Professor Timothy Savage:

I thank members for the range of very sharp questions they have put to us. I am not really too sure where to start but I suppose I will do so by referring to some of the more specific operational aspects. Reference was made to the undergraduate versus postgraduate aspect and Senator Craughwell asked about how the model develops.

We in Trinity College made a clear strategic decision. The answer that I will give encompasses a great deal of what we do. In order that our internal standards ensure the quality of the online education that we provide, we had to take the strategic decision that it would be handled by a centralised unit. We have developed a strong instructional design mode, employing instructional designers and multimedia developers to ensure that it has been done to the highest possible quality. It is not just a question of the content, but also of the design of the interaction, activities, support and training as part of continuing professional development, CPD, and working with lecturers to ensure that they know how to run video conferences, moderate online discussions effectively and interact in an online space, which is fundamentally different from face-to-face teaching.

We have developed a range of teaching courses through which our lecturers are required to go. We find that this approach also means that lecturers are working with our instructional design teams. We are taking their expertise and translating it into an online paradigm. We are not making them re-invent the wheel. It is a focused, strategic approach that is primarily concerned with supporting the academics in making the transition, training them and ensuring quality and standards.

The issue of quality and standards arose in a number of other questions. There are no recognised qualities and standards for online education. All of our formal courses go through the standard course approval process within Trinity College. We have adapted it slightly, but they still go through the graduate studies committee, the university council and external review. They hit exactly the same quality bars as our internal courses. This is important. We are determining how to develop quality standards. Getting the quality right addresses issues of retention and damaging the brand. One of the first things I was told in my post was to do no harm. We put ourselves out on the global stage when we leave the campus. This is how we deal with quality internally.

The question on undergraduate versus postgraduate links into the questions on funding. For the next five years, we will focus primarily on postgraduate and CPD courses. There is a range of rationales for this decision, one of the most important being the global context. An Information Age society requires the constant upskilling of professionals who can leverage the opportunity that online education provides. They cannot afford a year out to do advance degrees. We have a specific target market - postgraduates in their 30s or 40s who have multiple commitments, are highly motivated and do not necessarily need the undergraduate experience, which can be seen as more formative, as Senator Power alluded.

In the medium to long-term, though, we view this as a broader transition towards flexible or hybridised and blended learning pathways. An undergraduate degree student might start doing one year on campus before taking some time off to do online courses. We are entering that space at postgraduate level, but we expect it all to start merging in the medium term to allow for these progression pathways for learners regardless of their levels and backgrounds and to focus on their needs.