Validation Panel Report (Summary Sheet)
Provider’s Name:Griffith College
Address: South Circular Road, Dublin 8
- Programmes submitted for approval:
Bachelor of Engineering in Industrial Engineering (NFQ 7, 60 ECTS)
Leading to the award of:
Bachelor of Engineering
Constituent Minor Awards:
Industrial Engineering Principles(NFQ 7, 10 ECTS)
Continuous Improvement Engineering(NFQ 7, 5 ECTS)
Project Management in Industrial Engineering (NFQ 7, 5 ECTS)
Logistics and Supply Chain Management(NFQ 7, 5 ECTS)
Environment and Sustainability in Industrial Engineering(NFQ 7, 5 ECTS)
Work Measurement and Methods Engineering(NFQ 6, 5 ECTS)
2. Date submitted to QQI: 14/08/2015 (final version)
Date of Evaluation:17/08/2015
Date of Report:21/08/2015
- Membership of the Programme Evaluation Panel:
Name / Role / Area of Expertise / QQI Peer Review Reference Listing
David Denieffe / Chairperson / Registrar, Carlow IT
Damian Cox
IT Blanchardstown / Discipline Expert / Engineering
Brian Clare
DIT / Discipline Expert / Mechanical and Design Engineering
Dr. Leo Casey
National College of Ireland / Education / Teaching, Learning and Assessment
Mark Cooney
Industry Programmes Director - Connect Research Institute, TCD / Industry Expert / Formerly Intel – Engineering – Industry / Academic Partnerships
Orla Butler / Rapporteur / Quality Assurance and Enhancement / Griffith College
Report of the Programme Evaluation Panel
Provider’s Name:Griffith College
Addresses: South Circular Road, Dublin 18; O’Connell Avenue, Limerick City;
Wellington Road, Cork
QA procedures agreed Yes
Griffith College Quality Assurance procedures were agreed with HETAC in 2005. They have been reviewed on a regular basis since. Major modifications happened in 2010 when QA G4 was updated to formalise procedures for programmatic review published by HETAC. In September 2011 QA B2 was updated to formalise agreement with HETAC on devolution of sub-processes for validation.
QA procedures reviewed Yes
As well as the ongoing annual QA review, the QA procedures in the College were reviewed as part of the Institutional Review carried out by HETAC in 2009. The panel reported that:
- The effectiveness of the Quality Assurance arrangements operated by Griffith Collegehas been assessed and has been found to be effective and broadly in accordance with the seven elements of Part One of the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance, and the HETAC Guidelines and Criteria for Quality Assurance Procedures in Higher Education, 2004.
1.Programmes submitted for approval:
Bachelor of Engineering in Industrial Engineering
Leading to the award of:
Bachelor of Engineering
Constituent Minor Awards:
Industrial Engineering Principles and Work System Design(NFQ 7, 10 ECTS)
Continuous Improvement Engineering and Lean Six Sigma(NFQ 7, 5 ECTS)
Project Management in Industrial Engineering (NFQ 7, 5 ECTS)
Logistics and Supply Chain Management(NFQ 7, 5 ECTS)
Environment and Sustainability in Industrial Engineering(NFQ 7, 5 ECTS)
Work Measurement and Methods Engineering(NFQ 6, 5 ECTS)
2.Date submitted to QQI: 14/08/2015 (final version)
Date of Evaluation:17/08/2015
Date of Report:21/08/2015
Membership of the Programme Evaluation Panel:
Name / Role / Area of Expertise / QQI Peer Review Reference ListingDavid Denieffe / Chairperson / Registrar, Carlow IT
Damian Cox / Discipline Expert / Engineering / IT Blanchardstown
Brian Clare / Discipline Expert / Mechanical and Design Engineering / DIT
Dr. Leo Casey / Education / Teaching, Learning and Assessment / National College of Ireland
Mark Cooney / Industry Expert / Formerly Intel – Engineering – Industry / Academic Partnerships / Industry Programmes Director - Connect Research Institute, TCD
Orla Butler / Rapporteur / Quality Assurance and Enhancement / Griffith College
Profile of provider
Griffith College (GC) is an independent provider of higher education and professional training. It has been delivering successful training programmes leading to the examinations of professional bodies since 1972; academic programmes leading to QQI (HETAC / NCEA) awards since the early 1990s; degree programmes since 1991 (originally under the auspices of the University of Ulster); and postgraduate programmes since 1996.
