University College Dublin and the future : a memorandum from a research group of Tuairim, Dublin branch, on the report of the Commission on Accommodation Needs of the constituent colleges of the National University of Ireland : with special reference to

26 U.C.D. and the Future

(x) We realise that the above table may be criticised on matters of detail. This has not, however, deterred us from making the calculation, as our main point in so doing has been to show that such a forecast of future running costs can be made. We urge that a more accurate forecast on the above lines be made and published by those who have at their disposal more detailed and more recent data than we had.

No account is taken in these attempts to estimate future running costs, of any interest or other annual charges on the capital required for the new buildings. As one estimate makes the capital sum as high as £10,000,000, the annual charges could be of the order of £500,000 if the sum were raised as a loan. Of course if the cost of building were to be paid out of current revenue over, say a period of 10 years, an annual sum of the order of £1,000,000 would have to be raised in addition to running costs.

4. THE NEED FOR ECONOMY

The attempt at estimating running costs set out above, is not to be taken as an attempt to throw cold water on the scheme for expansion of U.C.D. on the grounds of costs. We accept that university expansion must take place, that it will be expensive, and that greatly increased annual sums will be needed by our universities and colleges for their running costs. We welcome the Government's decision to accept the Commission's recommendations in so far as that decision implies the acceptance of the necessity to spend many millions on the universities.

But we think that the Government should be told the full magnitude of the sums involved, and that the proposed scheme for U.C.D. expansion involves greatly increased running costs as well as capital expenditure. We suggest that the following points deserve careful attention:

(i) If the project is undertaken, funds must be available for its completion within a reasonably short period. Should the building be stopped or delayed the College would be dismembered. On the other hand expansion on the present site affords the advantages —(a) the College remains a unity at all stages and (b) the necessary expenditure could be spread over a longer period.

(ii) Money must be found to staff and equip adequately a College on this scale, while at the same time badly needed help must be given to other institutions of higher education. To build a larger College than could be staffed adequately, or to build it to the neglect of existing institutions, would be wasteful.

(iii) It is important that every opportunity for economising by sharing buildings, staff, equipment, and other resources between the institutions of higher education in Dublin be examined at the present time. There is undoubtedly a great deal of duplication and some of it could be avoided. Such economies would become much more difficult if U.C.D. were to move to the suburbs.

(iv) It is necessary to consider what effect the U.C.D. project would have on the Colleges at Cork and Galway and whether it would be possible or desirable to effect economies by eliminating some of the existing duplication within the N.U.I.

Problems in the Proposed Move 27

We believe that by an examination of these questions considerable savings could be made. It is important, however, that opportunities for the expansion of U.C.D. on its present site do not disappear while such problems are being studied. Too many such opportunities have been lost in the past. We suggest that the areas which we deal with later, in the vicinity of the College, should be acquired or at least an option on them secured immediately.

Economies for the College by Expansion near Present Sites

1. A saving of the capital cost of replacing existing sound buildings, and their fixed furniture and fittings. 2. Avoidance of the need for duplicate teaching space within the city for evening, part-time and extra-mural students. 3. A saving of the cost of provision of roads and services already available in the city, but which would have to be provided on the Stillorgan Road site. 4. Avoidance of the maintenance costs of these roads and services. 5. Possibilities of saving by co-ordination, and sharing facilities (space, equipment and staff) with other institutions. 6. The possibility of providing the facilities of the 'clinical institute' in existing city hospitals, and thus avoiding heavy additional building costs. 7. The continued use of part-time staff. 8. The possibility of spreading the cost of building over a longer period while maintaining the physical unity of the College. 9. The possibility of developing the Stillorgan estates as a capital asset.

E. THE OTHER INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN DUBLIN

1. THE INSTITUTES OF TECHNOLOGY

The College of Technology, Bolton Street, provides courses to primary degree standard in Architecture and Engineering. The College of Technology Kevin Street, provides similar courses in Electrical Engineering and in Science. The City of Dublin Vocational Education Committee has long maintained that it is necessary to provide these courses (a) as an incentive to the mass of students and (b) as an outlet for the small number of students who possess the requisite talents.

