Meeting 4/2003 of the Deans Discussion Group was held at 4.00 pm on Tuesday, 24 June 2003 in the Monash City Office, Level 11, 30 Collins Street, Melbourne.

NOTES

1. Attendance and apologies

There were present:

Professor P LeP Darvall, Vice-Chancellor

Professor A Lindsay, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Planning)

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

Professor S Parker, Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Dean, Faculty of Law

Professor B Mackenzie, Pro Vice-Chancellor, Gippsland Campus

Professor J K Redmond, Dean, Faculty of Art and Design

Professor H Le Grand, Dean, Faculty of Arts

Professor G Palmer, Dean, Faculty of Business and Economics

Professor S Willis, Dean, Faculty of Education

Professor T Sridhar Dean, Faculty of Engineering

Professor J Rosenberg, Dean, Faculty of Information Technology

Professor N Saunders, Dean, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences

Professor C Chapman, Dean, Faculty of Pharmacy

Professor R Norris, Dean, Faculty of Science

Professor M King, Director, Research Graduate School

Mr T Pollock, Vice-President, International

Professor M Evans, Director, Planning and Academic Affairs

Mr J Levine, Divisional Director, Financial Resources Management

Ms M Jackson, Executive Director, Marketing and Public Affairs

Apologies:

Ms A Crook AO, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Resources)

Secretary:

Mr T Calder, Director, Secretariat and Executive Services

2. Notes

Notes of meeting 3/2003 held on 13 May 2003 were confirmed subject to amendment of the penultimate paragraph of Item 6 to read:

In consultation with Mr P Marshall, Professor Saunders would investigate the viability of undertaking a pilot study of the suitability of the Performance Management Scheme in enhancing research activity, possibly within the Department of Community Medicine and in the School of History; and

3. Matters arising from the Notes of meeting 3/2003

3.1 Revelation: the travesty of the RTS.

In response to a question, members were advised that further discussions and calculations had been undertaken and the Vice-Chancellor, in consultation with Professor King, would shortly decide on how best to progress the matter.

4.1 Our Universities: Backing Australia’s Future

4.2 Implications of proposed reforms for Monash’s desired market position

4.3 Advancing our goal of self-reliance

The discussion was facilitated by Professor Parker and was guided by the discussion points detailed in the document Strategic Implications and Opportunities for Monash of Backing Australia’s Future.

Professor Parker introduced the discussion by inviting members to base the discussion on the assumption that the policies announced in Our Universities: Backing Australia’s Future would proceed through the Senate as, regardless of the political outcome, the issues involved were important and deserving of consideration.

Concluding the introduction, Professor Parker informed members that those matters where preliminary consensus was reached would be rolled into the discussion on Leading the Way: Monash 2020 (in October).

Commonwealth Grants Scheme and Annual Funding Agreement

Summary of responses: Noting that Monash had always had a notion of being a "broad-based university", market forces were an influencing factor and Monash would need to review its decision-making processes to ensure it was well placed to respond to stakeholder demands.

Summary of responses: Noting that some disciplines relied heavily on HECS and GPG load and in some disciplines postgraduate coursework load was an important feeder into research, the issue appeared to be one that was specific to particular disciplines and/or campuses rather than a university wide issue.

Summary of responses: It was suggested that an initial determining factor would be discussions held between the State and Federal governments on workforce skill shortages.

Summary of responses: Possible expectations may include a continuing commitment to remain a broad-based university, offsetting any perceived "elitism" with a commitment to equity places – possibly at Gippsland and outer metropolitan campuses, careful management of the double degree load and a focus on monitoring the progress and timely completion of courses by students.

Summary of responses: During discussion members noted a range of issues including:

• that a more flexible process for shifting/allocating load was required;

• the planning process needed to create an environment that provided some security over time – possibly three year load planning cycles;

• whereas load currently equated to $’s alternate models should be investigated and an options paper prepared for discussion at the Deans Discussion Group;

• course reviews, with increased scrutiny and focus on course viability, may be an appropriate mechanism; and

• consideration should be given to forming a working party on how Monash might become a more flexible and responsive organisation.

