Internal Quality Assurance at University College Cork

1. Internal Quality Assurance at University College Cork Dr. Norma Ryan University College Cork – National University of Ireland Cork

2. Dr. Norma Ryan • Biochemist • Director, Quality Promotion Unit, UCC • Irish Bologna Expert • Past-Chair, Irish Higher Education Network • Member, Governing Authority, UCC • Member, Senate of National University of Ireland • Member, Irish Universities Association Quality Committee

3. UCC • A University located in the South of Ireland, with 18,000+ students, and one of the highest annual research income of all the Irish Universities • Has a particular focus on delivering Fourth Level Ireland (graduate studies) and lifelong learning

4. Mission • To create, preserve, and communicate knowledge and to enhance cultural, social and economic life locally, regionally and globally. VISION • To be a research-led university of international standing with impact in Munster, Ireland, Europe and the world

5. Colleges of UCC • Arts, Celtic Studies & Social Sciences • Business & Law • Medicine & Health • Science, Engineering & Food Science

6. Universities Act 1997 • Legislation that established all Irish Universities as independent autonomous institutions • Requires all Irish Universities to put in place quality assurance procedures

7. Section 35: Quality Assurance • To promote the improvement of the quality of education of students and all related activities • Responsibility for process rests with the University

8. National Agenda • In 2003 Irish Universities Association published: A Framework for Quality in Irish Universities • In 2007 second edition published • Principles outlined in Framework compatible with the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Higher Education

9. Irish Universities Quality Board • Independent body established by Irish Universities in 2003 • Purpose: to assist the Universities in the quality agenda and to conduct reviews of the effectiveness of the Quality Improvement /Quality Assurance reviews on behalf of the Universities.

10. QI/QA • QI: Quality Improvement • QA: Quality Assurance

11. What is Quality? • ‘Fitness for Purpose’ • ‘Fitness of Purpose’ • ‘Making the best use of resources available’ • ‘added value’

12. Quality Assurance • Ensuring we do what we say we are doing • Ensuring what we do is a ‘quality’ job

13. Examples of QA • Peer review of research • External Examiner system • Accreditation of degrees • Employability of graduates

14. QI/QA Procedures • Focussed on quality improvement with rigour of quality assurance as a starting position • Well-established and documented • Reviewed internally and amended as deemed appropriate, e.g. • Implementation of detailed procedures for development and approval of Quality Improvement Plans following quality reviews. • Developed and amended using a collegial approach

15. Quality Reviews • Focus on ownership of review by unit under review • Focus on all activities of unit • All types of unit (academic, administrative, support service) reviewed under same principles and guidelines

16. Strategy in UCC • Quality Promotion Committee of Governing Body • Reviews scheduled over 6 year period by Quality Promotion Committee

17. Quality Promotion Committee • Committee of Governing Body with executive authority • Chaired by President of UCC • Has representatives of • Academic Staff • Administrative and Support Staff • Governing Body external members • Students

18. Quality Promotion Unit • Facilitates the implementation of Quality Improvement/Quality Assurance (QI/QA) procedures in UCC • Assists in the Follow-Up procedures following a QI/QA review of a unit

19. Methodology • Self-Assessment • Peer Review • Institutional/National/International • Follow-Up • On-going Quality Improvement

20. Reviews must involve • Students • Staff of institution • Employers • Past graduates/Alumni • Other stakeholders

21. Questionnaires • Used to obtain views of staff, students and others • Available on web sites • Some are linked specifically to guidelines for preparation of Self-Assessment Report

22. Evaluation Process 1 • Appointment of unit co-ordinating committee • Guidelines on web site • Conduct of surveys of opinions of stakeholders • Questionnaires • Focus meetings • ???? • Assistance can be provided by QPU upon request

23. Evaluation Process 2 • Nomination of members of Peer Review Group • External advisor to nominate a panel of external experts. • Unit to nominate a panel of external stakeholders • QPC to appoint internal members • Unit to be offered an opportunity to identify any conflict of interest prior to letters of invitation

24. Evaluation Process 3 • Appointment of internal and external peer reviewers by Quality Promotion Committee • Production of Self-Assessment Report • Agreement of timetable for conduct of visit

