Maynooth University Quality Assurance and Enhancement Office
ToggleQuality Assurance & Enhancement Framework and Guidelines
Maynooth University Quality Assurance and Enhancement Framework
Quality Review Process and Guidelines
Quality reviews are carried out in academic, administrative and support units on a 7/8 year cycle. Periodically, reviews will also be undertaken of cross-College structures. From time to time, thematic reviews of University-wide issues are also carried out. Typically the review model comprises of five key elements:
- Preparation of a Self-Assessment Report (SAR)
- A site visit by a Peer Review Group (PRG) that includes external and internal experts, both national and international
- Preparation of a Peer Review Report (PRR)
- Agreement of a Quality Improvement Plan (QIP), an action plan for improvement
- Follow up report on the implementation of the Quality Improvement Plan
Quality Assurance is an ongoing process. It should be continuous and does not end with the first review or with the completion of the formal follow-up procedures. It has to be periodically renewed. Subsequent external reviews should take into account progress that has been made since the previous review.
The University's strategic and holistic approach to academic unit review acknowledges that the various aspects of a unit's operations (strategy and organisation, teaching and learning, assessment strategies, research and resources) are inter-related and ensures that members of the unit come together to reflect upon what they are trying to achieve in all aspects of their work, and how these different areas of activity impact upon one another. All members of the unit, both academic and non-academic, are included in the review and are expected to engage, as appropriate, in discussions and the preparation of all materials, as a collegial activity. The primary focus of the review is on quality improvement.
Review Group Composition and Review Schedule
Composition of Periodic Quality Review Group
In general the Peer Review Group will consist of two external and two internal members. Internal members will be drawn from senior members of staff who are not directly involved in the Unit being reviewed. The Unit will be asked to suggest suitably qualified candidates to be external members of the Peer Review Group. When making their suggestions, Units are asked to consider senior leaders in their discipline or professional support area, both nationally and internationally, having regard for the range of academic disciplines or areas of responsibility within their Unit, and also gender balance.
Units should not suggest individuals with whom the Unit or the university has had formal relationships within the last 5 years (e.g. external examiners, research partners, project collaborations).
The Quality Office will be the point of contact for all internal and external reviewers.
Quality Review Schedule
Supports and Resources, Peer Review Reports and Quality Implementation Plans, External and Annual Institutional Quality Reports
Supports and Resources for Quality Review
To assist Schools and Units with their preparation for Periodic Quality Review, a wide range of internal supports are available, and can be accessed at critical stages in the development of the Self-Assessment Report (SAR) by the School/Unit:
- Institutional Research Office
- Research Office/RIS
- Teaching and Learning Office
- Library
- Human Resources Office
- Finance Office
Contact should be made at the early stage of the process to allow time for the necessary data to be collated.
Peer Review Reports and Quality Implementation Plans
http://strategy-quality/quality-review-process
External Reviews
Maynooth University Annual Institutional Quality Reports (AIQR)/Annual Dialogue Meeting (ADM)
Maynooth University reports annually to QQI regarding its Quality Assurance activities and also meets with its representatives to discuss Quality Assurance developments, including new and revised standards and guidelines across the higher education sector.
Maynooth University AQR 2021
Maynooth University AQR 2022
Maynooth University AQR 2023
QQI, National Guidelines and External Links
QQI is an independent State agency responsible for promoting quality and accountability in education and training services in Ireland. It was established in 2012 by the Qualifications and Quality Assurance (Education and Training) Act 2012.
Universities Act 1997
QQI National Framework of Qualifications
QQI publishes a number of statutory (that is, legally-binding) and other guidelines which help to inform quality assurance and enhancement across the entire Irish Higher Education sector.
QQI Statutory QA Guidelines (QAG):
Other QQI Policy Documents:
Other National/International References:
European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance 2015(ESG)
External Links:
Quality and Qualifications Ireland (QQI)
European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA)
Bologna Process Overview
Higher Education Authority (HEA)
Irish Universities Association (IUA)
European Universities Association (EUA)
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ's)
What is the Quality Review Process at Maynooth University?
