UNIVERSITY of LIMERICKThe University of Limerick (UL), through its membership of the Irish Universities Quality Board (IUQB), follows an established process for Quality Assurance (QA)

UNIVERSITY of LIMERICK

OLLSCOIL LUMINIGH

Quality Review of the

Department of Physiotherapy

The University of Limerick (UL), through its membership of the Irish Universities Quality Board (IUQB), follows an established process for Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Improvement (QI). This involves a seven-year cycle during which all Departments work to improve the quality of their programmes and services, undergo a rigorous self evaluation prior to a quality review by internationally recognised experts in the field. The process itself has evolved as a result of the Universities Act, 1997 in which the responsibility for QA/QI was placed directly with the individual universities. The UL Quality Support Unit (QSU) web site provides an elaboration of this process and the state of progress. The broader picture is described in the publication A Framework for Quality in Irish Universities which can be downloaded from the IUQB web site: http://www.iuqb.ie/

Issued by QSU Step 20 – October 2009 Review Date 14-16th October 2008 Quality Review Group Appendix A UL-QSU Web Site www.quality.ul.ie Web Site www.physiotherapy.ul.ie Copyright © – University of Limerick, October 2008

Please note – this report is the property of the University of Limerick and may be printed and distributed for personal use only. The document must not be redistributed or republished, in part or whole, without the express permission of the University of Limerick.

http://www.iuqb.ie/

http://www.quality.ul.ie/

http://www.physiotherapy.ul.ie/

Quality Review, Department of Physiotherapy, University of Limerick.

Table of Contents

1.0 Background .......................................................................................................3 1.1 Legislative Framework...................................................................................3 1.2 The Irish Universities Quality Board...............................................................3 1.3 The Quality Review Process..........................................................................4 1.4 Management of Quality in the University .......................................................4

2.0 The Department of Physiotherapy.....................................................................5

3.0 The Follow-up Process......................................................................................6

4.0 Preliminary Comments of the Peer Review Group (PRG).................................7

5.0 The Report of the Peer Review Group ..............................................................8 5.1 Mission ..........................................................................................................8 5.2 Design and Content of Curriculum...............................................................10 5.3 Teaching, Learning and Assessment...........................................................12 5.4 Faculty and Support Staff ............................................................................14 5.5 Facilities and Learning Resources...............................................................16 5.6 Student Guidance and Support ...................................................................18 5.7 Research Activity .........................................................................................20 5.8 Quality Management....................................................................................22 5.9 Quality Improvement Plan ...........................................................................24

Appendices ................................................................................................................25 A Membership of the Peer Review Group: .........................................................25 B Membership of the Physiotherapy Quality Team:............................................25 C Contact............................................................................................................25

2


1.0 Background

1.1 Legislative Framework The University of Limerick, in common with all the universities in the Republic of Ireland, falls within the Universities Act, 1997. This Act specifies the responsibilities of universities in Ireland for Quality Improvement and Quality Assurance. Section 12 stipulates that, ‘The objects of a university shall include - … to promote the highest standards in, and quality of, teaching and research’. Section 35 (1) of the Act further requires that each university Governing Authority ‘shall…require the university to establish procedures for quality assurance aimed at improving the quality of education and related services provided by the university’. The Act provides a framework for the universities to develop their quality processes. Section 35 requires each university to review the quality of the work of all faculty, academic Departments and service (including administrative) Departments on a ten-year cycle. In particular ‘The procedures shall include … assessment by those, including students, availing of the teaching, research and other services provided by the university’. Although each university is free to develop its own procedures in fulfilling its obligations under the Act, close co-operation has been achieved through the co-ordinating role of the Irish Universities Association Quality Committee, (IUAQC). Accordingly, the universities have developed a framework comprising a set of common principles and operating guidelines for quality improvement and quality assurance. These principles and guidelines have been integrated into each of the universities procedures, which ensure coherence through the university system, while maintaining the autonomy of each university and its individual institutional culture. More detail is available at www.quality.ul.ie/The_Act.htm and www.iuqb.ie 1.2 The Irish Universities Quality Board

The Governing Authorities of the seven Irish universities established the Irish Universities Quality Board (IUQB) in February 2003. This board comprises representatives of the Conference of Heads of Irish Universities (CHIU) and a number of external members. The aims of the IUQB are:

To increase the level of inter-university cooperation in developing Quality Assurance processes

To represent the Irish universities nationally and internationally on issues relating to quality assurance and quality improvement

To articulate, on behalf of the Governing Authorities of the universities, the resource implications of recommendations for quality improvement.