The College currently provides a wide range of QQI accredited programmes at levels 6 to 9 on the National Framework of Qualifications. The College has campuses in Dublin, Limerick and Cork. The College’s annual learner population is over 6,000.
Planning:
Programme development since agreement of QA procedures/the last review
The College’s QA procedures have been approved by QQI (formerly HETAC). The College’s Quality Assurance and Enhancement Procedures, Policies and Practices were reviewed by HETAC 2009 as part of the College’s successful institutional review.
The College continues to enhance its Quality Assurance Policies, Procedures, Practices and Guidelines (QAE Manual) through its active engagement with QQI and related national and international fora. Examples of engagements include: the College’s establishment of ICEP – the International Conference for Engaging Pedagogy; the College’s leading role in the development of IHEQN’s code of practice for International Students; and the College’s active participation in bodies such as the National Teaching Forum.
The College’s teaching and learning practices are further informed through its direct engagement with industry partners, for example in the collaborative development and delivery of the programmes with ISME – Ireland’s Small and Medium Enterprise Association; ICPAI – the Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Ireland; WLA – Windmill Lane Academy (Pulse College); Sports Council of Ireland; and many others.
The development of this particular programme is directly informed and enhanced through the active participation of the Institute of Industrial Engineers (IIE). This active engagement is formally reflected at executive board level; through the engagement of IIE members in programme delivery; and the support of IIE member companies in providing access to learners to industry projects for learning purposes.
Purpose of the award
The programme is designed to meet specific education, training and development needs within the industrial engineering sector, with its programme learning outcomes chosen to meet the engineering awards standards of Ireland’s National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ) at level 7.
Does the proposed programme address a clear market demand?Yes No __
Avoidance of duplication
Has the Programme Development Team identified the availability of similar programmes locally, regionally, nationally?
Yes No __
Lists of related programmes supporting access, transfer and progression are presented in Appendix 2 of the proposal document.
Stakeholder consultation
Was the level of stakeholder engagement in satisfactory?Yes No __
Sections 5.2.5 and 5.2.6 of the document outlinethe programme’s extensive engagement with stakeholders.
Support for the programme (industry/business/community)Yes No __
The proposed programme is actively supported by the Institute of Industrial Engineers (IIE); its members; and its member organisations.
Efficient and effective use of resources
Does the proposed programme represent both efficient and effective use of the provider’s resources?
Yes No __
Resource development over last 5 years (or in direct support of this programme)
Specific Comments:
Staff:
The College has grown in recent years and currently employs over 400 staff members. These include over 250 teaching staff. As the College’s programmes range from NFQ levels 6 to 9, the qualification and experience profile of staff members has also changed. In recent years, academic staff members have been supported in undertaking postgraduate programmes in teaching and learning offered internally and externally. An increasing number of academic staff have undertaken or completed doctoral programmes in their particular discipline.
Accommodation:
The College’s campus in Dublin provides a comprehensive range of resources for learners. The College’s move to a new campus in Cork offers similar potential. The College’s city location in Limerick provides adequate resources for full-time and part-time learners.
Information technology:
The College already has considerable IT resources and related capability. These include computer labs, Wi-Fi, Moodle, commercial online learning resources, etc.
The evaluation panel considers that the College’s existing resources; coupled with the limited additional resources outlined in the submission proposal; will meet the learners’ IT requirements for the programme.
Library:
The College’s library provides a comprehensive range of physical and online learning resources to learners.
The evaluation panel is satisfied that the College’s existing library resources, coupled with the specific textbook and resource provisions outlined in the proposal are appropriate for learners on the programme.
Administration:
The College has existing teams of programme directors, programme administrators with many years’ experience of managing the College’s programmes.