The aim of the Quality Review Process at Maynooth University is to promote and develop a culture of quality throughout the universities core activities. The Quality Review Process has been developed in line with the statutory requirements for universities, as set out in the Universities Act (1997), which is the legislative basis for quality throughout the Irish University sector, and the Qualifications and Quality Assurance (Education and Training) Act 2012. The processes for quality reviews are further aligned to the standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG) and the published guidelines of Qualifications and Quality Ireland (QQI), and are continually reviewed and further developed based on national and international good practice.
When will my Unit be reviewed?
Each Unit/Department will be generally reviewed every 7/8 years. The timetable for Maynooth Quality Reviews is approved by the Quality Committee and may occasionally be revised. The current schedule is available on the Maynooth Quality Office website. If you have any queries regarding the schedule please contact the Quality Office at 01 4747219
How long does the Quality Review Process take?
The quality review process has three key stages and takes approximately 12 months with the review process considered complete once the finalised Peer Review Group Report and the finalised Quality Improvement Plan (QIP) have both been published.
Stage 1: Self-Assessment
The Self-Assessment generally begins 10 months prior to a Peer Review Visit. The process begins with an initial meeting with the Head of Department led by the Quality Office, and the identification of a Peer Review Group expert panel. Self- assessment is led by the Unit under review and is generally completed in the six months prior to the Peer Review visit. The completed Self-Assessment report is submitted at least one month prior to the Peer Review Group visit.
Stage 2: Peer Review Visit
The visit generally takes place over a two/three day period. During the visit, staff from the area, students, and other internal and external stakeholders will meet with the Peer Review Panel. The visit concludes with the presentation of the Peer Review Group’s initial findings to the Unit. The final peer review group report is submitted to the Quality Office four weeks after the Peer Review Group visit.
Stage 3: Quality Improvement Planning
After receipt of the final Peer Review Group Report, the Unit under review develops a draft Quality Improvement Plan (QIP), and a response to the peer review group report. This process takes approximately 12 weeks. A meeting is then arranged with the President, relevant Vice President/Dean, the Registrar, the Head of Department and Director of Quality to consider the draft QIP. Any agreed set of actions arising from this meeting are incorporated into the QIP with the finalised document submitted to the Quality Office. The Quality Committee, Academic Council and Governing Authority are informed of the outcomes of the Review.
Who is involved in the Self-Assessment Phase?
The Self- Assessment process is led by the Unit Quality Committee and all staff within a Unit should be kept informed about the process, and where appropriate, invited to participate in self-assessment activities and reflection. The Quality Office encourages units to include the views of students during the self-assessment process, either as a member of the Unit Quality Committee, or a key stakeholder for consultation during the process.
What is the length of the Self-Assessment Report?
The Self-Assessment Report (SAR) should typically be no longer than 40 pages excluding appendices. The purpose of the report is to provide a basis for dialogue between the Unit and the Peer Review Group, and the emphasis should be on a comprehensive and reflective critical self-analysis of how effective and successful the unit believe its provision to be, including its mechanism for ongoing routine quality monitoring.
Who has access to the Self Assessment Report?
The Self-Assessment Report is a confidential document shared with the Peer Review Group and University Management which allows for greater openness in the Units self-reflection.
How are the internal and external reviewers selected?
In general the Peer Review Group will consist of two external and two internal members. Internal members will be drawn from senior members of staff who are not directly involved in the Unit being reviewed.
The Unit will be asked to suggest suitably qualified candidates to be external members of the Peer Review Group. When making their suggestions, Units are asked to consider senior leaders in their discipline or professional support area, both nationally and internationally, having regard for the range of academic disciplines or areas of responsibility within their Unit, and also gender balance.
