Report of Programme Validation Panel

Report of Programme Validation Panel Panel Visit: 13 th May 2013 Named Award: Bachelor of Science (Honours) Programme Title(s): Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Environmental Biology Exit Award(s): Not applicable Award Type: Honours Bachelor Degree Award Class: Major NFQ Level: 8 ECTS / ACCS Credits: 60 First Intake: September 2013 Panel Members Dr. Michael Hall Chair Registrar, Tralee IT Dr. Colin Conway Academic School of Science, GMIT Dr. Gavin Collins School of Natural Sciences, NUI Galway Mr. Michael Gillen Industry Senior Executive, PharmaChemical Ireland Ms. Ann Campbell Secretary to Registrar, Dundalk Institute of Technology Panel (DkIT) Programme Development Team Dr Breda Brennan Dr Edel Healy Dr Caroline Gilleran Dr Siobhan Jordan Dr Valerie McCarthy Dr Eleanor Jennings Dr Arjan Van Rossum Report of Validation Panel Page 1/9

1 Introduction The following report to Academic Council is a validation panel report from an expert panel of assessors on a proposal from the School of Health and Science at Dundalk Institute of Technology to design the following programmes: Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Environmental Biology The evaluators would like to thank the members of the development team for engaging generously and openly with the review process. The report is divided into the following sections: Background to Proposed Programme General Findings of the Validation Panel Programme-Level Findings Module-Level Findings 2 Background to Proposed Programme See programme submission for more detailed information. 3 General Findings of the Validation Panel The panel would like to commend the programme development team for the quality of their submission. The engagement and commitment of the team was evident on the day of the validation panel. Having considered the documentation provided and discussed it with the programme development team, the validation panel recommends the following: Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Environmental Biology Accredited for the next five academic years or until the next programmatic review, whichever occurs sooner Accredited subject to conditions and/or recommendations Re-designed and re-submitted to the same validation panel after additional developmental work Not Accredited X X Approval is conditional on the submission of a revised programme document that takes account of the conditions and recommendations outlined below and a response document describing the actions of the Department to address the conditions and recommendations made by the programme validation panel. In this report, the term Condition is used to indicate an action or amendment which in the view of the validation panel must be undertaken prior to the commencement of the programme. Conditions are mandatory if the programme is to be approved. The term Recommendation indicates an item to which the Programme Board should give serious consideration for implementation at an early stage and which should be the subject of on-going monitoring. Report of Validation Panel Page 2/9

4 Programme-Level Findings This section of the report addresses the following programme level considerations: Demand Award Institute strategy alignment Entry requirements Access, transfer and progression Standards and Outcomes Programme structure Teaching and Learning Strategies Assessment Strategy Resource requirements Quality Assurance. 4.1 Demand Is there a convincing need for the programme and has evidence been provided to support it? While the low numbers of students who opt to take this programme would suggest an issue in relation to its viability, the Panel is strongly of the view that there is much potential to exploit this programme. There are excellent opportunities for graduates of this programme in industry. Highlight the entrepreneurship and compliance themes on this programme as a means of encouraging the best level 7 graduates to enter. Summer research projects and links with postgraduate research can also stimulate demand. The research contribution to this programme should be highlighted in this respect. 4.2 Award Is the level and type of the award appropriate? Report of Validation Panel Page 3/9

4.3 Institute Strategy Alignment Is the proposed programme aligned to the Institute s strategy and are the strategic themes of entrepreneurship, sustainability and internationalisation embedded in the proposed programme as appropriate? 4.4 Entry Requirements Are the entry requirements for the proposed programme clear and appropriate? 4.5 Access, Transfer and Progression Does the proposed programme incorporate the procedures for access, transfer and progression that have been established by the NQAI and does it accommodate a variety of access and entry requirements? Report of Validation Panel Page 4/9