The IUQB subsumed the roles and functions formerly carried out by the IUQSC (Irish Universities Quality Steering Committee).

3

http://www.quality.ul.ie/The_Act.htm

http://www.iuqb.ie/


1.3 The Quality Review Process

The common framework adopted by the Irish universities for their Quality Assurance/Quality Improvement systems consistent with both the legislative requirement of the Universities Act 1997 and international practice comprise the following stages:

1. Preparation of a self-assessment report by the unit taking into account feedback from students and customers.

2. Quality (Peer) Review involving external experts, both nationally and internationally, who have visited the Department, met the students and studied the Self Assessment.

3. Quality Review Report, made publicly available by the Governing Authority of the university, incorporating the reactions and quality improvement plans of the Division and University.

4. Continuing improvement through implementation within the resources available to the university.

More detail is available at www.quality.ul.ie

1.4 Management of Quality in the University The Vice President Academic and Registrar has overall responsibility for implementation of Quality Assurance/Quality Improvement policy and implementation at the University of Limerick. Implementation is carried out by the Director of Quality. The planned schedule of Quality Review of both academic and support departments was commenced in the year 2000, with the first full cycle of units within the University being reviewed within a seven-year cycle. Academic departments are reviewed against international standards as described in the document “A Guide to the Quality Review Process for Academic Departments”, which is available on the UL website at www.quality.ul.ie/publications-lists.htm . In 2006, the university decided to implement a bespoke quality management system (QMS) and developed a suitable template with the assistance of external quality experts. This system is described in the document “Quality Management Systems – Standard Framework for Support Departments”. More detail is available at www.quality.ul.ie/Academic_Progress.htm

4

http://www.quality.ul.ie/

http://www.quality.ul.ie/publications-lists.htm

http://www.quality.ul.ie/Academic_Progress.htm


2.0 The Department of Physiotherapy The Department of Physiotherapy was established in 2002 in response to the Bacon Report (2001) for an increase in the number of graduate physiotherapists within Ireland. It is one of eight departments within the Faculty of Education and Health Sciences, and comprises 10.5 faculty, three of which are funded by the Health Service Executive (HSE) to support the clinical education of undergraduate students. The mission statement of the department is

To be a cohesive department with a national and international reputation for innovation in the development of the physiotherapy profession through excellence in research and teaching

To achieve our mission, we will strive to:

Ensure that our graduates are recognised as evidence-based practitioners and adaptive life-long learners

Maintain and develop strong partnerships with clinical and professional colleagues for mutual benefit

Foster an environment that promotes and enables personal development

Ensure that the Department of Physiotherapy is recognised as an integral part of health sciences at UL and contributes to the achievement of the university’s strategic objectives

The department is involved in two programmes, the 4-year BSc in Physiotherapy, and the recently developed Postgraduate Diploma/MSc in Clinical Therapies, which was first offered in September 2006. The latter is designed to meet the needs of therapists working in an evolving healthcare system. It is offered on a part-time or full-time basis over a maximum of five years, and fosters an evidence-based approach to healthcare delivery. There is a high demand for places on the undergraduate programme, with entry points ranging from 585 to 555 over the 6 years it has been offered. Integration of the students’ academic knowledge and clinical experience is a continuous underlying feature of the programme and the department has established good working relationships with clinical colleagues within the HSE. The research profile of the department is evolving, with research being conducted both into aspects of health care and the education of health science students, and with a steadily increasing number of research outputs and funding awards. The formation of the Faculty of Education and Health Sciences in 2008 should further facilitate collaborative research between departments. The department recognises the importance of quality assurance across all aspects of its activities and this review is welcomed as a formal mechanism of reflecting on the established and proposed quality assurance mechanisms within the department.