Units should not suggest individuals with whom the Unit or the university has had formal relationships within the last 5 years (e.g. external examiners, research partners, project collaborations). The Quality Office will be the point of contact for all internal and external reviewers.
Is it possible to have more than two external members?
The number of external members may vary due to the size and diversity of the Unit under review, but it is also subject to budget constraints pertaining at the time. However, the norm is two externals and any requests for additional external reviewers should be discussed with the Director of Quality.
Can I contact the Review Group during the review?
To ensure the integrity of the independent review process, all contact with the Peer Review Group is conducted through the Quality Office. Travel and accommodation arrangements, briefing material, Self-Assessment Report and site visit documentation are the responsibility of the Quality Office. This includes post site visit contact until the Peer Review report is finalised.
Can I see another Unit’s Self-Assessment Report?
The Self-Assessment Report (SAR) is not available to other Units for review. In order to encourage a critical self-evaluation the SAR remains confidential to the unit, University Executive, the Review Group and the Quality Office. The report should be self-critical, identifying strengths and weaknesses. It should also be developmental, identifying potential improvements within the unit. Guidance to consider in preparing the report are outlined in the MU Framework for Quality 2018
What is the composition of the Unit Quality Committee?
The co-ordinating committee should be representative of the key staff groupings within the unit under review, including academic, research, administrative, and technical staff. The committee should be operational and not too large.
As a member of staff - what is my role in the process?
All members of staff should be familiar with the quality review process and participate and contribute as required, to the preparation of the Self-Assessment Report, the site visit and the unit review process generally.
During the PRG visit you will be invited to participate in meetings. You may be asked questions about the Unit and its activities, as it relates to your role. Staff are encouraged to engage fully with the peer review group members during these meetings.
I have been invited to attend a meeting with the Peer Review Group for another Unit under review- how should I prepare?
Staff from across the University are often asked to participate in Peer Review Group visits. For academic staff, this may be the visit of a Unit with which your Unit has research partnerships, your Unit shares the delivery of modules within a programme, or a professional support Unit with which you have regular interaction. Staff in professional support units may be asked to represent their area in discussing the support services that are provided to the Unit under review.
These meetings do not have a formal agenda, so staff should be prepared to answer questions on their relationship with the Unit under review, relevant supports as they relate to the Unit under review, how work between your Unit and that under review is managed and prioritised. As the discussion may be wide-ranging, there may be occasions where you have to verify information to the Peer Review Group following the meeting. This can be co-ordinated through the Quality Office.
What supports are available to the Unit under review?
The process encourages Units to use an evidence based approach to self-assessment. Units should use, where possible, existing data, previous reviews, existing student surveys, as well as national or international benchmarks where appropriate to support the analysis of the Unit.
The Quality Office provides ongoing support for Units throughout the process and the Director of Quality is available to support, advise and facilitate unit heads and co-ordinating committees during the review process and Self-Assessment Report preparation. The Unit is encouraged to conduct research to gather information on the effectiveness of their activities. This may include surveys, focus groups, benchmarking, or statistical analysis of data. Support Units, such as the Library, Institutional Research, Registry, Research Office, and the HR Office are also available to provide data and/or meet with the Review Group.
Units may also use the self-assessment period as an opportunity for a team away-day and planning event. A small amount of funding is available to the Unit by the Quality Office to cover costs associated with these activities.
Where do I go within the University for statistical data?
Statistical data enquiries should in the first instance, be directed to the Institutional Research Officer, Dr Laura McElwain at [email protected] or 7083974
How is the date of the site visit determined?
Dates for the Peer Review Group visit are agreed between the Quality Office and the Unit under review. This is agreed at the start of the process, and is generally scheduled 8-10 months prior to the visit, to facilitate the organisation of review groups and to ensure the availability of all staff members, students and stakeholders to meet the review group.
What is a typical site visit timetable and who meets with the Review Group?