25. Evaluation Process 5 • Peer Review Visit & Report • Follow-up action • On-going quality improvement

26. Self-Assessment Report • Includes assessment by students • All staff of department must be involved • Includes views of past graduates • Incorporates views from • accrediting bodies • External Examiners • internal stakeholders • external stakeholders

27. Self-Assessment Report • Includes analysis of • Teaching • Learning • Research • Scholarly activity • Includes commentary on actions taken for improvement since last Quality Review and Research Quality Review

28. Self Assessment • Às appropriate, must include assessment of • Staff profile • Teaching • Research • Services provided • standards • Support services, including facilities • Contribution to society

29. Structure of SAR • Core: ‘Overall Analysis & Recommendations’ • Appendices: contain factual details

30. Overall Analysis & Recommendations • Succinct and comprehensive • Details Mission of Department • Details Aims & Objectives • Summary of Unit activities • Relates all activities to Mission and Strategic Plan of UCC

31. Overall Analysis & Recommendations (contd) • Benchmarking • Details of how you plan to show you have achieved your Aims & Objectives • How is quality measured?

32. Overall Analysis & Recommendations (contd.) How is success measured? Emphasis on strategies for improvement of quality

33. Summary of Department • 1 page executive summary on each of following: • Department Structure and Organisation • Teaching • Research • Consultancy Activities • Public Profile

34. SWOT Analysis • S - Strengths • W - Weaknesses • O - Opportunities • T - Threats • All staff involved • Leads to recommendations for improvement • Support for facilitator available from QPU upon request

35. Evaluation of Teaching • Evaluation by students • Questionnaires • Focus groups • Views of external stakeholders • Teaching portfolios • Peer review

36. Evaluation of Research • Peer reviewed publications • Books/chapters in books • Supervision of graduate students • Research grant income • Other scholarly activity

37. Appendices - Academic Units • Unit Details • Profiles of all staff - academic, administrative and support • Unit Planning and Organisation • Teaching and Learning • strategy • Reports of extern examiners • Reports from accrediting bodies. E.g. Medical Council

38. Appendices (contd.) • Research & Scholarly Activity • Metrics from Research Quality Review • Strategy • Staff Development Objectives • External Relations • Support Services • Methodology used in preparing Report • Additional documentation that Unit may wish to submit

39. Appendices - Admin & Central Service Units • Unit Details • Profiles of all staff • Unit Planning and Organisation • List of Client Groups for Unit • Service Standards for the Unit • Staff Development Objectives • Unit Budget • Methodology used in preparing Report

40. Documentation • Provided to review group by QPU: • Strategic Plans • UCC • College/Operational Area • Teaching & Learning • Research • Student Experience • Student statistics • Research profiles • Financial details • Previous Quality Review Report and Follow-Up report

41. Documentation (contd) • Research Quality Review Report • Actions taken by Unit/University following Research Quality Review

42. Examples of other Documents • Policy documents produced by Unit • Procedural Manuals • Guidelines/Manuals/Handbooks • Audit reports produced by external bodies

43. Peer Review • Evaluation of Self-Assessment Report • Site Visit to meet with staff and students • Report on findings • Recommendations for improvement • To Unit • To University

44. Peer Review Report • Comments on findings • Recommendations • Acted upon by unit • Acted upon by institution

45. Follow-up - 1 • Discussion • Draw up Quality Improvement Plan based on recommendations • Implementation

46. Follow-up - 2 • On-going quality improvement • Re-visit one to 2 years later to discuss developments • Re-visit six years later in a formal review

47. What happens report? • Review Report is considered by • Staff of Department • Quality Promotion Committee of Governing Body • Budget decision makers in UCC • Governing Body

48. Recommendations in report • Discussed with Head of Unit and Head of College/Vice-President and the Director of Quality Promotion Unit • A Quality Improvement Plan is agreed upon and acted upon by unit in first instance

49. Publication of Report • Review Report is published on University web site. • Annual Report of Quality Promotion Committee to Governing Body also published. Report provides a synthesis of findings and issues as well as full details on each review

50. Follow-up • Unit submits a report on actions taken and outcomes within 18 months of completion of the review to the Quality Promotion Committee • Report on progress is considered by Governing Body and published.