The evaluation panel suggested that the programme team members managing the B.Eng. in Industrial Engineering programme be given the mentored support of one of the College’s existing faculties, for example Computing Science.
Publicity/public information:
The College uses its website to communicate information about its programmes to the general public. Similar focused information is provided to prospective candidates by means of prospectuses.
Planned development over the coming 5 years?
The College intends to continue its development of the coming 5 years. Particular developments anticipated include its increased engagement with industry partners in the development and delivery of NFQ validated programmes.
The College is committed to actively supporting the further development of its research active staff, through funding doctoral qualifications and seeking funded research projects related to the College’s existing faculty disciplines.
Have the QQI award standards been explicitly referred to in the programme and does the programme meet those standards at the specified level?
Yes No __
The programmemeets NFQ Level 6 Engineering Awards Standards. It also necessarily meets NFQ Level 6 Generic Awards Standards.
Has the Provider complied with Protection for Enrolled Learner requirements?
The College complies with Protection for Enrolled Learners. Formal PEL arrangements will be forwarded by the College to QQI in advance of programme commencement.
Access
Is the expected minimum and maximumnumberof all learners entering the programme explicitly stated?
Yes No __
These are outlined in Section 4.7 of the proposal document.
Have any/all prerequisite knowledge, skills or competence or any other specific entry requirement been articulated?
Yes No __
Holders of Higher Certificate awards in engineering disciplines, and graduates of the IIE Diploma in Industrial Engineering award working in industry meet the prerequisite knowledge, skills and competencies required for entry.
A specific requirement for learners to meet the NFQ Level 6 Engineering Awards Standards is to be explicitly stated.
Quality Assurance
Application of agreed quality assurance procedures for development of programmes
Were the agreed quality assurance procedures for programme development followed?
Yes No __
The proposal document was developed in accordance with the College’s QAE procedures (Section QA B2)
Has the programme team demonstrated how programme delivery will be monitored in accordance with agreed QA procedures ?
Yes No __
The methods are further outlined in the College’s QAPolicies, Procedures, Practices and Guidelines and in related support documents provided to learners on the programme.
Are programme management arrangements adequate and coherent?
Yes No __
The College’s programme management arrangements are presented in the College’s Quality Assurance and Enhancement Policies, Procedures, Practices and Guidelines. These are complemented by a variety of support documents for learners which include: Programme Handbooks; Assessment Guidelines; Project Handbooks, etc.
Programme structure and content
Is the programme structure well designed, coherent and fit for its stated purpose?
Yes No __
Programme learning outcomes
Do the programme learning outcomes comply with national standards for the level of award proposed?
Yes No __
The programme learning outcomes meet the Engineering Awards Standards specified in respect of Level 6 programmes on the National Framework of Qualifications.
Are module descriptions adequate and relevant?
Yes No __
A few minor re-presentations are suggested in the recommendations below.
Are modules relevant and current?
Yes No __
Does the combination of modules chosen have the coherence to support the proposed award?
Yes No __
Learning Modes
Can the teaching and learning strategies proposed support achievement of the required learning outcomes?
Yes No __
The programme’s varied combination of teaching and learning strategies is capable of supporting the required learning outcomes.
Are the delivery mechanisms proposed adequate to the needs of the programme and the proposed learner cohorts?
Yes No __
The delivery mechanism proposed for the full-time delivery is appropriate. Learners from industry attending the block-release in-person programme are supported with online blended supports to provide an equivalent learning experience. All candidates are required to complete equivalent projects and identical examinations.
Assessment strategies
Are assessment processes and methods adequately described? Yes No __
These are outlined in Section 5.4.6. Appendices 7 and 8 provide indicative examples of assessments and examinations in respect of the programme’s constituent modules.
Are these strategies appropriate to this type of award, in terms of type, frequency and volume?
Yes No __
Is assessment explicitly linked with intended learning outcomes?
Yes No __
The linking of assessment to intended learning outcomes is presented in respect of the programme’s constituent modules. The mapping of programme learning outcomes to module learning outcomes is presented in Appendix 9.
Does the assessment strategy underpin the achievement of the relevant standard of knowledge, skill and competence?
