Review by the National Qualifications Authority of Ireland (NQAI) of the
effectiveness of the quality assurance procedures of the Dublin Institute
of Technology (DIT)
Terms of Reference (20 September 2010)
1.
Background
The Dublin Institute of Technology was established as an autonomous institution
under the DIT Act in 1992. In 1998, it was granted degree awarding powers by the
Irish state, and makes major awards at Higher Certificate, Ordinary Bachelor
Degree, Honours Bachelor Degree, Masters and PhD levels (Levels 6 to 10 in the
National Framework of Qualifications), as well as a range of minor, special purpose
and supplemental awards. The Institute also has a major involvement in and
commitment to apprenticeship education and training. As a statutory awarding
body and provider of higher education and training, and in line with national and
international practice, the primary responsibility for the quality assurance of the
educational provision and awards made by DIT resides with the Institute itself.
Side by side with the internal quality assurance procedures which the Institute
operates, and again in line with national and international practice, DIT is also
subject to external quality assurance, as set out in the Qualifications (Education and
Training) Act, 1999. Section 39 (3) of the act provides that the NQAI shall
consider the findings arising out of the application of the DIT's quality assurance
procedures, as agreed with the Authority under section 39(1) of the Act, and may
make recommendations to the Institute which the Institute shall implement. Under
section 39 (4), the Institute is required to review the effectiveness of the Institute’s
quality assurance procedures ‘not more than once in every three years and not less
than once in every seven years’. Section 39 (5) also provides that the Authority
shall publish the results of the review of effectiveness.
The first review of effectiveness of the DIT's quality assurance procedures was
completed in 2006. The review was carried out by the European University
Association on behalf of the NQAI, under the EUA's Institutional Evaluation
Programme. The published outcomes of the review are available at:
http://www.nqai.ie/award_dit_rev.html. This review process is the second review
of effectiveness of the DIT's quality procedures, and is being instituted in fulfilment
of the statutory obligations of the DIT and NQAI under section 39 (4).
It is of note that plans are advancing for the amalgamation of the NQAI with the
Higher Education and Training Awards Council (HETAC), the Further Education
and Training Awards Council (FETAC) and the Irish Universities Quality Board
(IUQB). The new qualifications and quality assurance body will assume the
1
NQAI's statutory external quality assurance role in relation to the DIT. It is
possible that the new body may be established before this review process is
completed, and that the review outcomes may be considered and published by the
new body. In this connection, the NQAI will build into the review process a formal
consultation, which will involve all of the quality assurance agencies involved in
the amalgamation, namely, HETAC, FETAC and the Irish Universities Quality
Board (IUQB).
2.
Review Objectives
The objectives of the review will be to evaluate:
3.

the effectiveness of the procedures operated by DIT for the quality
assurance of its education and training programmes, and the awards
to which they lead in the National Framework of Qualifications, both
nationally and internationally

the extent to which DIT, in operating these procedures meets the
requisite standards, as set out in Part 1 of the Standards and
Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education
Area
Basis of Review Criteria and Procedures
To meet the review objectives, the DIT will be evaluated and assessed against
criteria and procedures that are informed by institutional review practice within the
Irish higher education system, and by the standards and guidelines for quality
assurance agreed by the Ministers of the Bologna signatory states. Specifically, the
criteria and procedures are informed by the following documents:

Higher Education and Training Awards Council (HETAC): Policy on
Institutional Review of Providers of Higher Education and Training (2007);
Supplemental Guidelines for Institutional Review (2008); Supplementary
Guidelines for the Review of Effectiveness of Quality Assurance Procedures
(2008)1

Irish Universities Quality Board (IUQB): Institutional Review of
Universities (IRIU) Handbook (2009); Good Practice in the Organisation of
PhD Programmes in Irish Higher Education (2009) 2
1
http://www.hetac.ie/publications.cfm?sID=44
2
http://www.iuqb.ie/info/iriu.aspx; http://www.iuqb.ie/info/good_practice_guides.aspx
2
4.

Irish Higher Education Quality Network: Principles of Good Practice in
Quality Assurance/Quality Improvement for Higher Education and Training
(2005); Principles for Reviewing the Effectiveness of Quality Assurance
Procedures in Irish Higher Education and Training (2007); Provision of
Education to International Students: Code of Practice and Guidelines for
Irish Higher Education Institutions (2009) 3

European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA):
Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher
Education Area (3rd edn., 2009) 4