Achieving increased funding per CGS place.

Noting that much of the advice around the issue was still unclear, members requested a briefing on the status of negotiations / discussions for the next round of Enterprise Bargaining at the next meeting of the Committee of Deans.

Charging above (or below) HECS

Issues raised by members included:

• as central costs were fixed, any revenue above HECS should go entirely to the faculty;

• that income generated by charging a premium above HECS could be used to generate scholarship places;

• due to the complexity of unit, course and campus programs Monash would require a sophisticated set of pricing models;

• some courses may be unable to charge a premium but Monash may still want to retain them with a view to their evolution as premium courses;

• differential HECS does not appear to have affected enrolments and it may hold true that students want to maximise the value of their ENTER score irrespective of the premium;

• Monash will need to carefully consider the relationship between price, market position and equity issues;

• an option to consider may be to offer "X" number of places per unit at one price (the economy section) and "Y" number of places per unit at a premium price (business class);

• several Deans indicated that during discussions with colleagues at other institutions most had indicated that their preference was for student contributions to be set at 30% above HECS; and

• noting the complexity of the issues discussed, that consideration be given to forming a Working Party to develop a range of options covering pricing models, market position and equity issues.

Equity, Access and Scholarships

A view was expressed that Monash should target not only the brightest students but should also foster disadvantaged students.

Ensuring we benefit from new Teaching and Learning funding

• members were advised that Monquest was designed as a tool for staff to improve their teaching and was inappropriate as a management tool for measuring the performance of staff; and

• noting the need for a formal teaching evaluation process, it was suggested that the matter be included in the next round of Enterprise Bargaining negotiations.

University process for settling our strategic response to the proposals

Members were advised that offshore markets linked price and quality and therefore any decisions on price structures would need to take into account the pricing structure of our market competitors and in the case of Malaysia, any differential between prices at Monash’s Australian campuses and the cost of similar courses at the Malaysian campus.

Concluding the meeting, Professor Parker thanked members for their contributions and noted that many of the issues raised would be discussed further in remaining Discussion Groups this year.

5. Proposal to establish and fill the position of Professor (or Associate Professor) of Communication

During discussion, several Deans advised Professor Le Grand that while the option of seeking to fill a position at either Professor or Associate Professor had some advantages, their preference was wherever possible to advertise at Professor level or Associate Professor level – preferably not both.

Professor Le Grand thanked the Deans for their advice and advised that he would consult with faculty colleagues and then progress the matter – most likely at the Professorial level.

RESOLUTION

Deans Discussion Group endorsed for transmission to Academic Board and Council the proposal to establish and fill the position of Professor (or Associate Professor) of Communication subject to the option of the Dean, following consultation with faculty colleagues, progressing the position as a Professor of Communication.

6. Monash Identity

Members of the Deans Discussion Group were given a demonstration of the new Monash identity, visuals and language by Ms Jackson.

Noting that some aspects of the visuals were not final, Deans were advised that faculty specific colour coding was subject to further discussions with each faculty.

Members thanked Ms Jackson for the early preview of Monash’s new identity and visual standards.

7. Schedule of Meetings 

8. Next Meeting

The next meeting of the Deans Discussion Group will be held at 4 pm on Tuesday, 29 July 2003 in the City Office.

The next meeting of the Committee of Deans will be held at 2.15 pm on Tuesday, 15 July 2003 in the Sir George Lush Room.

Distribution

Vice-Chancellor Director, Monash Research Graduate School

Deputy Vice-Chancellors Executive Director, Marketing and Public Affairs

Pro Vice-Chancellors Director, Planning and Academic Affairs

Deans Divisional Director, Financial Resources Management Division

Vice-President (International)