With these motives we thoroughly agree. We think, however, that the provision of these courses, side by side with similar courses in the universities, is wasteful of resources. Further, the cost borne by the community for each student who qualifies as an engineer or architect through the institutes of technology is much higher, due to the small numbers involved, than the cost borne in producing a university trainined engineer or architect.

Some of the news expressed by a deputation from the City of Dublin Vocational Education Committee as reported by the Commission (Report, p.42) appear, in our view, to be self-contradictory. They are stated to have assured the Commission that there would be no duplication of expensive facilities. But we do not see how professional courses, exactly similar to technical degree

28 U.C.D. and the Future

courses can be run without such duplication. Also they are reported as stating that the Vocational Education Committee had in Kevin Street and Bolton Bolton Street a building problem which would cost 'up to £1,000,000 in the long run.'* They were interested in the Commission's Report from the point of view of knowing what accommodation would be provided by the University, to enable them to form their plans.

The problem involved is not peculiar to our circumstances. It has arisen years ago in the more advanced countries. In many countries it has been solved by integrating the technological courses in the institutes with their counterparts in the universities. We have in mind the kind of collaboration or integration that exists in various forms at Belfast, Cardiff, Glasgow, Manchester and elsewhere. Some of these examples we outline below.

The Belfast College of Technology. Part of the teaching for the degree in Engineering of Queen's University is done at the College of Technology by staff recognised by the University. The whole of the teaching for university degrees in Chemical Technology, Pharmaceutics, Textile Industries and Naval Architecture is done there by recognised teachers.

The College of Technology and Commerce, Cardiff. Through its affiliation to the University of Wales this College offers courses leading to the degrees of B.Arch. and B.Pharm.

The Royal Technical College, Glasgow. In 1913 this College became affiliated to the University of Glasgow and in 1919 it was recognised as a University College and became eligible for grants from the University Grants Committee. The College has an independent Board of Governors and comes directly under the Scottish Education Department. Through its affiliation with the University of Glasgow the College offers courses of study leading to the Degree of B.Sc. in a variety of subjects. It also offers courses leading to its own Associateship (A.R.T.C.).

The Manchester College of Science and Technology. The Faculty of Technology of the University of Manchester was instituted within the above College in 1905. The Principal of the College is Dean of the University Faculty and heads of departments are professors of the University. The College offers courses which lead either to the University Degrees of Bachelor or Master of Technical Science or to its own Associateship (A.M.C.T.). The M.Sc. Tech. and the Ph.D. and D.Sc. degrees of the University may be conferred on those who have pursued research in the College.

In passing it is well to remember that until 1926 the Royal College of Science for Ireland, an independent non-university institution, offered courses

* In point of fact we understand that the cost of the Bolton Street project is approx. £350,000 and that the sum required for Kevin Street alone will not be less than £1,000,000. These are building costs and do not include furniture or equipment. We understand that the extra equipment for Engineering and Architecture at Bolton Street will cost over two hundred thousand pounds. For Kevin Street it will cost considerably more.

Problems in the Proposed Move 29

that led to its own Associateship (A.R.C.Sc.I.). It co-operated with the University by permitting U.C.D. students to take their workshop courses in Merrion Street. A previous Irish Government, rather than finance the duplication of expensive faculties, compelled its amalgamation with the University. It was handed over to U.C.D. by the University Education (Agriculture and Dairy Science) Act, 1926. University College, Dublin, which has already absorbed the College of Science, might well consider at least co-operation with the newer expanding institutes of technology.

Elsewhere, when technological institutes have grown up in a university city, the time came when they had developed in status and in standards to the stage of providing courses to full professional level. At that point co-ordination with, and even integration into, the technological faculties of the university followed as a natural course. We believe that the same course should be followed in Dublin and indeed that eventually it will follow, but we are concerned that meanwhile U.C.D. may have been transferred to Stillorgan Road instead of remaining on its present sites which are more conveniently situated for cooperation with the institutes.

