration
Proposed Structure:
DCU proposes a governance structure which will be independent, accountable, appropriately focussed
and have academic credibility. The Academy should be jointly owned by the HEIs and the HEA but
should not be physically located in either the HEA or a HEI. Responsibility for teaching and learning
development could largely be delegated to the Academy through the involvement of the existing
Heads of Teaching and Learning and academics with T&L leadership responsibility. This will
maintain institutional ownership and responsibility while obliging collaborative approaches.
The proposed organisation should have a two –tier governance structure, similar to that in use by the
DRHEA - (i) The National Academy Board and (ii) The National Committee (or Centre) for
Teaching and Learning. Membership of both should include the IUA and IoTI. The Academy should
be supported by a small office, located centrally, with an Executive Director and a small secretariat.
The Executive Director would serve as a liaison between the two structures as well as secretary to the
Board. For the purpose of real transparency and independence the Executive Director should be
recruited through open competition. In relation to shared ownership it is proposed that the institutions’
share of funding would be achieved through the involvement of the institutional staff and sharing of
resources (i.e. matched activity and not through top slicing or other direct funding).
Proposed configuration
Summary:
DCU recommends an Academy which will aim to maximise engagement by academics, structured in
effect as a professional body. It should be appropriately structured, focussed and resourced so as to
achieve genuine improvement and enhancement of the student learning experience, contribute to the
relevant research and provide CPD, networking and other professionally valuable opportunities. The
Academy should be informed through consultation and evaluation of existing activity and should be
acceptable to the wider HE community.
i
Some duplication may be necessary to ensure academic acceptance and engagement
APPENDIX 1
LISTING OF SELECTED HE RESEARCH AND POLICY INSTITUTES IN IRELAND AND
INTERNATIONALLY
A. Research centres in Irish HEIs focusing on the study of higher education
Higher Education Research Centre (HERC) DCU
Higher Education Policy Research Unit (HEPRU) DIT
Also: many university and institute Centres for Teaching and Learning support practice orientated
research.
B. Selected international centres of research on higher education
Center for the Study of Higher Education University of Virginia, USA
CEET Centre for the Economics of Education and Training, Monash University, Australia
Cepes European Centre for Higher Education , UNESCO
CHEMP Centre for Higher Education Management and Policy, University of New England, Australia
CHEMS Commonwealth Higher Education Management Service, London, UK
CHES Centre for Higher Education Studies, Institute of Education, London
CSHE Center for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne, Australia
ICHEM International Centre for Higher Education Management, Bath, UK
Institute of Education University of London
ITLHE Innovations in Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, University of Plymouth, UK
The Learning Alliance for Higher Education, USA
National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, San Jose, CA, USA
The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education
OISE Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada
OxCHEPS Oxford Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies
SRHE, Society for research into Higher Education, Lancaster University, London, UK
SUSE Stanford University School of Education, USA
UNESCO Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge
See also www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk