Skip to content | Change text size
Assets | Includes | header.shtml
 

Committee of Deans Meeting 7/2002

Meeting 7/2002 of the Committee of Deans was held at 2.30 pm on Tuesday, 8 October, 2002 in the Sir George Lush Room, ground floor, University Offices Building 3a, Clayton campus.

MINUTES

1 There were present:

Professor Peter Darvall, Vice-Chancellor

Professor Alan Lindsay, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic & Planning)

Professor Gary Bouma, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Development)

Ms Alison Crook, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Resources) - by teleconference (for item 4.1.1)

Professor Brian Mackenzie, Pro Vice-Chancellor, Gippsland Campus

Professor John Redmond, Dean, Faculty of Art and Design

Professor Gill Palmer, Dean, Faculty of Business and Economics

Professor Sue Willis, Dean, Faculty of Education

Professor Michael Brisk, Dean, Faculty of Engineering

Professor John Rosenberg, Dean, Faculty of Information Technology

Professor Stephen Parker, Dean, Faculty of Law

Professor Colin Chapman, Dean, Faculty of Pharmacy

Professor Max King, Director, Research Graduate School

In Attendance:

Professor Nigel Tapper, Head of School, School of Geography and Environmental Science, Faculty of Arts, for Professor Le Grand

Associate Professor Michael Page, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Science, for Professor Norris

Professor Leon Piterman, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, for Professor Saunders

Professor Merran Evans, Director, Planning and Academic Affairs for item 4.3.1, 4.3.2

Mr Reynold Dias, Deputy Director, Financial Resources Management for item 4.1.1

Mr John Levine, Divisional Director, Financial Resources Management for item 4.1.1, 4.1.2

Mr Terry Masocco, Manager, Financial Resources Planning for item 4.1.2

Apologies:

Apologies were received from Professor Homer Le Grand, Dean, Faculty of Arts, Professor Rob Norris, Dean, Faculty of Science, and Professor Nick Saunders, Dean, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences.

Order of agenda – items were discussed in the following order: 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.3.1, 4.3.2, 4.2.1, 4.2.2 (new item), 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5.

2 Minutes

The minutes were circulated (Attachment 1).

The minutes of Committee of Deans Meeting 6/2002, held on 2 July 2002, were approved.

3 Matters arising from the minutes

4 Vice-Chancellor’s Group

4.1 Vice-Chancellor

4.1.1 Budget 2003 Update (Discussion of issues arising from draft Budgets sent to Deans etc.)

Documentation for this item was tabled.

The Vice-Chancellor, Professor Peter Darvall, introduced this item noting that this initial discussion about the budget principles would supplement the discussions that were underway between Financial Resources Management and individual Deans and Faculty / Resource Managers.

Mr John Levine, Divisional Director, Financial Resources Management (FMR), took members through the documentation presented. It was noted that the provisional faculty information that was distributed to Deans on 20 September, which was included with the papers, incorporated some changes.

Discussion occurred regarding the following issues:

  • the new method indicated for treatment of research benchmarking;

  • the reduction of Commonwealth funding for the Research Training Scheme (RTS), and the calculation of funding following the places that Monash had traded for research training. Members noted that no extra funding had been received for gap places and that Monash was receiving less back than was being contributed. Mr Levine advised that FMR would be following up on aspects of those Commonwealth calculations;

  • IT development priorities (refer ‘Support Services’ p 6) would need to be prioritised in consultation with Deans;

  • clarification about the ‘International recruitment marketing and student support’ budget and the difference in how these figures were presented. Professor Palmer would address specific issues with Mr Levine and Mr Pollock. A query was raised about whether the dividend from Monash International would subsidise central or faculty budgets. FRM would follow up on this issue. A related query regarding the funding for Monash College would need to be addressed;

  • concern about the ability of Monash Abroad to meet set targets given the allocated funding indicated in this budget.

  • suggestions that any unexpected surplus return from the Monash University Foundation could be put towards Monash Abroad, the Institute for Study of Global Movements, and other major projects. Ms Crook noted that additional allocations could be considered at the end of the year when any further changes to available funding were known;

  • the method of calculating the contribution to, and distribution from, research support funding (refer page 8). Members discussed the cross-subsidisation that was occurring through the use of a relative percentage of total student fee income to determine each faculties’ contribution to the funding for research support and infrastructure. Professor Rosenberg highlighted the potential for this structure to institutionalise lower research income for faculties that currently have high student fee income and lower research income. Mr Levine noted that FRM was working with faculties on decisions about transfers between faculties to arrive at positions on recurrent revenue. Further discussion occurred about alternative methods for calculating contribution and distribution of research support funding and the possibility of a change to the relative Monash funding model. The value of subsidisation of research was highlighted as research significantly contributed to the reputation of the university. Concern was noted about the model in which one faculty contributed such a substantial proportion of the research support funding but received the most significant overall loss in revenue compared to the traditional model. Ms Crook informed members that allocations had not yet been finalised;

  • the difference in outcome for particular faculties between the old and new formats for the budget, and the need for faculties not to be worse off in the first year of the new format than under the traditional model;

  • the rationale for and benefits of changing the budget process; and

  • the costs involved with space, particularly for those faculties with significant/specialist facilities. The Vice-Chancellor noted that a principle was required in relation to charging for spaces that had been paid for by external sources, research grants etc, and other exceptions.

Ms Crook advised that a suite of papers regarding charging for space would be brought to the next meeting of Deans for detailed discussion.

Members noted that budget discussions would continue with individual Deans, followed by group discussions with Deans and the VCG, and a further meeting of Deans (possibly including Faculty Managers) to be held in November. This early item had been included at this meeting for initial information prior to the detailed consideration to follow.

Action/Information: Mr J Levine; Mr R Dias; Professor G Palmer

4.1.2 Course Fees for Australian Students (2003) and International Students (2004)

Documentation was circulated (Attachment 2).

Mr Terry Masocco, Manager, Financial Resources Planning, introduced this item noting that discussions had occurred with each faculty for this exercise, and that the recommendations would be submitted to the Resources and Finance Committee. Mr Masocco advised members about the revision to fees policy, proposed in the recommendations, to allow an annual adjustment to apply to all fee-paying students irrespective of their year or course stage (rather than setting the fees for returning students at their entry rate).

Members discussed related issues including the rationale for the lower local fee rate for Arts masters degrees compared with undergraduate awards, and the substantial increase in the international fee rate for doctoral programs in Art and Design (it was noted that the Faculty Manager, Art and Design, would contact Mr Masocco to check this matter).

Action/Information: Professor J Redmond; Mr T Masocco

4.2 Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Development)

4.2.1 Benchmarking Monash Research Performance

Professor Gary Bouma, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Development), introduced this item noting that the Monash research benchmarking outcomes had been negatively impacted by the stronger forward movement of other comparator institutions. Professor Bouma highlighted the importance of staff numbers as the benchmarking process involved calculations on a per capita basis.

Brief discussion took place about employment issues, taking into account that some staff did not contribute to research outcomes. Deans noted that staffing levels and categorisations were the responsibility of each faculty.

The Deputy Vice-Chancellor also informed members about the recent ARC grant outcomes, involving a strong result with Discovery grants and a consistent result in relation to Linkage grants.

4.2.2 Changes to Monash Research Fund (MRF) Allocations 2003

This item was added at the meeting. Documentation was tabled regarding the MRF, and the Monash Institute for the Study of Global Movements.

Professor Bouma advised the Committee that due to the poor investment returns to the Foundation, the proposed MRF budget would be reduced by $2 million. Members were informed about the existing MRF commitments, and a proposal for allocation of the funds that had not yet been committed. Professor Bouma noted the importance of strategic investment in the Global Institute in light of the university’s previous commitment, the goal of achieving financial independence for the Institute and the need to fund research excellence.

The Committee discussed issues in relation to the MRF including:

  • inclusion of Logan Fellowship allocation in another part of the budget;

  • a proposal to allocate $100,000, from the funding currently proposed for Global Institute projects, to ASIRC. Professors Darvall and Bouma would look into this matter;

  • the high level of funding proposed for the Global Institute and the rationale for that commitment. In response to a query regarding the value of directing funding towards the Global Institute, in comparison to the value of other unfunded projects, Professor Willis provided a briefing regarding the Institute’s programs, selection processes and timelines, assessment criteria for proposals, team and program criteria;

  • the need for support for Federation Fellowship Applications. Noting the prestige associated with these Fellowships, and noting the difficulty in meeting the related expense, the Vice-Chancellor agreed that if a faculty achieved a Federation Fellowship, the funding could be negotiated to be shared between the relevant faculty and central budgets;

  • the current status of CRC applications; and

  • that follow-up in relation to ARC grants should be directed to Professor Bouma, and then to Ms Crook.

Professor Bouma noted that he would send correspondence to the relevant areas shortly to advise about allocations from the MRF. It was noted that a strategic review would be required of the use of central funding.

4.3 Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Planning)

4.3.1 University Wide Performance Indicators 2002

Professor Merran Evans, Director, Planning and Academic Affairs, informed members that the range of indicators, consistent with ‘Leading the Way Monash 2020’, were stable measures over the last three year period with refinements where necessary. An executive summary had also been included for this year’s report that would be submitted to Council. The Vice-Chancellor noted that the figures showed little variation in comparison to the Go8.

Members highlighted a range of issues in relation to the performance indicators including:

  • the difference in the number of undergraduate students undertaking study abroad as part of their award program. It was noted that expected growth in this area might be hindered by the current budget;

  • concern about performance under ‘Research: Prestige and Engagement’. (Recent efforts towards increasing national grants were noted.); and

  • the need for analysis and a strategy to address Monash’s falling share of the top 5% of undergraduate applicants, particularly relative to Melbourne University. Members noted that the issue was being considered by the Admissions Committee. This matter (and the issue of research performance noted above) would require further consideration by the Committee of Deans and at the next VCG. Members highlighted the importance of analysing data for faculties and across faculties, and about changes in culture over recent years.