5


3.0 The Follow-up Process The Quality Review process occurs on an approximately seven-year cycle at the University of Limerick. An average of five academic Departments are reviewed annually. Once the Peer Review Group report is finalised, the Department concerned immediately sets about planning its response to the issues raised therein. The self-evaluation process is intended to be a reflective exercise in which a Department/Division should identify many of its strengths and weaknesses and develop plans to strengthen and grow as appropriate. Quite often, the Peer Review Group (PRG) will reinforce these issues and may identify areas of concern that were overlooked. In many cases, the PRG will also highlight the strengths of the Department and encourage faculty and staff to take advantage of these. After the department and the university have been given time to respond to the issues raised; the Peer Review Group’s report will be made available to the wider community through the University’s web site. Normally, the report is available within the University less than four weeks after the PRG visit. Responses and plans for action are incorporated into the report and are subject to the approval of the Deans’ Council. Presentation to the University’s Governing Authority usually follows within six months of the PRG visit. The Governing Authority will publish the Peer Review report, including reactions and plans, immediately following approval. It is expected that a review of progress in implementing recommendations and investigating issues raised would occur quarterly for the two years following the Peer Review Visit. Progress Reports will be published as deemed appropriate. Date Action November 08 Department is issued with Peer Review report and required to

prepare reactions and plans for Quality Improvement as appropriate. The report is circulated to all members of Management Committee for comment.

April 09 Reactions and plans, from all levels, incorporated into the document. Quality Improvement Action Plan developed and circulated to Deans’ Council. Head of Division presents an overview of key issues from Quality Review Report to the Deans’ Council. PRG Report with Responses and Quality Improvement Action Plan are tabled at Executive Committee meeting for discussion.

June 09 PRG Report, incorporating reactions, is presented to UL Governing Authority for approval for publication.

6


4.0 Preliminary Comments of the Peer Review Group (PRG) The Peer Review Group (PRG) was impressed by the professionalism and commitment of the faculty and staff of the Department of Physiotherapy. This young and dynamic department has already established itself, during the five years since its formation, as a key member of the constellation of units which make up the Faculty of Education and Health Sciences (EHS). The members of the Department have grasped with enthusiasm the opportunities offered by the recent reorganisation of the academic structure of the University of Limerick and are building effective links with the other constituent departments of EHS. The Department of Physiotherapy attracts some of the highest-qualified applicants to the university, and the learning and teaching practice was found to be at an advanced stage of development resulting in positive student learning experiences. The research activity is building in terms of quality and quantity, and it is likely that the new Faculty will facilitate development with the provision of effective leadership. The faculty team is commended both for delivering high-quality teaching and developing research that can impact on patient care within the demands of professional practice. The members of the PRG would like to express their appreciation of the carefully written, detailed and constructively analytical self-assessment report. It greatly facilitated the work of the review group. The frankness and general openness of discussions were also much appreciated. Although the University is rightly proud of its growth and development into the area of health sciences, there is a need to recognise that the current relatively informal communication and management structures, which served the smaller university well, may not fully meet the needs of the present, much larger academic institution. Also, the particular requirements of professional practice in the health sciences should be acknowledged and addressed as soon as possible.

7


5.0 The Report of the Peer Review Group

5.1 Mission

Commendations The PRG commends the following:

5.1.1

The clear evidence which confirms the congruence between the mission statements of the University of Limerick, the Faculty of Education and Health Sciences (EHS) and the Department of Physiotherapy.

5.1.2

The strong evidence of Faculty support for the Department in terms of achieving its mission.

5.1.3

The notable emphasis within Physiotherapy programmes on evidence-based practice, problem solving, partnership working and personal development.

5.1.4

The firm commitment from faculty and staff at all levels to ensure that the Department of Physiotherapy is integrated fully within EHS.

