report of programme validation panel€¦ · certificate in wind energy accredited for the next...

Report of Validation Panel /10

Report of Programme Validation Panel

Date: 25th March 2014

Named Award: Master of Science Programme Title(s): Master of Science in Renewable Energy Systems Exit Award(s): Postgraduate Diploma in Science in Renewable Energy Systems Minor Award(s): Certificate in Wind Energy

Certificate in Ocean Energy Certificate in Solar Energy Certificate in Bio Energy

Award Type: Masters Degree Award Class: Major NFQ Level: 9 ECTS / ACCS Credits: 90, 60, 25, 25, 25, 15 First Intake: September 2014

Panel Members

Mr David Denieffe Chair Registrar, Carlow Institute of Technology

Dr Joseph Stokes

External Academic Head of School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Dublin City University

Dr Justin Quinn External Academic Director Centre for Engineering and Renewable Energy, University of Ulster (UU)

Mr Mick Sherlock Industry Representative Asset Management Services, ESB International

Dr. Brendan Ryder Secretary to Panel Assistant Registrar, Dundalk Institute of Technology (DkIT)

Programme Development Team

Dr Daniel O’Brien Dr Tom Dooley


1 Introduction The following report to Academic Council is a validation panel report from an expert panel of assessors on a proposal from the Department of Electronic and Mechanical Engineering in the School of Engineering at Dundalk Institute of Technology to design the following programme(s): Master of Science in Renewable Energy Systems Postgraduate Diploma in Renewable Energy Systems Certificate in Wind Energy Certificate in Ocean Energy Certificate in Solar Energy Certificate in Bio Energy 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 congratulate the programme development team on the quality and comprehensiveness of the documentation presented for the programme. They also commend the openness, enthusiasm and engagement of the staff on the day. It was evident that a significant amount of self-reflection was conducted by the programme team as part of the programmatic review process. Having considered the documentation provided and discussed it with the programme development team, the validation panel recommends the following: Master of Science in Renewable Energy Systems

Accredited for the next five academic years or until the next programmatic review, whichever occurs sooner

Accredited subject to conditions and/or recommendations X Re-designed and re-submitted to the same validation panel after additional developmental work

Not Accredited


Postgraduate Diploma in Renewable Energy Systems



Not Accredited Certificate in Wind Energy



Not Accredited Certificate in Ocean Energy



Not Accredited Certificate in Solar Energy



Not Accredited Certificate in Bio Energy



Not Accredited Note: Conditions and recommendations described for the parent award apply equally for the

exit and minor awards as appropriate.


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 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

Validation Criterion: Is there a convincing need for the programme and has evidence been provided to support it?

Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None.

Recommendation(s): None.

4.2 Award

Validation Criterion: Is the level and type of the award appropriate? Overall Finding: Yes

Condition(s): None.



4.3 Institute Strategy Alignment

Validation Criterion: 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?

Overall Finding: Yes Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.4 Entry Requirements

Validation Criterion: Are the entry requirements for the proposed programme clear and appropriate?

Overall Finding: Yes, with condition(s) Condition(s): International English Language Testing System (IELS) 6.5 should be required as

appropriate.


4.5 Access, Transfer and Progression

Validation Criterion: 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?




4.6 Standards and Outcomes

Validation Criterion:

Does the proposed programme meet the required award standards for programmes at the proposed NFQ level (i.e. conform to QQI Award Standards)? For parent award? Yes For exit award (if applicable)? Yes

Overall Finding: Yes. Science Award Standards utilised as appropriate: http://www.hetac.ie/docs/Science%20-%20Award%20Standards.pdf

The awards standards requirements for programmes on the NFQ Framework can be found at http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.7 Programme Structure

Validation Criterion: 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?

Overall Finding: Yes, with condition(s) Condition(s): The structure and operation of the part-time delivery of the masters programme needs to

be articulated and clarified.


4.8 Teaching and Learning Strategies

Validation Criterion: Have appropriate teaching and learning strategies been provided for the proposed programme?

Overall Finding: Yes

http://www.hetac.ie/docs/Science%20-%20Award%20Standards.pdf

http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm


Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

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)?