4.3.2 Aligning Faculty Performance Indicators with University-Wide Strategic Measures

Professor Evans informed the Committee about the proposal for alignment of faculty performance indicators with the university-wide performance indicators. Professor Evans thanked faculties for the six responses received about the draft faculty performance indicators previously distributed.

Comments were made regarding:

  • the rationale for use of the Composite Performance Measure (CPM) as an indicator for ‘Research Prestige’,

  • a suggestion about the possibility of incorporating further information regarding teaching and learning such as flexibility and internationalisation. Professor Lindsay noted that these indicators in relation to teaching and learning were not constructed in a way that would readily allow such information to be incorporated; and

  • the importance of indicators regarding research activity outside the traditional campuses. Noting that relevant information was included in campus research plans, the Vice-Chancellor commented that it would be appropriate to discuss this matter further with Professor Bouma.

Deans accepted the faculty performance indicators presented.

4.4 Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Resources)

5 Matters raised by Deans

5.1 OHSE Performance Indicators

Documentation was circulated (Attachment 6).

Professor Mike Brisk, Dean, Faculty of Engineering and Chair, OHSE Policy Committee, provided the Committee with a briefing on OHSE performance indicators. Members noted the improvements that had been achieved over the years 1999 to 2001 regarding the number of Zone OHS Committee meetings and building evacuations held, and the level of training conducted.

However, the Committee noted Professor Brisk’s advice that performance indicators for 2002 were inadequate and that consideration was required about ways to proceed in order to meet relevant targets. Members noted the immediate external pressures involved as, due to incidents in 2002, Workcover was conducting unannounced inspections at the university. The Vice-Chancellor urged Deans to make appropriate efforts in order to assist and improve on this situation.

Professor Darvall thanked Professor Brisk, noting that this would be his last report on OHSE, with Professor Norris to Chair the OHSE Policy Committee from 2003.

Action/Information: Deans

5.2 Proposal to establish and fill the position of Professor and Director of Women’s, Children’s and Adolescent Health Services

Documentation was circulated (Attachment 7). Professor Leon Piterman, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, noted that the proposed position would be funded by Peninsula Health.

The Committee endorsed the proposal of the Board of the Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, to establish and fill the position of Professor and Director of Women’s, Children’s and Adolescent Health Services.

5.3 Proposal to amend the title of the Chair of Psychogeriatrics to the Chair of Psychiatry of Old Age

Documentation was circulated (Attachment 8). Professor Piterman noted that this proposal had been unanimously endorsed at the Faculty Board.

The Committee endorsed the proposal of the Board of the Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences to amend the title of the ‘Chair of Pyschogeriatrics’ to become the ‘Chair of Psychiatry of Old Age’.

5.4 Proposal to fill the established Chair of Meteorology in the School of Mathematical Sciences

Documentation was circulated (Attachment 9). Associate Professor Michael Page, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Science, advised members about key aspects of the proposal. In response to a query, Associate Professor Page advised that relevant efforts were underway to secure Professor Karoly’s ARC grant for continuation at Monash after he leaves the university.

The Committee endorsed the proposal of the Board of the Faculty of Science to fill the established Chair of Meteorology in the School of Mathematical Sciences.

5.5 Request to Fund Basic Operations of the Monash Science Centre from Central Funds

Documentation was circulated (Attachment 10). Associate Professor Page informed the Committee about the rationale and specific costs involved with the proposal under this item to seek central funding for operations of the Monash Science Centre.

The Vice-Chancellor noted that the MSC was a significant initiative and contribution to the community. However, the intention had been that the Centre would be self-supporting. It was noted that if funding was provided from the central budget, it would have to be taken from other faculties in some way.

A comment was received about the potential for Strategic Cost Management to act as a disincentive in relation to such initiatives. Other initiatives were also highlighted that would benefit from central funding.

Professor Darvall noted that the University Development and Alumni office had not yet been successful in raising required financial support, and urged Deans to seek strong support from faculties for the Centre. The Vice-Chancellor noted that the issue would need to be considered at the VCG.

6 Other business

6.1 Date for Committee of Deans for 2003

(Secretarial note: Due to a range of factors, a revised schedule of meeting dates has been included for discussion at meeting 8/2002.)

6.2 Policy on Advertising Jobs

The Vice-Chancellor noted that a proposal that had not been brought to this meeting, regarding a university policy on advertising jobs, would be considered at the VCG the following day. Comments were noted about the need to consider the interest of potential applicants in the specific field, rather than in the university, and ensure that any policy was solidly supported involving efficient, streamlined processes.

7 Next meeting

The next meeting of the Deans Discussion Group will be held at 4.00pm on Wednesday 5 November 2002 in the City Office.

The next ordinary meeting of the Committee of Deans will be held at 2.15pm on Tuesday 19 November, 2002 in the Sir George Lush Room.