The UNESCO/OECD Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border
Higher Education5
Review Criteria
The following are the criteria and procedures for the review of effectiveness of the quality
assurance procedures of the DIT. These criteria will apply, where appropriate, to the
Institute’s educational provision both in Ireland and overseas.
4.1
Follow-up to the 2006 review of effectiveness of DIT's quality assurance
procedures
The criterion is intended to assist the examination of DIT's internal quality culture.
Specifically, the review will evaluate the extent to which the DIT has implemented
the 33 strategically linked recommendations made by the EUA review team in
2006. Particular attention will be given to the five recommendations made by the
EUA team on quality assurance and enhancement, and to the quality issues which
the NQAI commented upon in its consideration of the review outcomes, namely:


the need to implement more proactively and to review the annual
programme reporting processes in order to encourage full participation by
both students and staff, and in order to ensure greater transparency in the
student feedback process
the need to accelerate the development of the emerging systems for school,
faculty and research review.
3
http://www.iheqn.ie/publications/default.asp?NCID=154
4
http://www.enqa.eu/files/ESG_3edition%20(2).pdf
5
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/27/51/35779480.pdf
3
4.2
Education and training programmes offered by the DIT
The criteria set out here are intended to assist in the examination of DIT's processes
for the quality assurance of the programmes of education and training, including
research programmes, which it provides. In line with practice in the Irish higher
education sector generally, and Ireland’s commitment to the Bologna Process, the
criteria used here are the standards from Part 1 of the European standards and
guidelines for internal quality assurance within higher education institutions. These
criteria should be considered in conjunction with the accompanying guidelines as
set out in Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher
Education Area (3rd edn. 2009), pp. 16-19.6 The guidelines provide additional
information about good practice and in some cases explain in more detail the
meaning and importance of the standards.
 Policy and procedures for quality assurance
Institutions should have a policy and associated procedures for the assurance of
the quality and standards of their programmes and awards. They should also
commit themselves explicitly to the development of a culture which recognises
the importance of quality, and quality assurance, in their work. To achieve this,
institutions should develop and implement a strategy for the continuous
enhancement of quality. The strategy, policy and procedures should have a
formal status and be publicly available. They should also include a role for
students and other stakeholders.
 Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards
Institutions should have formal mechanisms for the approval, periodic review
and monitoring of their programmes and awards. In relation to this criterion, an
assessment will also be undertaken with regard to how these formal
mechanisms incorporate the implementation of the National Framework of
Qualifications and the relevant parts of the NQAI's policies and procedures on
access, transfer and progression.7 Areas to be examined here will include the
processes used by the Institute to ensure the accurate levelling of awards, the
extent and the manner in which NFQ award-types (major, minor, special
purpose and supplemental) are utilised, and the manner in which credit
arrangements and transfer and progression routes are embedded in the
programme development processes.
 Assessment of students
6
http://www.enqa.eu/files/ESG_3edition%20(2).pdf
7
http://www.nqai.ie/publication_oct2003a.html
4
Students should be assessed using published criteria, regulations and
procedures which are applied consistently.
 Quality assurance of teaching staff
Institutions should have ways of satisfying themselves that staff involved with
the teaching of students are qualified and competent to do so. They should be
available to those undertaking external reviews, and commented upon in
reports.
 Learning resources and student support
Institutions should ensure that the resources available for the support of student
learning are adequate and appropriate for each programme offered.
 Information systems
Institutions should ensure that they collect, analyse and use relevant
information for the effective management of their programmes of study and
other activities. In this connection, consideration should also be given to the
Institute's processes for monitoring and analysing grade distribution and profile
patterns across its education and training programmes.
 Public information
Institutions should regularly publish up-to-date, impartial and objective
information, both quantitative and qualitative, about the programmes and
awards they are offering including the award-type to which the programme
leads, the level at which it is included in the NFQ and the credit volume
associated with the programme. In this connection, consideration should also
be given to the information provision requirements on providers as set out in
the NQAI’s policies and procedures on access, transfer and progression.
5.
The Review Process
In line with best national and international practice, the review process will consist
of the following elements:

an institutional self-assessment report to be prepared by the DIT addressing
the agreed criteria and terms of reference

an expert review panel will be appointed comprising national and
international representation to conduct the review process

a review of the DIT self-assessment report by the expert panel and
consideration by the panel of any other information they might consider
relevant
5

visit by expert panel appointed by the NQAI

preparation of a review report by expert panel for submission to the NQAI,
which will include findings and a recommendations in relation to the
effectiveness of the DIT's quality procedures, and the extent of its
compliance to Part 1 of the European Standards and Guidelines

preparation of an institutional response, including a quality improvement
plan, by the DIT

consideration of review report and institutional response by the NQAI

publication by NQAI of the review outcomes.
It is of note, and in consideration of the impending amalgamation of the
qualifications and quality assurance agencies, that at all appropriate stages
of the effectiveness review the NQAI may consult and seek advice from an
advisory group comprising representatives of FETAC, HETAC, and the
IUQB. The executive of the NQAI will provide secretarial support to the
expert panel, including drafting of the expert panel’s report.
6. Indicative Timetable for Review
DIT commences self-evaluation report against agreed
criteria
September 2010
Appointment of expert review panel by NQAI
Autumn 2010
Preparation of site visit schedule and indicative timetable
by NQAI
Autumn 2010
Briefing for expert review panel
Spring 2011
DIT self-evaluation report completed and submitted to
NQAI for circulation to expert review panel
February 2011
Expert review panel site visit
March 2011
Expert review panel report completed
April 2011
DIT submits response to expert review panel report to
NQAI/new qualifications and quality assurance body
May 2011
NQAI/new qualifications and quality assurance body
considers and publishes review outcomes
Summer 2011
6
7