Yes No __
Assessments have been chosen to meet programme and module learning outcomes. The mapping of assessments to learning outcomes is shown in the modules descriptors and in related appendices. (Appendices 3, 5, 7 to 10)
Duration
What is the intended duration of the Programme?
The programme is intended for delivery on a full-time basis over two semesters. It is proposed that candidates in industry will also be facilitated through the in-person delivery of modules on a block-release basis over an extended time period. Learners will be supported with online resources providing a blended learning experience.
What is the lifespan of the programme (e.g. single cohort intake to satisfy limited local demand; multiple intakes over the following 5 years etc.?)
It is anticipated that the programme will be delivered to a number of learner cohorts over a five year period. Springboard funding has been provided in respect of a full-time cohort for 2015/6. Industry research by the IIE suggests separate demand from those in industry.
The evaluation panel is recommending approval for multiple intakes over the following five years from September 2015.
Does the Panel believe this to be realistic?
Yes No __
Are there flexible modes of participation?
Yes No __
It is proposed to deliver the programme in a full-time mode.
It is also proposed to deliver the programme in a flexible mode to facilitate mature learners in industry. This second mode will include in-person delivery on a block-release basis over an extended period of time. It will also support learners with complementary online resources and opportunities for synchronous and asynchronous learning sessions with lecturers and peer learners to reduce the requirement for their in-person attendance.
Credits
Is credit allocation in accordance with national and international guidelines?
Yes No __
Considering the level, outcomes and volume of each module, is the number of credits attached to each appropriate?
Yes No __
The evaluation panel recommended that one of the 10 ECTS modules be re-presented as two separate 5 ECTS modules.
Considering the stated objective of the programme is the number of credits attached to the award appropriate?
Yes No __
NFQ Level
Is the proposed level of the programme in accordance with institutional policy/national norms?
Yes No __
Programme titles and award
Is the title consistent with national policy, is it informative and is it fit for purpose?
Yes No __
Transfer and Progression
Has the Programme Development Team identified realistic transfer and progression opportunities/possibilities that learners may avail of following achievement of this award?
Yes No __
Specific transfer and progression opportunities / possibilities are presented in Appendix 2.
Module Titles, Content and Assessment Strategy
Module Title 1: Industrial Engineering Principles
Is the title informative and is it fit for purpose? / Yes No __Are the specific learning outcomes a) properly stated, b) sufficient and c) achievable? / Yes No __
Is the content sufficiently informative and is it fit for purpose? / Yes No __
Does the Assessment Strategy align sufficiently with the intended learning outcomes? / Yes No __
Is the required reading and supplementary reading appropriate, current and realistic? / Yes No __
Module Title 2: Continuous Improvement Engineering
Is the title informative and is it fit for purpose? / Yes No __Are the specific learning outcomes a) properly stated, b) sufficient and c) achievable? / Yes No __
Is the content sufficient informative and is it fit for purpose? / Yes No __
Does the Assessment Strategy align sufficiently with the intended learning outcomes? / Yes No __
Is the required reading and supplementary reading appropriate, current and realistic? / Yes No __
The evaluation panel recommended that this module be presented as two separate modules of 5 ECTS credits – with the first highlighting the treatment of statistics.
Module Title 3: Industrial Engineering Project Management
Is the title informative and is it fit for purpose? / Yes No __Are the specific learning outcomes a) properly stated, b) sufficient and c) achievable? / Yes No __
Is the content sufficient informative and is it fit for purpose? / Yes No __
Does the Assessment Strategy align sufficiently with the intended learning outcomes? / Yes No __
Is the required reading and supplementary reading appropriate, current and realistic? / Yes No __
Module Title 4: Professional Practice
Is the title informative and is it fit for purpose? / Yes No __Are the specific learning outcomes a) properly stated, b) sufficient and c) achievable? / Yes No __
Is the content sufficient informative and is it fit for purpose? / Yes No __
Does the Assessment Strategy align sufficiently with the intended learning outcomes? / Yes No __
Is the required reading and supplementary reading appropriate, current and realistic? / Yes No __
Module Title 5: Industrial Engineering Finances