Overall Finding: Yes 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/assessment-and-learning-guidelines-dundalk-institute-technology) should also be consulted. Condition(s): None.



4.10 Resource Requirements


Does the Institute possess the resources and facilities necessary to deliver the proposed programme?


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?

Overall Finding: Yes The Institute’s Quality Assurance Procedures are published in the Academic Quality Assurance Manual available at: https://www.dkit.ie/registrar/policies/academic-quality-manual and include approved procedures for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of Programmes. Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.12 Module-Level Findings Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.



Have appropriate module assessment strategies been included in the proposed programme?

Overall Finding: Yes



4.14 Other Findings Condition(s) A module on Research Methods linked to the Research Thesis module should be included on

the masters programme to ensure the attainment of NFQ level 9 outcomes. Careful consideration also needs to be given to supervisory arrangements (including over the Summer months).

The module entitled Energy Policy and Economics found in the Masters should be incorporated into the minor awards.

Recommendation(s): The panel recommends that the following be incorporated into the programme:

o Project management. An understanding of project management and its

importance is a key factor in the selection process for employers. This could be a unique selling point of the programme.

o Health and Safety legislation. This is a key issue in organisations. The role of the design or construction engineer is defined in law. Having knowledge of the roles of the project supervisor roles is now vital for all engineers in the industry and it is likely to be one of the first courses a new graduate will be asked to undertake.

o Ethics.

The programme development team should consider the incorporation of guest speakers in

areas that are not directly or substantially covered in the programme (e.g. fuel cells).

The panel recommends that the web content related to the programme be updated to reflect the actual programme content. Thesis titles provide an excellent way to showcase the work that has been completed by previous students on the programme and should also be included. This could be done as part of a wider marketing strategy for the programme.

The panel recommend that a dedicated industry advisory board be established for this programme (including exit and minor awards). The panel note that there is a SEAI contact in place currently providing a support role).

Report of Validation Panel Page 1/12

Response to the Report of the Programme Validation Panel

Date: 25th March 2014

Named Award: Master of Science Programme Title(s): Master of Science in Renewable Energy Systems Exit Award(s): Postgraduate Diploma in Science in Renewable Energy Systems Minor Award(s): Certificate in Wind Energy

Certificate in Ocean Energy Certificate in Solar Energy Certificate in Bio Energy

Award Type: Masters Degree Award Class: Major NFQ Level: 9 ECTS / ACCS Credits: 90, 60, 25, 25, 25, 15 First Intake: September 2014

Panel Members

Mr David Denieffe Chair Registrar, Carlow Institute of Technology

Dr Joseph Stokes

External Academic Head of School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Dublin City University

Dr Justin Quinn External Academic Director Centre for Engineering and Renewable Energy, University of Ulster (UU)

Mr Mick Sherlock Industry Representative Asset Management Services, ESB International

Dr. Brendan Ryder Secretary to Panel Assistant Registrar, Dundalk Institute of Technology (DkIT)

Programme Development Team

Dr Daniel O’Brien Dr Tom Dooley


1 Introduction The following report to Academic Council is a validation panel report from an expert panel of assessors on a proposal from the Department of Electronic and Mechanical Engineering in the School of Engineering at Dundalk Institute of Technology to design the following programme(s): Master of Science in Renewable Energy Systems Postgraduate Diploma in Renewable Energy Systems Certificate in Wind Energy Certificate in Ocean Energy Certificate in Solar Energy Certificate in Bio Energy 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 congratulate the programme development team on the quality and comprehensiveness of the documentation presented for the programme. They also commend the openness, enthusiasm and engagement of the staff on the day. It was evident that a significant amount of self-reflection was conducted by the programme team as part of the programmatic review process. Response: The Programme board would like to thank the panel for the friendly, frank and forthright manner in which the plenary session was conducted . It proposes that the copy of the SER Volume 2 Report to be placed in the public domain, will have the comments of graduates’ summarised rather than the fuller text as supplied to the Panel. Our concern in this regard is on Data Protection grounds as the detail provide by the Graduates could, by cross references with LinkedIn uniquely identify them. We would wish to reassure all the graduates who did respond, that the full text of their responses had been provided to the panel. Having considered the documentation provided and discussed it with the programme development team, the validation panel recommends the following:


