Dublin Institute of Technology

Response to the Report of the External Panel following the Review by the National Qualifications Authority of Ireland of the effectiveness of the quality assurance procedures of the Dublin Institute of Technology

for submission to the National Qualifications Authority of Ireland

June 2011

Table of Contents

Page No

1Introduction1

2Commendations 2

3Response to Recommendations 6

4Conclusion12

5Acknowledgements 12

1Introduction

Internal quality assurance procedures in Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT) are subject to external quality assurance as set out in Section 39 of the Qualification (Education and Training) Act 1999. The Institute is required to review the effectiveness of its quality assurance procedures not more than once in every three years and no less than once in every seven years.

In 2006 NQAI requested the European University Association to carry out an institutional review of DIT on its behalf.This year, 2011, NQAI arranged for an international Expert Panel to carry out a review of DIT Quality Assurance procedures. A significant element of the 2011 review was to consider how DIT has responded to the recommendations made in 2006 but also to reflect on how the Institute has developed in the intervening period.

In the five years since the earlier Review, higher education in Ireland has undergone many changes and there have been many significant developments in DIT. For example, the Institute has moved to modularise its curriculum; intensified its programme of enhancing qualifications in learning and teaching for all academic staff; developed extensive opportunities for students to engage with community and industry partners; developed a coordinated Campus Life service dedicated to enriching the student experience; increased research activity across all disciplines; and established an online database of publications and research outputs by staff and students, in support of a policy of open access research. These are just some of the many initiatives that are contributing to a deepening of the quality of learning outcomes across DIT. The ongoing challenge for the Institute is to ensure that each of these developments becomes part of the broader discussion of quality issues, as highlighted in the recommendations of the External Review Panel.

In preparation for the Review, a broadly representative DIT Steering Group developed a Self-Evaluation document which was sent to NQAI on 24 February 2011. The site visit by the External Panel took place between 29 March and 01 April. The main aspects to be addressed by were:-

  • Policy and procedures for quality assurance
  • Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards
  • Assessment of students
  • Quality assurance of teaching staff
  • Learning resources and student support
  • Information systems
  • Public information

The Report of the External Review Panel was received by DIT on the 16th May 2011. This document provides responses to recommendations made by the External Review Panel.

2Commendations

DIT welcomes Review Panel’s commendations, given under the Review section headings below.

2.1Policy and procedures for quality assurance

2.1.1The Panel commended DIT on the following:-

  • The fact that a culture of quality is deeply embedded within the DIT. There is a very consistent understanding and acceptance across all levels and categories of staff of quality assurance procedures. These policies and procedures are clear and comprehensive.
  • The comprehensive set of policies and procedures that are in place for quality enhancement. The Panel is impressed with the collaborative and consultative developmental process that has been adopted to updating the Handbook for Quality Enhancement and the commitment to making the Handbook a more user-friendly practical academic and management tool.
  • The moves to School and College reviews. The Panel considers this to be central to the coherence and the overall direction of the Institute’s quality assurance processes. The School reviews are of strategic importance. The Panel notes that the process of programme reviews has ended. Instead, these take place within the context of School reviews. This is commended. However, the success of this approach depends on a well-functioning Q5 (annual programme monitoring) process in all Schools and for all programmes (see Section 1.2). Colleges need to maintain oversight of this.
  • The development of College action plans. These are a very positive development; they provide transparency and clearly assign responsibility for actions.

2.1.2 The Panel also endorsed the proposed actions set out in DIT’s Self-Evaluation report:-

  • Codify and disseminate existing best practice in non-academic quality assurance processes (e.g. timetabling, registrations, examinations) as they relate to academic quality assurance
  • Senior Leadership Team has agreed that a detailed and benchmarked survey of staff will be conducted to clarify specific actions that may be required to improve staff recruitment and selection of policies and their communication
  • Review the strategy for continuous enhancement of quality in light of the NQAI Review 2011, the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030, Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy 2010 and the possibility of designation as a Technological University
  • Ensure genuine value is placed on formal evidence that actions/changes ensue from staff feedback in the QE system
  • Address concerns regarding semesterisation and calendar implications
  • Review all student handbooks

2.2Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards

2.2.1The Panel commended DIT on the following:-

  • The widespread engagement of students in quality assurance processes and the provision of training for student representatives. The Panel suggests that the DIT builds on this by informing incoming student representatives of the availability of training, and by supplementing training with relevant induction on active engagement with committees and quality assurance structures.
  • The breadth of community and stakeholder engagement and of access programmes. The Panel finds that the Institute’s policies and procedures for access, transfer and progression are clear and robust.
  • The engagement of DIT students in the Institute’s outreach activities which benefit both the community and the students themselves via learning and credit achievement.
  • The DIT’s community links programme which is a wonderful programme that makes a significant difference to the lives of its participants.