The visit generally takes place over a two/three day period. During the visit, staff from the unit, students (undergraduate and postgraduate), and other internal and external stakeholders will meet with the Peer Review Panel. The visit concludes with the presentation of the Peer Review Group’s initial findings to the Unit.
Who is responsible for organising the site visit timetable?
The Quality Office provides a timetable template for the site visit – if necessary, and following agreement by the Quality Office, the timetable may be modified on a case-by-case basis. The unit under review, in consultation with the Quality Office, is responsible for organising the staff/student/stakeholder groups to meet with the Review Group. A draft timetable should be available for discussion approximately 4 weeks before the site visit, to allow for adjustments and notifying staff and students. The Review Group may also review the timetable and request changes following receipt of the Self-Assessment Report.
Who organises travel/accommodation/meeting rooms and refreshments for the Review Group?
The Quality Office organizes the travel, accommodation, meeting rooms and refreshments for the Review Group and covers the costs.
Who Attends the Exit Presentation?
All staff from the Unit under review are invited to the exit presentation at the conclusion of the peer review visit. The exit presentation is an opportunity for the peer review group to provide a summary on the main commendations and recommendations from the review. As the exit presentation is for information only and a summary of the final report, questions and comments from the staff are not permitted at this stage.
When does the Unit receive the Peer Review Group Report?
A draft of the Peer Review Group report is provided by the Chair of the Group to the Quality Office approximately four weeks after the conclusion of the Peer Review visit. The draft report is sent to the Unit Head for a period of two weeks, at which time the Unit may request changes to the report based on factual errors within the report. Any suggested changes are then considered by the Review Group, and necessary edits made prior to the completion of the final Peer Review Group Report.
The Unit then moves into the follow-up stage and implementation of the Review Group recommendations. A Quality Improvement Plan (QIP) is developed by the unit, which sets out how each of the recommendations in the Review Group Report is to be addressed.
To whom is the Peer Review Group Report circulated?
The final Peer Group Report is sent to the Head of the Unit by the Quality Office, who also circulates the report to the relevant Vice President/Dean (for circulation to the University Executive), and the Quality Committee. The Report is also sent for note to the Governing Authority and Academic Council. It is recommended that the final peer review report is circulated to all staff within the Unit for information and discussion on quality improvement planning.
Where are Peer Review Group Reports Published?
Finalised Peer Review Group Reports, and finalised Unit Quality Improvement Plans are published on the Quality Office website at the following link: https://www.maynoothuniversity.ie/strategy-quality/quality-review-process
How long does the Quality Improvement Planning take and who is involved?
Quality improvement planning takes place over a period of 12 weeks after the receipt of the final Peer Review Report. During this time, the Unit will be required to respond to the recommendations of the Peer Review Group. All recommendations must be addressed: recommendations already implemented, recommendations to be addressed by the Unit, and recommendations to be addressed by the Unit with the assistance of the University. Implementation of the QIP is reviewed through a progress report and follow-up meeting.
The quality improvement plan is generally led by the Head of the Unit under review, and includes staff from across the Unit, often those previously leading the self-assessment phase of the review. The relevant Vice President/Dean also reviews the peer review report, and the draft quality improvement plan from the Unit. Based on this, the university provides additional input and commentary on the Quality Improvement Plan by menas of a QIP meeting attended by the President, the Registrar, the relevant Vice President/Dean, the Head of the Unit and the Director of Quality. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss and agree the final Quality Improvement Plan. Any agreed set of actions arising from this meeting are incorporated into the QIP with the finalised document submitted to the Quality Office. The Quality Committee, Academic Council and Governing Authority are informed of the outcomes of the Review.
When will the Unit have to prepare a Progress Report?
A Progress report is normally prepared 24 months following the Quality Improvement Plan being finalised. The Progress Review meeting is typically between the Head of the Unit and the Director of Quality after which the progress report is submitted. PRG Report Template Administrative