Master of Science in Renewable Energy Systems



Not Accredited Postgraduate Diploma in Renewable Energy Systems



Not Accredited Certificate in Wind Energy



Not Accredited Certificate in Ocean Energy



Not Accredited Certificate in Solar Energy



Not Accredited Certificate in Bio Energy


Accredited subject to conditions and/or recommendations X


Re-designed and re-submitted to the same validation panel after additional developmental work

Not Accredited Note: Conditions and recommendations described for the parent award apply equally for the

exit and minor awards as appropriate. 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 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

Validation Criterion: Is there a convincing need for the programme and has evidence been provided to support it?




4.2 Award

Validation Criterion: Is the level and type of the award appropriate? Overall Finding: Yes


4.3 Institute Strategy Alignment

Validation Criterion: 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

Validation Criterion: Are the entry requirements for the proposed programme clear and appropriate?

Overall Finding: Yes, with condition(s) Condition(s): International English Language Testing System (IELS) 6.5 should be required as

appropriate. Response: The Programme Board welcome this and are extremely happy to comply. As a Department we do not have the competence to adjudicate on levels of language competence and so we value this direction. Our entrance criteria have been modified, and the International Office of the institute, from which requests for international students arrive, will be notified of this condition



4.5 Access, Transfer and Progression

Validation Criterion: 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?


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)? For parent award? Yes For exit award (if applicable)? Yes

Overall Finding: Yes. Science Award Standards utilised as appropriate: http://www.hetac.ie/docs/Science%20-%20Award%20Standards.pdf

The awards standards requirements for programmes on the NFQ Framework can be found at http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.7 Programme Structure

Validation Criterion: 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?

Overall Finding: Yes, with condition(s)

http://www.hetac.ie/docs/Science%20-%20Award%20Standards.pdf

http://www.hetac.ie/publications_pol01.htm


Condition(s): The structure and operation of the part-time delivery of the masters programme needs to

be articulated and clarified. Response: We would welcome clarification from the panel on this matter as we would be anxious to comply. The Programme Board are confused as to what is intended by this condition. We will rewrite the section in the SER Volume 2 in an attempt to clarify our current process. Our understanding is that it may refer to the access by part time students to practical and tutorial facilities outside the plenary lectures. Our structure on the programme is that all students, whether FT or PT are required to attend for two specific courses- the Introduction to Renewable Energy in the first week of the first semester , and the introduction to Research Methods in the first week of the second Semester. We would like to retain this structure as it permits students to bond together as a group. Once the Technology modules commence in the second week of theses semesters, our practice is to ensure that part time students are afforded priority and will take practical assignments during the single day per week that they are with us. This does mean that their day is extended into the evening and night. The growth of our Moodle access will allow these students to access tutorial material as it suits. Ancillary programmes e.g Matlab, which do not form part of the formally assessed material, will be made available as podcasts. A consequence of this is that full time students will be required to take their assignments during other days as we do have limited experimental kit.


4.8 Teaching and Learning Strategies

Validation Criterion: Have appropriate teaching and learning strategies been provided for the proposed programme?





Have appropriate programme assessment strategies been provided for the proposed programme (as outlined in the QQI/HETAC Assessment and Guidelines, 2009)?

Overall Finding: Yes 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/assessment-and-learning-guidelines-dundalk-institute-technology) should also be consulted. Condition(s): None.


4.10 Resource Requirements


Does the Institute possess the resources and facilities necessary to deliver the proposed programme?



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?

Overall Finding: Yes The Institute’s Quality Assurance Procedures are published in the Academic Quality Assurance Manual available at: https://www.dkit.ie/registrar/policies/academic-quality-manual and include approved procedures for the on-going monitoring and periodic review of Programmes. Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.

4.12 Module-Level Findings Condition(s): None. Recommendation(s): None.



Have appropriate module assessment strategies been included in the proposed programme?



4.14 Other Findings Condition(s) A module on Research Methods linked to the Research Thesis module should be included on

the masters programme to ensure the attainment of NFQ level 9 outcomes. Careful consideration also needs to be given to supervisory arrangements (including over the Summer months).

Response:

We do have a separate module on Research Methods, and it does take place in the first week of

the second semester. The original programme validation panel advised us of this requirement

and we have operated this structure since 2006. This Research Methods module currently

attracts 3 ECTS Credits. These Credits are ring-fenced and made available to the learner as part

of the Research Thesis overall grade. The other elements of the Research thesis - The Thesis

document proper, the presentation at the Research Symposium and the short paper attract the

remaining 27 ECTS Credits.

We have adopted this structure in order to be compliant with our Academic Council directives on ECTS Credits per module. As discussed with the panel, moreover, we do intend taking a more assertive line in directing completion dates for thesis.- The Research Methods module will act as the springboard for commencement of thesis work and the entire second semester will include direction and selection of thesis topics.

The module entitled Energy Policy and Economics found in the Masters should be incorporated into the minor awards.

Response: We thank the panel for this insight and are very happy to comply. It is a very logical and welcome improvement . The APS for all the Minor awards have this change incorporated. Recommendation(s): The panel recommends that the following be incorporated into the programme:

o Project management. An understanding of project management and its

importance is a key factor in the selection process for employers. This could be a unique selling point of the programme.

o Health and Safety legislation. This is a key issue in organisations. The role of the design or construction engineer is defined in law. Having knowledge of the roles of the project supervisor roles is now vital for all engineers in the industry and it is likely to be one of the first courses a new graduate will be asked to undertake.

o Ethics.


Response: This was a very interesting recommendation and the Programme Board will take this under advisement. Because of the profile of graduates who have already taken this programme have been, in general, experienced engineers seeking a technology shift, it has not yet been an issue. Our experience to date has been that this class group, drawn from what are experienced engineers will already have had project management and in many cases also H&S responsibility and experience. However if we start attracting less experienced students, these would certainly benefit from exposure to these topics. . Our graduate survey has already indicated a range of possibilities in technical topics e.g Wind Farm optimisation and energy storage which we also need to explore.

The programme development team should consider the incorporation of guest speakers in

areas that are not directly or substantially covered in the programme (e.g. fuel cells). Response: The Programme Board would welcome additional external expertise. – We do have a programme of external speakers in the Economic Policy and Economics module, but to date very few guest speakers in specific advanced technology areas. Perhaps we did fail to mention at the plenary session the highly enjoyable practical workshop presented by a Dr. R. Barrie from University of Angers on fabrication of organic Gratzel type PV cells. We would anticipate that the growing relationship with DCU will facilitate this type of interchange.

The panel recommends that the web content related to the programme be updated to reflect the actual programme content. Thesis titles provide an excellent way to showcase the work that has been completed by previous students on the programme and should also be included. This could be done as part of a wider marketing strategy for the programme.

Response: The Programme Board fully accept as justified the comments regarding web presence. Following this Review, the entire programme will be loaded onto the Web, and in addition, the summary papers prepared as part of the theses will be linked to the School website. – An attempt to do this was made a few years ago, but in some revision of the institute website the links were lost. There is now more competence locally available in website maintenance and it will be exploited.

The panel recommend that a dedicated industry advisory board be established for this programme (including exit and minor awards). The panel note that there is a SEAI contact in place currently providing a support role).

Response: The School has in place an IIAB, on which there is representation from some of the more local international Renewable Energy companies. We highly value our local rapport with SEAI. The Department and the School is also represented on regional enterprise committees including the Dundalk 2020 committee and the Low Carbon Initiative. Our CREDIT colleagues are in positions of responsibility with the IWEA and the SPIRE Energy storage


Response Report Approved By: Signed:

_____________________________________________ Mr. Eugene Roe, Head of School of Engineering.

Date: Signed:

______________________________________ Mr. David Denieffe, Chairperson.

Date: 16th June 2014

report of programme validation panel€¦ · certificate in wind energy accredited for the next...

Documents