2.2.2The Panel also endorsed the proposed actions set out in DIT’s Self-Evaluation report:-

  • Further develop monitoring procedures for partnerships with other HEIs and with professional accreditation and recognition bodies and to maintain a single repository for all partnership agreements.
  • Undertake a comprehensive review of feedback processes and procedures from the perspective of staff, students and external examiners
  • Undertake a comprehensive review of the QE handbook to achieve the right balance between programme validations and reviews on the one hand and reviews of Colleges, Schools on the other.
  • Continue the development of Structured PhD programmes.
  • Complete all School and College Reviews

2.3Assessment of students

2.3.1The Panel commended DIT on the following:-

  • The Panel is extremely impressed with both the transfer examination process for research students and the confirmation exam for students on PhD programmes, and in particular, the incorporation of external examiners into these processes.
  • The broad implementation of modularisation, which appears to be both successful and well-received by staff and students.
  • The broad implementation of a learning outcomes approach.
  • The breadth and quality of DIT‟s RPL policies and supports.
  • The DIT‟s continuing efforts to provide timely feedback on assessment to students (and to ensure consistency across programmes).

2.3.2The Panel also endorsed the proposed actions set out in DIT’s Self-Evaluation report:-

  • Further develop diversified methods of assessment, taking account of concerns around plagiarism, lack of resources, non-exam assessment, meaningful timely feedback, bottlenecks in submission dates and individual staff workloads
  • Consider Institute-wide implementation of assessment methods that support increased independent learning
  • Consider additional training and support required to ensure consistent application of General Assessment Regulations
  • Bring to an early resolution the review of the academic calendar with a view (in particular) to including appropriate interventions to avoid repeat assessments and/or the carry forward of failures into subsequent years
  • Improve Institute’s implementation of the strategy to provide appropriate, timely, and effective feedback for students in the area of assessment
  • Complete the review of the Regulations for Postgraduate Study by Research.

2.4Quality assurance of teaching staff

2.4.1The Panel commended DIT on the following:-

  • The Panel recognises the strong institutional commitment to teaching and learning, as shown in its recruitment strategy, support for pedagogy and research, the work of the Learning, Teaching and Technology Centre, student feedback mechanisms and institutional recognition/awards for teaching and learning.
  • The Learning, Teaching and Technology Centre is highly respected and has an extremely positive impact on the teaching and administrative environment. It is also highly responsive to the outcomes of quality assurance processes and encourages innovative practice.
  • The mandatory requirement that all new members of teaching staff acquire the Postgraduate Diploma in Third-level Learning and Teaching.

2.4.2The Panel also endorsed the proposed actions set out in DIT’s Self-Evaluation report:-

  • Review quality assurance measures inherent to policies and procedures for staff selection and progression
  • Ensure that PMDS supports training and academic development that continuously improves the quality of teaching and learning
  • Target academic support for new lecturers and improve overall participation in LTTC activities
  • Create additional measures to encourage excellence in teaching

2.5Learning resources and student support

2.5.1The Panel commended DIT on the following:-

  • It recognises the challenges posed to the DIT by its diverse student body and commends its commitment to students and on improving student supports, particularly to first-years and mature students.
  • The work of the Counselling Services, and the Institute’s provision of medical services to students.
  • The appointment of a Director for Student Services, and the integration of key functions within the Directorate.
  • The moves to create one-stop-shops for student services (and planning for this in relation to Grangegorman).
  • The manner in which quality enhancement and the student experience has been embedded in the design, planning and approach to the new campus at Grangegorman.
  • The on-going work on the first year experience. In particular, it commends initiatives, such as “Get Smart” and encourages the DIT to consider the role-out of similar initiatives across all Schools.
  • The on-going work of some staff to screen student learning styles and amend lecturing styles accordingly. The Panel suggests that the Teaching and Learning Technology Centre consider the possibility of providing tools and supports to students and staff in this regard.

2.5.2The Panel also endorsed the proposed actions set out in DIT’s Self-Evaluation report:-

  • Continue to take measures necessary to ensure learning spaces are fit for purpose, used efficiently and maintenance is improved where necessary.
  • Continue detailed planning for the new campus at Grangegorman
  • Leverage on-line resources to enable flexible provision of programmes, services, information and communication between staff and students
  • Continue implementation of the widening participation strategy
  • Improve student attendances where necessary

2.6Information systems

2.6.1The Panel commended DIT on the following:-

  • The continued management and operation of IS systems in a very challenging environment.
  • The on-going development of an IS strategy and its focus on the student lifecycle.
  • The regular operation of surveys of students, staff and graduate employment.

2.6.2The Panel also endorsed the proposed actions set out in DIT’s Self-Evaluation report:-

  • Develop an integrated knowledge management strategy focussed on providing information needed to inform decision making.
  • Integrate all information systems to enable relevant and on demand reports to be generated by end users.
  • Student information system to be reconfigured to generate award classifications as an automatic report.
  • Determine and provide additional functionality required to support leveraging modularisation.
  • Develop and implement data definitions, policies, procedures and training that ensure consistent accurate entry, management and integrity of data, both internally and from external bodies such as the CAO.
  • Achieve ISO/IEC 20000 standard certification for Information Services

2.7Public information

2.7.1The Panel commended DIT on the following:-

  • The availability of a number of School review reports on the DIT website or on the intranet. The Panel encourages this practice as a particularly useful means of sharing good practice across Schools and Colleges, aiding transparency and enhancing quality.