5.1.5

The emerging Faculty committee structure, which is designed to support the core activities of the Department in the areas of teaching, learning and research.

Recommendations The PRG recommends the following:

5.1.6

The Department of Physiotherapy should develop a workload model capable of recognising individual staff contributions to teaching, student support, research and administration.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > Department of Physiotherapy Head of Department is currently working with Dean of EHS on a common EHS faculty workload allocation model.

5.1.7

The Department should strive to exploit the teaching and research opportunities that can be derived from the new Faculty structure.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > Department of Physiotherapy are aligning our Research Strategy with the newly established EHS Research strategy, which emphasises collaborative working. Opportunities for IPE within the faculty are being explored and developed by Dr Ann Taylor (Department of Physiotherapy HOD) who is leading this initiative. Response of Dean: The Dean has asked Ann Taylor to lead an EHS initiative around Interprofessional Education both from a practice/programme perspective and potential research focus

5.1.8

The University should review the criteria for internal promotion with a view to reflecting contributions to include leadership as well as teaching and research.

8


Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We agree – we believe that a new University promotions policy is currently in the later stages of development.

5.1.9

The Faculty and Department should identify a common set of metrics and key performance indicators capable of reflecting progress towards achieving the mission and monitoring overall performance.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > The Department of Physiotherapy will develop appropriate KPIs as part of our Quality Improvement Action plan. Response of Dean The ADR is working on the development of a set of metrics to reflect achievement of the research objectives. The EHS Academic Plan should address key performance indicators at Faculty level

5.1.10

The University should develop a transparent resource allocation model and allocate departmental budgets in advance of the academic year.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We agree – forward planning is hindered by lack of timely knowledge of financial resources. Response of Dean The ADR is working on the development of a set of metrics to reflect achievement of the research objectives. The EHS Academic Plan should address key performance indicators at Faculty level

5.1.11 The University should be mindful of the specific demands impacting on health science programmes in terms of protection of the public and the needs associated with developing safe and competent graduates.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We agree that this is very important issue and ensure to produce safe and competent graduates, however improved alignment between University and professional regulations would be welcomed. Response of Dean: This programme and several others in Education and Health Sciences must align externally determined professional standards for the profession. The Dean and ADAA are educating the larger university community of these professional expectations and will ensure the policies and procedures are cognizant of these demands/expectations.

5.1.12 The committee structure and communication systems at university level should be reviewed. The PRG gathered evidence from a range of sources that indicated that the current committee structures at university, faculty and departmental levels are inadequate in terms of enabling the academic units to achieve their respective missions.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > The PRG have commended the Department of Physiotherapy committee structures (see 5.8.1), and we welcome the ongoing review of University-wide committee structures and communication systems. Response of Dean: The university is to undergo a review of its management structures. This issue should be raised at various Management levels.

9


5.2 Design and Content of Curriculum


5.2.1

The BSc Physiotherapy curriculum which is consistent with contemporary international developments in physiotherapy, including the integration of the 10 professional behaviours specified in the World Confederation for Physical Therapy (WCPT) guidelines for entry-level educational programmes.

5.2.2 The accreditation of the BSc Physiotherapy programme in 2006 following annual accreditation during the programme development phase.

5.2.3

The reflection within the curriculum design of the PgDip/MSc in Clinical Therapies programme of the principles outlined in the national health strategic documents.

5.2.4

The continual review, development and adaptation of the programmes in response to a range of sources, including the accreditation process, external examiner reports, student needs and student feedback, and clinical educator feedback.

5.2.5 The use and planned increase in use of Primary, Community and Continuing Care (PCCC) sites for clinical placements given the Transformation Programme of the health services.

10



5.2.6

The Department should secure clinical placements in the Mid-West Regional Hospital through the agreement of local (with the HSE) and national (with the National Implementation Group) memoranda and understandings to ensure exposure to a range of clinical specialties for students. There should be target dates in place for the completion of these agreements.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We will continue to work with established structures (HSE, NIG/LIG, other EHS Depts) to move this issue forward, however we are constrained by currently unfilled practice education posts in the HSE.