We urge that serious consideration be given to the above point of view. Apart from the economic advantages of such collaboration we believe that in this way the best interests of higher technological education would be served.

Further, we believe that in view of the continued growth of heavy industry in Cork (steel, shipbuilding, oil refining) a very good case can be made for siting an advanced technological faculty or college in that city and that the establishment of a multiplicity of such faculties in Dublin will militate against adequate provision being made for the needs of the south.

As an example of the position that is arising because of the lack of cooperation between the institutes and the universities, we deal below in some detail with the provision of professional training in Architecture.

The Dublin Schools of Architecture

The Commission's Report accepts the College authorities' estimate of space required for the new school of Architecture: 22,000 sq. ft. nett or 29,730 sq. ft. gross to be built at a cost of approximately £250,000. It is to be noted that this estimate was prepared in 1952 when the numbers in the school were at an abnormal maximum, and the requirements would seem to be excessive for what might be taken to be the average number of students. The records of recent years show a decline in numbers from 150 to 110 (a 27% decrease). The reason for this decline is undoubtedly a 'settling down' of the profession to 'normal' conditions following the post-war building boom when the profession offered very attractive prospects.

If we take the average student number at 110, then the estimate of approx. £250,000 would provide for the ecertion of a first-class school with all facilities. Such a provision is very desirable and would we fully justified were it not for the fact that a second school of Architecture with first-class standards of accommodation is already nearing completion in Dublin. We refer to the school of Architecture at the College of Technology, Bolton Street. When complete (September 1960) this school will have the great advantage of being associated

30 U.C.D. and the Future

with workshops for the building trades apprentices taking courses there -- an asset of great value. The issue therefore which must be decided at top level is whether there is justification for the provision from public funds of two equally elaborate and well-equipped schools of Architecture situated in the one city to serve a maximum number of approximately 200 students.

The functions of the two Schools

Until recent years the Bolton Street school did not attract the best entrants to the profession, the U.C.D. school being unquestionably the premier school. While this state of affairs prevailed, the two schools could be said to fulfil separate functions, Bolton Street catering for those who did not matriculate or who could not afford the university course. However, there have been significant changes in recent years, the cumulative effect of which has been to establish the Bolton Street school as equal if not superior. The results of these changes are to be seen in the successful record of Bolton Street students and alumni in recent open competitions and in the high esteem in which the graduates of this school are held by the senior members of the profession, indicative of which was the inclusion of the phrase 'preferably not University trained' in a press advertisement seeking the services of an architect ('Irish Times,' September 29, '59).

Apart from the raising of standards which has taken place at Bolton Street, it is now proposed that this school will be authorised to award a diploma having the status of a university degree, and that admission will be by an examination of the standard of Matriculation. When these plans materialise, the two schools of Architecture will cease to have separate functions, and a powerful incentive will exist for a shift in student numbers from U.C.D. to Bolton Street, as not only will equal or superior training be offered but it will be available at a much lower fee.

The effect of moving to Stillorgan Road

The view is widely held that schools of Architecture are best sited in busy urban areas close to the heart of the local building industry, trade and commerce, and that schools which divorce themselves from the industy tend to become purely academic. Whether the theory be valid or not, the removal of the university school to Stillorgan will take it away from close contact with the Royal Institute Library, the College of Arts, the Building Centre and not least the offices of the practising architects, quantity surveyors, contractors, builders providers and manufacturers. The effect of this must inevitably be to enhance further the status of the Bolton Street school vis-a-vis that of the University.

Conclusion

A possible solution to the problem of the future of architectural education in Ireland may lie in the University school specialising in purely academic and professional formation while the College of Technology would provide the technical training. Any such scheme of amalgamation would, of course, be made much more difficult by the removal of the U.C.D. school from its present location. The problems, however, are properly the concern of the educational committees of the professional institutes, who alone are competent to provide the solutions. The University authorities cannot be ignorant of the problems

Problems in the Proposed Move 31

confronting the profession with regard to the future education of its members and in the circumstances it is difficult to imagine that the University would, if dependent on its own resources, embark on spending £250,000 on a school of Architecture at the present time.

Until the problems are resolved, it would be unjustifiable for the Government to sanction expenditure of this order from public funds for a school which might never be required.

The Inefficient Use of Space and Equipment

In the teaching laboratories and workshops of a university, all too frequently the 'efficiency of plant utilisation is deplorably low.' A discussion of this problem by Sir Eric Ashby will be found in Appendix G.

When overcrowding is absent, the laboratories and workshops, in all but the final advanced years, may be in use for no more than three or four hours a day during term, and in some subjects, and depending on the curriculum and time-table, perhaps on only two or three days a week. However, assuming that a workshop is in use for four hours every day of term and that the college is open from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. with an hour for lunch, then the plant is in use for 50% of the time during term. But three terms extend in all to about 26 weeks in the year so the plant is in use for only 25% of the available time. If it is in use on only three days per week during term then the plant utilisation efficiency sinks to a mere 12 1/2%, i.e. expensive plant which could be turning out much needed technologists and technicians is lying idle for seven-eights of the time during normal 'working hours' on week-days throughout the year. This is not the way to get an adequate return on a heavy capital investment.

The advantage from this point of view in securing co-operation between universities and institutes of technology is obvious. Such institutes cater for evening as well as day students. They also provide part-time and 'sandwich' courses and short specialised courses both in and out of term. Even allowing for the fact that time is needed for 'cleaning up' say one hour after each threehour class, then the plant can be in operation for nine hours each day (i.e. taking a morning, an afternoon and an evening class). Further, the working year for the plant is extended from 26 weeks to something more like a calendar year.

Such considerations are amongst those that have operated in so many centres elsewhere to ensure the co-operation and co-ordination of universities and technological institutes, particularly in the subjects of Civil, Mechanical, Electrical and Chemical Engineering in which the capital cost of equipment is very high. In Dublin, can we afford, or is it logical to disregard this example?

Considerations in Regard to the Foregoing

We are of opinion that because of the lack of co-operation between the universities and the institutes of technology, the institutes have been forced into the position of providing full professional courses for those students who either cannot afford, or for other reasons do not wish, to attend a university. A position in the development of the institutes has now been reached in which

32 U.C.D. and the Future

they are to rival the universities as centres' of higher technological education and it is not inconceivable that they might outstrip the universities altogether in this regard. Credence is lent to the views expressed above by the plans outlined by Mr. Martin Gleeson, of the City of Dublin Vocational Education Committee|Dublin Vocational Education Committee]], in his recent speech at the opening of the school year. Under the heading 'Plan for a Diploma with Status of a University Degree' he is reported as saying:

'The Department of Education were now prepared to provide an examination to be taken by students entering professional courses in technical colleges, the standard to be equivalent to that required for entry to N.U.I. A pre-requisite to its establishment would be its acceptance by professional bodies in lieu of thie rpreliminary examinations.

The Department were, as a result, prepared to investigate the possibility of establishing, in conjunction with the technical colleges and certain professions, a National Diploma or a Technical College Diploma which would have the status of a University Degree and to be acceptable as such by the professional bodies.' ('Irish Independent,' 8th October, 1959).

The institutes of technology are in fact, if not in name, to be raised to the status of a technological university. Thus a new university, a third university in Dublin, is being founded without any flag-waving or laying of foundation stones. But, more important still, this is happening without any public enquiry into the need for a third institution of university status and without a full consideration of its effect on the future of the existing universities or of the community's ability to bear the extra cost.

What is the necessity of having another examination of a standard 'equivalent to that required for entry into N.U.I.' — i.e. the Matriculation or Leaving Certificate examinations? If a student can pass the proposed new entrance test, he can pass or will already have passed one of the two existing examinations. If he has passed one of these, why does he not go to the university for his professional training? Presumably because he cannot afford it, or prefers to take his professional qualification by part-time study. To neither group of earnest student should the university doors by closed.