4.6 Standards and Outcomes Does the proposed programme meet the required award standards for programmes at the proposed NFQ level (i.e. conform to QQI Award Standards)? The awards standards requirements for programmes on the NFQ Framework can be found at http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm 4.7 Programme Structure Is the programme structure logical and well designed and can the stated proposed programme outcomes in terms of employment skills and career opportunities be met by this programme?. This programme has potential to lead to career opportunities in a variety of areas. Visiting speakers can contribute to the programme and demonstrate the range of career opportunities available to graduates. Consider collaboration with ERASMUS and other international partners to develop the internationalisation theme in the programme. Emphasise water re-cycling in the curriculum. Consider developing this programme as an ab-initio level 8 programme. Report of Validation Panel Page 5/9

4.8 Teaching and Learning Strategies Have appropriate teaching and learning strategies been provided for the proposed programme? Condition: Recommendation: 4.9 Assessment Strategies Have appropriate programme assessment strategies been provided for the proposed programme (as outlined in the QQI/HETAC Assessment and Guidelines, 2009)? Assessment strategies are required in line with HETAC s Assessment and Standards and should form a substantial part of the documentation to be considered by the programme validation panel. See (HETAC (2009) Assessment and Standards, Section 4.6.1, page 33). Accordingly the assessment strategy should address the following (See (HETAC (2009) Assessment and Standards, Section 2.2.5, page 13) : Description and Rationale for the choice of assessment tasks, criteria and procedures. This should address fairness and consistency, specifically their validity, reliability and authenticity; Describe any special regulations; Regulate, build upon and integrate the module assessment strategies; Provide contingent strategy for cases where learners claim exemption from modules, including recognition of prior learning; Ensure the programme s continuous assessment workload is appropriately balanced; Relate to the teaching and learning strategy; Demonstrate how grading criteria will be developed to relate to the Institutional grading system. The Institute resource entitled Assessment and Learning: A Policy for Dundalk Institute of Technology (Nov 2010) (https://www.dkit.ie/celt/documents-and-policies/assessmentand-learning-guidelines-dundalk-institute-technology) should also be consulted. Report of Validation Panel Page 6/9

4.10 Resource Requirements Does the Institute possess the resources and facilities necessary to deliver the proposed programme? Examine commonality with other programmes to free up resources. There may be greater potential for commonality than is currently identified. 4.11 Quality Assurance Does the proposed programme demonstrate how the Institute s quality assurance procedures have been applied and that satisfactory procedures exist for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of programmes? The Institute s Quality Assurance Procedures are published in the Academic Quality Assurance Manual available at: https://www.dkit.ie/registrar/policies/academic-qualitymanual and include approved procedures for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of Programmes. 4.12 Programme Management Are the programme management structures adequate? Recommendation: Report of Validation Panel Page 7/9

5 Module-Level Findings 5.1 Assessment Strategies Have appropriate module assessment strategies been included in the proposed programme? There are 26 assessment components in the first semester. Develop an assessment matrix for the programme and review number of assessment components to avoid over assessment. 5.2 Other Findings Report of Validation Panel Page 8/9

Validation Panel Report Approved By: Signed: Dr. Michael Hall, Chairperson. Date: 13 th May 2013 Report of Validation Panel Page 9/9

Response to the Report of the Programme Validation Panel Panel Visit: 13 th May 2013 Named Award: Bachelor of Science (Honours) Programme Title(s): Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Environmental Biology Exit Awards: Not applicable Award Type: Honours Bachelor Degree Award Class: Major NFQ Level: 8 ECTS / ACCS Credits: 60 First Intake: September 2013 Panel Members Dr. Michael Hall Chair Registrar, Tralee IT Dr. Colin Conway Dr. Gavin Collins Academic School of Science, GMIT School of Natural Sciences, NUI Galway Mr. Michael Gillen Industry Senior Executive, PharmaChemical Ireland Ms. Ann Campbell Secretary to Panel Registrar, Dundalk Institute of Technology (DkIT) Programme Development Team Dr Breda Brennan Dr Edel Healy Dr Caroline Gilleran Dr Siobhan Jordan Dr Valerie McCarthy Dr Eleanor Jennings Dr Arjan Van Rossum 1 Introduction School Response to Validation Panel Report Page 1/9