5.2.7

There should be an increase in the number of placements in PCCC sites and local acute settings in line with the Transformation Programme to ensure maximum experience for students within this developing health area.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > A number of additional PCCC placement sites have been recruited and developed, in addition to existing opportunities. Lack of resources in HSE is a constraint to developing further acute placement sites.

5.2.8

The Department should work with leaders of service-taught modules to ensure that the modules are current and relevant to the undergraduate physiotherapy programme and that the relevance of the modules is evident to physiotherapy students.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > Service taught module leaders will participate in this years programme review, with a view to improving coordination of module contents, quality procedures and student experience.

5.2.9

The Department should work towards increasing the opportunities for distance learning as part of the PgDip/MSc Clinical Therapies programme.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > Distance learning is a core component in some modules, (ILM, etc), and will continue to be rolled out further as the programme develops. Continuing development of e-learning resources within UL will further facilitate this.

5.2.10

The Department should develop a number of strategies to support the future workforce needs of health services.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > The Department of Physiotherapy is working with newly appointed CPD officer for the ISCP to ensure alignment of postgraduate education with professional needs. The undergraduate programme has been commended (5.2.1) for its consistency with national and international developments, and this will continue to be a core focus for this programme.

5.2.11 Appropriate supporting documentation should be provided for the international benchmarking standards exercise so that the quality of the programme is adequately represented.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > BSc curriculum documentation will be revised in light of this exercise.

5.2.12 The programme team should monitor more closely the student learning experience of the self-directed module Essential Respiratory Care.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > The self directed components form only a small component of this module, however additional support and contact time will be provided in future to assist with the transition to independent learning.

11


5.3 Teaching, Learning and Assessment


5.3.1

The teaching approach which progressively promotes the development of problem-solving and independent learning skills as well as evidence-based practice for health care professionals.

5.3.2

The varied and innovative forms of assessment which are employed to promote undergraduate and postgraduate student learning.

5.3.3

The high student achievement within the Department and student satisfaction with their learning experience.

5.3.4

The varied and well-managed clinical placement experience for undergraduate physiotherapy students.

5.3.5

The high-quality support for student learning.

12



5.3.6

The University and Faculty should adopt an assessment policy to promote congruent assessment practices (grading conversion schemes, assessment load and student effort matched to credit rating).

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We would welcome such an initiative. Response of Dean: Assessment policies and practices to be discussed by EHS management and faculty board with the intent to bring appropriate actions for discussion to Academic Council.

5.3.7

Grade conversion schemes should be applied consistently across the university within undergraduate and postgraduate programmes.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We would welcome such an initiative, and will submit this as an item for discussion at Faculty Board level and Academic Council Response of Dean: Assessment policies and practices to be discussed by EHS management and faculty board with the intent to bring appropriate actions for discussion to Academic Council

5.3.8

The Department should exploit the new EHS structure to further develop interdisciplinary learning and teaching in undergraduate and postgraduate programmes.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > Opportunities for IPE within the faculty are being explored and developed by Head of Department of Physiotherapy who is leading this faculty-wide initiative. Response of Dean: The EHS faculty and programmes are well placed to pilot interdisciplinary programming initiatives. We are looking at how this might be done at both UG and PG level.

5.3.9

Postgraduate students should have timely access to study skills training to support their return to academic learning and assessment.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > Many such resources are available in UL, however the part-time nature of the programme is a barrier to student participation. Increasing flexibility and publicity of such support would be welcomed by the Department, and we will continue to work with the appropriate Support Departments to improve this.

5.3.10

The Department should explore the opportunities for national and international recruitment to their postgraduate programmes.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > This will be explored as the programme develops further, in collaboration with the International Office.

13


5.4 Faculty and Support Staff Commendations The PRG commends the following:

5.4.1

The implementation of the performance, development and review system (PDRS) with clear personal development plans (PDPs) and the availability of continuing professional development (CPD) funding.