2.7.2The Panel also endorsed the proposed actions set out in DIT’s Self-Evaluation report:-

  • Continue to develop CourseWise as the single repository for programme information, module descriptors and exam papers
  • Archive superseded programme and module information
  • Continue to review the website to ensure that site navigation and presentation are designed from the users’ perspective, and provide enhanced information including links to quantitative reports on admission, transfer and progression of students.
  • Develop and implement a single integrated research information system

3Responses to Recommendations

The Review Panel’s recommendations and DIT responses are provided under the Review section headings below. The recommendations are presented (in blue) and the corresponding Institute response follows directly (in black).

3.1Policy and procedures for quality assurance

3.1.1 DIT, in its next stage of development, needs to contemplate more deeply the concept of quality assurance and enhancement. In this regard, it should consider how it can make more coherent what is currently a process-driven approach to quality assurance; how it can ensure that ownership of quality processes is central, as well as dispersed; and how, as an institution, it can be more dynamic in its use of quality assurance to ensure that its nature is more analytical and that it focuses on key issues.

A paper in respect of this recommendation is to be developed for Academic Council consideration by December 2011. As any changes need to go beyond mere QA procedures there needs to be well thought out consultation across the academic community. It is envisaged that the current system will largely be retained but driven by a clear quality enhancement strategy. It is intended that this strategy will be articulated better as a cornerstone of the Institute’s strategic plan so as to integrate more effectively within the Institute’s strategic planning framework

3.1.2In terms of strategic oversight of quality assurance, the Academic Council and its sub-committees, particularly the Academic Quality Assurance sub-committee, should focus on activity at the College level. They should review the effective operation of quality assurance processes at the College level. Individual Colleges, in turn, while operating inside an institutional system of processes and reporting, should be delegated more responsibility for setting priorities for Schools and for programmes. Mechanisms to share good practice should be actively promoted at School and College levels, for example, making available all the elements of School reviews (self-evaluation reports, panel reports and follow-up) to all Schools.

Academic Affairs will implement this recommendation. The implications of such changes need careful consideration through a consultative process with Colleges and Schools. Early in the next academic year, Academic Affairs will meet with each College Board to assess how to best implement this recommendation and seek Academic Council approval accordingly.

3.1.3Colleges should act to ensure agreed levels of consistency in the level of quality, specificity and transparency required of follow-up to College action plans, including feedback loops to School Boards and Programme Committees. The Panel recommends that all Colleges take ownership of the action plans; they should manage the action plans on a rolling basis (as some currently do) so that they are ‘living documents’. The Panel recommends better use of IT to operate these plans so as to increase the potential for sharing good practice, automation and to help identify key priorities for quality assurance and quality enhancement.

In the current environment schools/colleges must prioritise actions that ensure that the quality of programmes is sustained whilst operating within increasingly difficult financial constraints. Academic Affairs will support Colleges in producing prioritised action plans. These plans will be subject to relevant formal approval and periodic monitoring.

3.1.4The Panel strongly urges DIT to fill the remaining two College posts of Head of Learning Development on a full-time basis as a matter of priority and to provide the Heads with the necessary administrative support.

DIT remains committed to having a role Head of Learning Development (HoLD) in each College. Where available resources permit, this will form a separate post.

3.1.5DIT should consider how to improve the tracking and monitoring of decisions, documents and records concerning the multiple quality assurance processes, including the introduction of workflow management systems and a records management system.

DIT will develop and implement formal processes that address this recommendation.

3.2Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards

3.2.1Schools and Colleges must ensure that the Q5 process is implemented fully, consistently and to a high standard across DIT. This is essential to maintaining the integrity of the quality assurance system.

Colleges will to continue to ensure their programme Q5s are delivered to the highest standard. There is a need to increase visibility at Institute level to assess the overall Institute’s standards in producing and following up on Q5s. Action will be undertaken (linked to recommendation 3.1.5) regarding a document and reporting system. Also see response to 3.2.2 below.

3.2.2In view of the problems outlined in connection with the Q6 and Q5 processes, and knowing that a College Board / quality enhancement sub-committee oversees between 50 and 100 programme Q5’s annually, it seems this oversight could become somewhat superficial. The Panel recommends that DIT considers making the Schools - rather than Colleges – the central node in its quality assurance system and to underpin this with enhanced accountability and transparency. This is the level which is closest to the academic and pedagogical concerns, and deals with much fewer programmes than the College. Colleges, supported by a Head of Learning Development, should oversee effective implementation, set broad priorities, identify key themes and support mainstreaming of best practice across the Schools. Schools should report annually on the operation of the Q5 process to the Colleges and the Academic Council should consider the findings of these reports annually.