The following report to Academic Council is a validation panel report from an expert panel of assessors on a proposal from the School of Health and Science at Dundalk Institute of Technology to design the following programmes: Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Environmental Biology The evaluators would like to thank the members of the development team for engaging generously and openly with the review process. The report is divided into the following sections: Background to Proposed Programme General Findings of the Validation Panel Programme-Level Findings Module-Level Findings 2 Background to Proposed Programme See programme submission for more detailed information. 3 General Findings of the Validation Panel The panel would like to commend the programme development team for the quality of their submission. The engagement and commitment of the team was evident on the day of the validation panel. Having considered the documentation provided and discussed it with the programme development team, the validation panel recommends the following: Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Environmental Biology Accredited for the next five academic years or until the next programmatic review, whichever occurs sooner Accredited subject to conditions and/or recommendations Re-designed and re-submitted to the same validation panel after additional developmental work Not Accredited X X Approval is conditional on the submission of a revised programme document that takes account of the conditions and recommendations outlined below and a response document describing the actions of the Department to address the conditions and recommendations made by the programme validation panel. In this report, the term Condition is used to indicate an action or amendment which in the view of the validation panel must be undertaken prior to the commencement of the programme. Conditions are mandatory if the programme is to be approved. The term Recommendation indicates an item to which the Programme Board should give serious consideration for implementation at an early stage and which should be the subject of on-going monitoring. 4 Programme-Level Findings School Response to Validation Panel Report Page 2/9

This section of the report addresses the following programme level considerations: Demand Award Institute strategy alignment Entry requirements Access, transfer and progression Standards and Outcomes Programme structure Teaching and Learning Strategies Assessment Strategy Resource requirements Quality Assurance. 4.1 Demand Is there a convincing need for the programme and has evidence been provided to support it? While the low numbers of students who opt to take this programme would suggest an issue in relation to its viability, the Panel is strongly of the view that there is much potential to exploit this programme. There are excellent opportunities for graduates of this programme in industry. Highlight the entrepreneurship and compliance themes on this programme as a means of encouraging the best level 7 graduates to enter. Summer research projects and links with postgraduate research can also stimulate demand. The research contribution to this programme should be highlighted in this respect. School Response: Summer internships are offered each Summer by the Centre for Freshwater and Environmental Studies and most of the students carry out their final year research project in this Research Centre. 4.2 Award Is the level and type of the award appropriate? School Response to Validation Panel Report Page 3/9

4.3 Institute Strategy Alignment Is the proposed programme aligned to the Institute s strategy and are the strategic themes of entrepreneurship, sustainability and internationalisation embedded in the proposed programme as appropriate? 4.4 Entry Requirements Are the entry requirements for the proposed programme clear and appropriate? Condition: Recommendation: 4.5 Access, Transfer and Progression Does the proposed programme incorporate the procedures for access, transfer and progression that have been established by the NQAI and does it accommodate a variety of access and entry requirements? School Response to Validation Panel Report Page 4/9

Visiting Speakers are invited on a regular basis to speak to the students. Erasmus opportunities shall be further explored. The School is currently developing this programme as an ab-initio level 8 programme hoping to offer it to 2014 CAO applicants. 4.8 Teaching and Learning Strategies Have appropriate teaching and learning strategies been provided for the proposed programme? 4.9 Assessment Strategies Have appropriate programme assessment strategies been provided for the proposed programme (as outlined in the QQI/HETAC Assessment and Guidelines, 2009)? Assessment strategies are required in line with HETAC s Assessment and Standards and should form a substantial part of the documentation to be considered by the programme validation panel. See (HETAC (2009) Assessment and Standards, Section 4.6.1, page 33). Accordingly the assessment strategy should address the following (See (HETAC (2009) Assessment and Standards, Section 2.2.5, page 13) : Description and Rationale for the choice of assessment tasks, criteria and procedures. This should address fairness and consistency, specifically their validity, reliability and authenticity; Describe any special regulations; Regulate, build upon and integrate the module assessment strategies; Provide contingent strategy for cases where learners claim exemption from modules, including recognition of prior learning; Ensure the programme s continuous assessment workload is appropriately balanced; Relate to the teaching and learning strategy; Demonstrate how grading criteria will be developed to relate to the Institutional grading system. The Institute resource entitled Assessment and Learning: A Policy for Dundalk Institute of Technology (Nov 2010) (https://www.dkit.ie/celt/documents-and-policies/assessmentand-learning-guidelines-dundalk-institute-technology) should also be consulted. School Response to Validation Panel Report Page 6/9

