QUALITY REVIEW REVIEWED

1
QUALITY REVIEW REVIEWED APPRAISAL OF THE QA/QI
PROTOCOLS DEVELOPED AND IMPLEMENTED IN
ULPatrick Cashell Adrian Thomas, University
of Limerick, Ireland

2

• The number of universities increased from three
  to nine and the Government established a network
  of 14 Institutes of Technology distributed across
  the country.
• Total student numbers in the HE Sector increased
  700 in that period with the total number engaged
  in full-time HE studies across all of Irelands
  institutions now numbering some 140,000.

3

• UL originally established as the National
  Institute for Higher Education (NIHE) was the
  first of the new institutions to be established
  as a University by the Irish Parliament (1989).
• Innovative and applied approach to undergraduate
  and postgraduate teaching and learning, and
  introduction of such unprecedented features as
  cooperative education, modular programmes and
  autonomous learning methodologies.

4

• Rapidly changing Higher Education sector in
  Ireland inevitably resulted in the adoption of
  contemporary approaches to Quality
  Assurance/Quality Improvement.
• The lateness of the development and
  implementation of QA/QI systems in Irelands
  universities and Institutes of Technology
  afforded Irelands HE institutions a timely
  opportunity to evaluate and adapt to Irelands
  own unique requirements, a best fit in terms of
  a QA/QI process.

5

• Irelands universities, under the aegis of the
  Higher Education Authority (HEA). Put in place
  the Irish Universities Quality Board (IUQB).
• The universities, working with the IUQB,
  developed and fine-tuned a sectoral set of
  guidelines and procedures for QA/QI across all
  the universities, thereby leading to a
  homogenous, although autonomous implementation of
  quality across the university sector.

6

• The guidelines provided for substantial
  harmonisation in the procedures in use in each
  university, and made allowance for sufficient
  variation and autonomy between the individual
  institutions own requirements and approaches.
• UL set about the project of quality-reviewing all
  of its 25 academic departments in the period
  1998-2006.
• UL utilised a uniquely Limerick-based approach
  and methodology.
• UL had a team of standing Chairpersons on each of
  its Quality Review Panels strong emphasis was
  also placed on the peer role of both academics
  and industrialists/professionals who were members
  of these panels.
• All the Quality Review Panels, across the
  diversity of departments in the University,
  followed a consistent template, schedule and
  reporting process, in carrying out their reviews.

7

• With the quality reviews in the Universitys
  academic departments well-established and with
  the first cycle completed, and the methodology
  fine-tuned, attention was turned by ULs Quality
  Support Unit to the many academic support
  departments.
• Decided that the support departments should
  develop, and implement, a quality management
  system (QMS), based on the ISO90002000 model.

8

• Information Technology (ITD) and Cooperative
  Education and Careers Division (CECD) completed
  this phase of ULs quality review strategy.
• Library and Student Academic Administration
  developed their own basic QMS using ideas drawn
  from ISO9000 and other sources.
• The university decided to set up a task force to
  develop a bespoke QMS based on the most
  appropriate elements of ISO9000, Baldridge and
  EFQM and in 2006 this was published as the UL
  Quality Management System.

9

• It was agreed to make a quality review of all
  support departments during 2006 and 2007 and this
  had the effect of galvanising all units into
  activity.
• The Departments
• Buildings Estates,
• Human Resources,
• Student Affairs Division,
• Campus Life Services,
• University Arena and Sports,
• Finance Division and
• Research.

10

• In addition to the self-evident added-value of
  these departmental quality reviews being
  completed, and the reports published, a
  significantly valuable spin-off of the process
  has been the now holistic and indeed enthusiastic
  manner in which the Campus Community has embraced
  the universitys quality agenda.

11

• During the period 1997 to 2004 all of Irelands
  universities undertook regular reviews of their
  teaching and support departments.
• The universities jointly agreed to devolve this
  authority to the IUQB and in 2004 the HEA and
  IUQB contracted the European University
  Association (EUA) to review the whole Irish
  university sector.
• Three EUA review panels visited each individual
  university campus on two occasions, during 2004.
  
• The EUA teams completed their mission and
  reported in detail on each universitys quality
  strategies and procedures, as well as presenting
  a holistic sectoral report.

12

• This EUA report validated much of the work
  underway in the universities sector, for
  Quality Assurance, and provides accountability in
  respect of this work. It goes on to articulate
  The validation of these systems isa major
  endorsement of the universities.
• The Minister for Education Science, in
  launching the Report commented that The
  systematic organisation and promotion of Quality
  Assurance at the initiative of the Universities
  themselves here is unparalleled in any other
  country in Europe or the US or Canada.

13

• To promote awareness and enhance buy-in to the
  quality culture across the University, the
  Quality Support Unit has established the QIFAC
  Awards scheme, with a budget of 150,000 for
  funding QI projects.
• The HEA also funds a number of sectoral projects,
  through the IUQB, which facilitate UL and its
  fellow universities in engaging in cross-sectoral
  studies on a common Quality theme.

14

• Five significant features of the UL Quality
  brand which characterise the institutions
  approach
• The bespoke QMS model deployed and adapted in the
  support departments
• The open, honest and friendly tone of the
  engagement between the PRG and University staff,
  both before and during the review meetings
• The requirement for departments to respond to the
  quality review by putting forward a detailed QI
  Action Plan for approval by the university
  Executive
• Wide distribution and discussion of the quality
  review report, through Deans Council, Executive
  Committee and Governing Authority. Reports are
  published in full on the Universitys website
• Involvement of stakeholders, and thereby
  elucidation of their views during the support
  departments quality reviews.