5.4.2

The structured practice education team which includes health service and university-based staff.

5.4.3

The collaborative and structured working of the administration and technical support teams to address the needs of the Department within limited resources.

5.4.4

The Department for establishing a formal academic mentoring system to address the career developmental needs of faculty.

5.4.5

The well-designed and implemented process for the integration of HSE-based practice education staff with faculty.

14



5.4.6

The Department should develop and make available an annual departmental CPD plan encompassing individual PDPs and should prioritise the allocation of CPD funding according to the plan.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > The Department acknowledges the value of being strategic in the use of available CPD funding to help achieve our mission.

5.4.7

The University should review the promotion and grading structure for faculty involved in professional courses to reflect and reward the commitment to clinical practice and the high student contact hours of such courses.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > > We agree – we believe that a new University promotions policy is currently in the later stages of development.

5.4.8

The University should resolve the permission difficulties and allow off-campus library access to practice tutors and clinical educators.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We agree – we believe provision of this support is vital to ensure across the board application of evidence based practice in our programme. We will continue to raise this issue with the Library and IT Departments in order to achieve a resolution

5.4.9

The University should actively engage in the canvassing of the HSE to recruit to the vacant clinical education posts.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > HOD is actively pursuing this with HSE National and Local Implementation Groups.

5.4.10

EHS should establish a management training plan, which takes advantage of the expertise available in other faculties within the university.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We would support and value such a programme. Response of Dean: The nature of such a training programme to be discussed with the Department of Physiotherapy Head.

5.4.11

The Clinical Therapies Departments should identify how existing technical staff could be evenly deployed to support all departments on a more equal basis.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > This issue is currently under review by the three Clinical Therapies Departments. However it is clear that additional allocation of technician support is warranted to facilitate development of our Research activity.

15


5.5 Facilities and Learning Resources


5.5.1 The co-location of the Clinical Therapies departments in one building and the location of almost all Physiotherapy faculty and staff on one floor.

5.5.2

The availability of spacious teaching and practical rooms, with good internet access and audio-visual equipment.

5.5.3 Access for all UL staff and students to the highly rated library service.

5.5.4 The availability to all students of the SULIS collaborative learning environment technology system.

5.5.5

The existence of a good department website for students and clinical educators.

16



5.5.6

The Buildings & Estates Division should communicate with the Department staff concerning the plan to resolve the ongoing roof leakage problems in the Health Sciences building and provide regular updates on its status.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We would welcome such a development.

5.5.7

In the light of multiple occupancy of staff offices, a strategy is needed to provide facilities for private meetings between staff and students.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We have attempted to provide a temporary solution, however in the long term this is untenable. Currently 70% of staff share their offices therefore this problem is ongoing, and requires a solution.

5.5.8

A more efficient system of room bookings needs to be devised to facilitate the advanced planning of faculty time and the inclusion of visiting lecturers to the Department. There is a need for the University to respond better across all departments in relation to this, with agreed improved lead times for informing departments of their timetables.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We would welcome such a development. Response from Head of SAA: SAA are currently working on a Scheduling project with the Executive Support and the lead times for Class Schedules are being addressed. This project is being undertaken to try and find the best way of scheduling for the University.

5.5.9 The overload problems associated with the online Student Academic Administration (SAA) system at exam results time should be resolved so that students have timely access to the system.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We agree and would welcome resolution of this problem. Response from Head of SAA: This technical overload was addressed with ITD and the System vendors Tribal Technologies in late 2007/8 and changes of a technical nature where made by ITD and Tribal to deal with issuing results and in 2008/9 there were no problems with issuing or overload in the system

5.5.10 The overall performance of the online collaborative learning environment technology system should be addressed so that it meets the needs of staff and students.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We would welcome improvements in efficiency, utility and capacity of this system, and will provide the appropriate feedback to the Departments involved.

17


5.6 Student Guidance and Support Commendations The PRG commends the following:

5.6.1

The commitment to accessible and comprehensive student support mechanisms, both departmental and within the university.