4.10Resource Requirements Does the Institute possess the resources and facilities necessary to deliver the proposed programme? Examine commonality with other programmes to free up resources. There may be greater potential for commonality than is currently identified. School Response: There is some shared delivery with other Level 8 add-on Programmes but due to the specialist nature of the Programme no further commonality is feasible. 4.11Quality Assurance Does the proposed programme demonstrate how the Institute s quality assurance procedures have been applied and that satisfactory procedures exist for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of programmes? The Institute s Quality Assurance Procedures are published in the Academic Quality Assurance Manual available at: https://www.dkit.ie/registrar/policies/academic-qualitymanual and include approved procedures for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of Programmes. School Response to Validation Panel Report Page 7/9

4.12Programme Management Are the programme management structures adequate? 5 Module-Level Findings 5.1 Assessment Strategies Have appropriate module assessment strategies been included in the proposed programme? There are 26 assessment components in the first semester. Develop an assessment matrix for the programme and review number of assessment components to avoid over assessment. School Response: An assessment matrix is currently used and reviewed by the Programme Board each semester. A copy of the CA Schedule from the current semester is included as an example in Appendix 1. 5.2 Other Findings School Response to Validation Panel Report Page 8/9

Signed on behalf of the School Dr. Edel Healy, Head of School of Health and Science. Date: 25 st November 2013 I confirm that the conditions and recommendations contained in the validation panel report have now been met and recommend this programme to the Academic Council at Dundalk Institute of Technology for ratification. School Response to Validation Panel Report Page 9/9

B.Sc. (Hons) in Environmental Biology Year 4 - Semester 1 Module Research Design, Statistics & Ethics Soil and Water Management Environmental Field Studies and GIS Environmental Review and Critque Environmental Research Project (Year-Long) ACS = CA% : Exam% 100% : 0% 40% : 60% 100% : 0% 70% : 30% 100% : 0% A. van Rossum, A. E. Jennings (Field) S. Lecturer(s) Watters, K. McDaid S. Murnaghan Murnaghan (GIS) S. McCarthy E. Jennings Week 1 (16 Sep) Week 2 (23 Sep) Week 3 (30 Sep) Field test (6%) Group presentation (15%) Field Week 4 (7 Oct) Week 5 (14 Oct) Week 6 (21 Oct) 14 Oct Journal review (0%) 24/25 Oct Class presentations (5%) Field project individual report Friday 18 1pm 22 Oct GIS mapping assignment 1 (10%) Reading Wk (28 Oct) Week 7 (4 Nov) Week 8 (11 Nov) Week 9 (18 Nov) Week 10 (25 Nov) 17 Nov: Stats assignment (25%) Week 11 (2 Dec) 3 Dec Lit review (5%) Week 12 (9 Dec) Week 13 (16 Dec) 11 Dec Research Proposal (22.5%) 18 Dec: Presentations (22.5%) 25 Nov GIS CA exam (16%) 19 Dec GIS mapping assignment 2 (14%) 4 Nov Desk Study (20%) 21st Nov Presentation (10%) 2nd Dec Presentation (10%) Literature review (25%) Plan of work (15%) Presentation 13th Dec (10%) Ongoing (Practicals, Projects etc.) Weekly laboratory practicals (30%) Regular journal reports (20%); attendance & Note: This a draft CA Schedule. While it is the lecturer's intention to use these dates and methods of assessment, there may be some changes. Programme Director: Eleanor Jennings