All credit is due to the Vocational Education Committee for its efforts to ensure that such students are provided with the opportunity of attaining full professional status. But we do not see why the community should be burdened with the maintenance of several independent training establishments, when by the co-operation of the universities and the provision of more and adequate scholarships the same results could be obtained more economically and in a manner that would be of greater benefit to the individual student.

'A satisfactory solution in our view could only be one which provided for due co-ordination between the work of the University and the College (of Technology) in the same field. Resources in manpower and equipment are limited and economy in their use is therefore necessary. Unlimited competition between two institutions covering the same ground in the same centre would be wasteful. Moreover close association between applied science and other faculties is important . . . To give the College (of Technology) independent degree-giving powers, so far from improving its co-ordination with the University, would have severed such links as exist between the two institutions.'

Problems in the Proposed Move 33

This paragraph is taken from a recent report of the British University Grants Committee ('University Development 1952-1957,' para. 119), and refers to the situation in Glasgow. It might have been written about the situation in Dublin, where it applies with greater force — more than two institutions are involved in competition, and the 'resources in money, manpower and equipment' are even more limited.

We urge that co-operation must be achieved and that the expansion of both U.C.D. and the institutes of technology should not be financed as completely independent projects. This would appear to be a sphere in which a University Development Committee as proposed by the Commission would be particularly useful 'in advising on long-term plans for development and problems of co-ordination' (Report, pp. 41 & 128).

2. THE INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES

The Institute for Advanced Studies, a statutory body financed directly out of public funds, is divided into three schools, viz., Theoretical Physics, Cosmic Physics and Celtic Studies, which are housed in Merrison Square. The Cosmic Physics School also controls the Observatory at Dunsink.

The essential work of the Institute lies in research. From time to time, however, members of the staff give statutory public lectures and specialised courses are run which are attended by advanced students from both U.C.D. and T.C.D.

The Institute also accepts students of its own. In all cases these students are of degree or higher standing and come, both from our Irish universities and from abroad, to do research which is suitable for a doctorate thesis. As the Institute is not itself a degree-giving body, research students may wish to submit their theses either to N.U.I. or to T.C.D. We understand that difficulties can and do arise in this regard. The Institute may not be able to continue to attract students unless it can facilitate them in this matter of higher degrees. In the School of Cosmic Physics at least, because of the practical nature of the work involved, research students are essential.

Individuals may hold appointments both in the Institute and in one or other of the Colleges in Dublin. Members of the Institute make use of the libraries of both Colleges. Collaboration in research between the universities and the Institute also takes place. Some members of the Institute are known to be willing, or even anxious, to undertake some further, though limited, teaching duties to the more advanced university students.

Closer ties with the universities would appear desirable and may be essential in the matter of granting higher degrees. Some of the difficulties involved might be overcome if the universities were willing to confer honorary professorships on the professors of the Institute. Such a procedure would give members of the Institute official status and even limited rights (e.g. library, restaurant and common-room facilities) in the universities, and might enable the Institute's research students to register as students of one of the universities for the purpose of qualifying for higher degrees.

If still closer integration should be considered, a marked improvement on the present position might be achieved, both from the point of view of

34 U. C. D. and the Future

economies in staff and equipment and, more important still, from the point of view of providing the best possible teaching for the students and of facilitating research. In any moves towards closer ties with the universities, however, it would be important to preserve the essentially research character of the Institute's appointments.

Now that our universities are about to achieve a consider expansion, it might be an opportune time to review the functions and constitution of the Institute.

3. TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN -- THE COMMISSION'S MINORITY REPORT We have concerned ourselves almost entirely with examining the Majority Report of the Commission, but we feel that some comment must be made on the Minority Report, signed by Mr. Aodhogan O'Rahilly. Whereas the majority, working within their rigidly interpreted terms of reference, make no reference to T.C.D., Mr. O'Rahilly goes to the other extreme and find a solution in a complete amalgamation of U.C.D. and T.C.D. We believe that his solution is too facile. Further, the danger in his Report is that, when it is read in conjunction with the Majority Report, it would seem to imply that his solution is the only alternative to the majority's solution, that Trinity, so to speak, is the alternative to Belfield. Now here we shall be emphatic: We are making a case for keeping U.C.D. where it is, and our case would stand even if T.C.D. did not exist.

The logical alternative to the Belfield proposal is not that contained in the Minority Report but the case that we are making: It is both undesirable and unnecessary, for the reasons outlined, to remove U.C.D. from the city centre.

But we cannot leave the question of Trinity College without asking whether its existence is quite irrelevant to the desirability of keeping U.C.D. at Earlsfort Terrace. Is the present proximity of U.C.D. to Trinity of no significance beyond the fact that they are the major parts of a cultural and educational complex? We are persuaded that whatever the significance may be now, it will grown with time if only through considerations of economy. We note the new position in veterinary education, where the two schools of Veterinary Medicine will use the same buildings and equipment provided by the Government though functioning as separate schools. Co-opertaion has existed between the two Colleges in the faculties of Agriculture and of Engineering. T.C.D. students attended at the Albert College and were granted engineering workshop facilities at U.C.D. We believe that sharing of space and equipment could be extended to other departments, notably in science and technology. We have already discussed the imminence of a technological university in Kevin Street and Bolton Street, its probable impact on U.C.D., and the need for rationalisation. We recognise that the case of T.C.D. is different in many respects, but not in this matter of sharing specialised facilities.

The possibility, then, of sharing accommodation and equipment in certain departments with T.C.D. presents us with yet another argument for keeping U.C.D. on its present sites. Any such sharing of facilities would result in further economies, and this saving would become more and more pronounced in future years as it becomes increasingly imperative to avoid duplication in

U.C.D. Accommodation Needs 35

the provision of the costly equipment that will be required if this country is to keep abreast of the latest developments in scientific and technological education. We believe that to move U.C.D. would certainly minimise the possibility of making such arrangements and perhaps preclude them for all time.

IV. U.C.D. ACCOMMODATION NEEDS

Introduction The Commission accepted the U.C.D. authorities' own estimate of the College's total accommodation needs, based on the then current student numbers plus an increase of 20%. It did not make any attempt to relate student numbers 'to the national need,' excusing itself by the highly contentious statement (Report, p.43) that 'freedom of entry is a university tradition and is specifically an Irish tradition.' This ignores the fact that freedom of entry is unreal as far as the majority of Irish people are concerned because of the cost of university education and the paucity of scholarships.

We do not see that limitation of student numbers by the raising of entrance standards would necessarily be unjustifiable.

Further, the Commission's narrow view of its terms of reference prevented it from considering 'co-ordination within the University or over a wider field.' If this was done, it says, 'other solutions might present themselves.' It is probable, for example, that if the Colleges in Cork and Galway were expanded and improved the numbers wishing to attend U.C.D. would be reduced.

However, for the purpose of this Section, we will follow the Commission and accept the College's estimates.

A. SPACE AND CONSEQUENT SITE REQUIREMENTS

We set out below, with what we hope is greater clarity than was employed by the Commission, an analysis of the space and consequent site requirements of U.C.D.

Nett requirements for a complete new College, assuming surrender of all present buildings at Earlsfort Terrace and Merrion Street . . . 610,630 sq. ft. nett Add 33.3% for circulation etc . . . . . . 203,540 sq. ft. nett Hence, total requirements . . . . . . . . . 814,170 sq. ft. gross

This includes provision for a 20% expansion above immediate needs. Subtracting amount required for future expansion (1/6th of above) --

For future expansion . . . . . . . . . 135,700 sq. ft. gross Requirements for immediate needs . . . . . . 678,470 sq. ft. gross

Accepting, for the moment, the 'rule of thumb' used by the Commission, that one acre of ground is required to erect one acre of floor space (irrespective