5.6.2

The well-organised, comprehensive and thorough clinical placement team which proactively supports students.

5.6.3

The local induction and orientation programmes for new students of the Department.

5.6.4

The allocation of academic advisors to support the students and the fact that the students consider these advisors to be approachable and flexible.

5.6.5

The Student/Staff Liaison Committee as a mechanism for obtaining feedback and addressing student needs.

18



5.6.6

Faculty should undertake advisor training as a matter of urgency. This should be as a department and scheduled when students are not on campus. It may require the allocation of CPD funds.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > A two-day training programme has been planned in co-operation with the Director of Students Affairs and the Counselling Service, which will be delivered to all staff in May 2009.

5.6.7

The University should develop an attendance policy to allow students to participate in university sports teams and societies.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We would welcome such an initiative, in addition to no scheduling on Wednesday afternoons. We will submit this as an item for discussion at EHS Faculty Board

5.6.8

A process should be implemented where the minutes and actions of the Student/Staff Liaison Committee are disseminated promptly to all stakeholders.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > Terms of reference, including mechanisms for dissemination, for both PG and UG SSLCs will be fully implemented.

5.6.9

The Department should implement an advisor monitoring and review system.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > This will be undertaken by the Department Senior Advisor

5.6.10

The University, in conjunction with faculty, should develop a ‘fitness to practice’ policy to address issues that may arise on professional courses.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We would value such an initiative and look forward to working collaboratively on this issue with EHS partners Response of Dean: It would be important that fitness to practice policy would reflect the diversity of professional programmes across the university and align with the relevant professional codes of practice.

19


5.7 Research Activity


5.7.1

The strong evidence, confirmed in staff CVs and tabled evidence of research outputs, that faculty have been successful in developing research activity capable of impacting on physiotherapy practice and health care generally.

5.7.2

The strong evidence of Departmental and Faculty-based partnership working in emerging research groupings.

5.7.3

The Head of Department for her success in appointing highly competent and committed staff who are capable of supporting the Departmental and Faculty research activity.

5.7.4

The confirmation by undergraduate and postgraduate students that taught programmes are underpinned by relevant research activity.

5.7.5

The faculty members for preserving a balance between teaching and research activities.

20



5.7.6

In forming research strategies, there is a need to clarify the relationship between the new Faculty of Education and Health Sciences and the Department of Physiotherapy for the purposes of leading and supporting research.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We believe this has been clarified by the newly adopted EHS Research Strategy.

5.7.7 Research groupings with identified leaders should be formed at Faculty level.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > Initiatives to help achieve this are incorporated into the new EHS Research Strategy

5.7.8

In the light of the new faculty structure, the EHS Research Committee should formulate a research investment plan for submission to the University to align with the proposed strategic investment areas.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > One of the major constraints in our Department to research development is high teaching/administration/clinical load – investment in additional staffing support is critical to achieving our research mission. The EHS Faculty Research strategy acknowledges the importance of a coherent faculty approach to strategic research planning and The Department of Physiotherapy is making an ongoing contribution to this process through our Representation on this Committee.

5.7.9

The Faculty and Department should identify metrics that will reflect the development of research in the Department of Physiotherapy.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > This will be incorporated into our Research Strategy. Response of Dean: The ADR is working on the development of a set of metrics to reflect achievement of the research objectives. The EHS Academic Plan should address key performance indicators at Faculty level

5.7.10

The Faculty should investigate strategies for developing research leadership within the Department.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > One Adjunct Professor has been appointed, and faculty will be encouraged to make use of UL Mentoring Scheme, to help provide research leadership. However the appointment of a Chair in Physiotherapy would further assist with this aim.

21


5.8 Quality Management


5.8.1

The existence of appropriate departmental structures and processes to support quality management.

5.8.2

The opportunities for student involvement and engagement in management processes.

5.8.3

The three-year appointment term for the BSc Physiotherapy course director, which provides an opportunity for the development of management skills and security for quality management.

22



5.8.4

Faculty who deliver service-taught modules should be included in quality management processes for the undergraduate Physiotherapy programme.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > Service taught module leaders will participate in this years programme review, with a view to improving co-ordination of module contents, quality procedures and student experience.

5.8.5

There needs to be continued monitoring of postgraduate student achievement and progression from PgDip to MSc thesis level.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > PGDip/MSc Course Development team will examine this issue in conjunction with external examiners, as further students reach this progression point.

5.8.6

The University should review academic regulations and policies to ensure that quality management is evident and embedded within the University regulations.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > The Department of Physio has been commended on this issue (5.8.1.) Response from DIRECTOR of QUALITY > Academic Regulations are under review currently and the impact of the ESG will no doubt lead to further integration of quality systems into academic regulations.

5.8.7

The University should ensure that quality issues can be addressed in a timely manner through the use of transparent and clear processes.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > Department has been commended on this aspect (5.8.1.) Response from DIRECTOR of QUALITY > A more structured follow-up process is under development and this will probably include a 12-month review which will be published.

5.8.8

The University Student Academic Administration Policy should provide regulatory support for the management of professional practice programmes in relation to issues such as fitness to practice, student grading and assessment opportunities.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > We agree that this is very important issue and ensure to produce safe and competent graduates, however improved alignment between University and professional regulations would be welcomed. Response of Dean: > The Dean to invite the Head of SAA will be invited to meet with EHS management on an annual basis so that there is an appreciation of issues faced by professional practice programmes.

23


5.9 Quality Improvement Plan


5.9.1

The quality improvement plan which reflects all core areas of activity within the Department.

5.9.2

The departmental team for its commitment to support quality assurance and enhancement.

5.9.3

The Department for putting in place structures and processes responsive to quality issues.


5.9.4

The quality improvement plan should be broadened to include actions required at university and faculty levels.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > This is being undertaken as part of our Quality Improvement Action plan

5.9.5

The objectives should be articulated using the “SMART” format, indicating priority, lead responsibilities and achievable timelines.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > This is being undertaken as part of our Quality Improvement Action plan

5.9.6

Opportunities for curriculum development should be extended beyond the existing portfolio.

Response of Departmental Quality Team: > The Department has been commended on the ongoing revision of our curricula in line with current Health service developments – we will continue to do so as the programmes develop.

24


25

Appendices

A Membership of the Peer Review Group:

Dr David Whan Quality Consultant.

Dr Mary Cramp Senior Lecturer in Physiotherapy, School of Health and Bioscience, University of East London.

Prof. Brian Durward Dean, School of Health and Social Care, Glasgow Caledonian University.

Ruaidhri O’Connor CEO, Irish Society of Physiotherapists, Dublin.

Spencer Turvey Physiotherapy Manager, Mercy University Hospital, Cork.

Ailish O’Farrell Technical writer and secretary to the PRG

B Membership of the Physiotherapy Quality Team:

Dr Ann Taylor Head of Department

Karen McCreesh Lecturer in Physiotherapy

Dr Norelee Kennedy Lecturer in Physiotherapy

Dr Susan Coote Lecturer in Physiotherapy

Kieran O’Sullivan Lecturer in Physiotherapy

Dr Amanda Clifford Lecturer in Physiotherapy

Amanda Connell Lecturer in Physiotherapy

Anne O’Connor Regional Placement facilitator

Marie O’Donnell Regional Placement facilitator

David Sainsbury Placement Education coordinator

Una McInerney Executive Administrator

C Contact The Peer Review Group were given the opportunity over three days to talk to the Physiotherapy Quality Team both formally and informally. Meetings with staff, postgraduate & undergraduate students and others were scheduled as group sessions. The Review Group was given the opportunity to meet all Physiotherapy staff during a visit to the facilities of the department and this was most helpful. All the meetings provided extremely useful additional information to support the SAR.

Documents

UNIVERSITY of LIMERICKThe University of Limerick (UL), through its membership of the Irish Universities Quality Board (IUQB), follows an established process for Quality Assurance (QA)