|
1. |
Attendance and apologies |
|
There were present: Professor Ed
Byrne, Professor Colin Chapman, Professor Edwina Cornish, Ms Peggy
Daroesman, Mr Stephen Davey, Mr Jeremy Du Ve (for Mr Alan McMeekin),
Professor Merran Evans, Mr Ron Fairchild, Professor Arie Freiberg, Mr
Don Gregg, Professor Max King, Professor Richard Larkins, Professor
Homer Le Grand, Professor Brian Mackenzie, Mr Peter Marshall, Mr David
McWaters, Professor David Murphy, Ms Lee-ann Norris, Professor Rob
Norris, Professor Gill Palmer, Professor Stephen Parker (Chair), Mr
Andrew Picouleau, Mr David Pitt, Professor John Redmond, Professor Tam
Sridhar, Professor Phillip Steele, Mr Nick Thorburn (for Mr Greg
Connell), Mr Clive Vernon, Professor Graham Webb, Professor Ron Weber,
Professor Rob Willis, Professor Sue Willis, Mr Ian Wilson (for Ms
Cathrine Harboe-Ree), Mr Renn Wortley, Mr Peter Yates. |
| |
Apologies were received from: Professor Chris Browne, Mr Greg
Connell, Professor David Copolov, Ms Cathrine Harboe-Ree, Professor
Merilyn Liddell, Mr Alan McMeekin, Mr Jonathan Sanders |
| |
In attendance Ms Megan Deacon, Copyright Advisor, Library
Corporate Services (for item 3.1)
Mr Rob Andrew, Ms Heather Bradbury and Ms Marina Tseng (for item 5.1)
Ms Amanda Birmingham, Manager Policy and Consultancy, Student and
Staff Services (for item 10.1) |
| |
A
welcome was extended to Mr David McWaters, attending his first meeting
of the Committee. |
|
2. |
Minutes of Meeting 6/2005 |
| |
The
Minutes of Meeting 6/2005, held on 18 October 2005, were confirmed
as an accurate record of the meeting. |
| 3. |
Matters arising from the Minutes |
|
3.1 |
University Integrity Committee (Minutes item 5.1) |
| |
|
The Committee
noted the Terms of Reference of the University Integrity Committee. |
|
3.2 |
University Travel (Minutes item 10.1) |
| |
|
In updating
members on a range of matters relating to university travel, Mr David
Pitt advised that:
Meetings had been held with
staff regarding the travel management service. A core of frequent
travellers had been identified and would be allocated a specific BTI
consultant.
BTI fare matching
information was now available on the Monash travel website.
Travel profiles could now
be lodged with ResX (a secure facility, which speeded up the
international booking process). Nearly 50% of expected profiles had
already been received.
A proforma booking request
form had been loaded onto the travel website.
A travel newsletter would
be published on a monthly basis.
Privacy issues would not
allow Deans to directly access Flightlock data. However, Mr
Bracegirdle was currently working on a data feed to automate the
issue of travel insurance –access by Deans might be possible as a
spin off from that source, rather than from Flightlock
itself.
In discussion, members commented that negative feedback regarding the
level of service provided by the travel management company had been
received, and could be expected to continue. Mr Pitt acknowledged that
some problems had been encountered in the early days of the new
provider, but also noted that more staff had been engaged by BTI and
that improvement in service levels had been reported. |
|
3.3 |
Monitoring of Copyright (Minutes item 11.1) |
| |
|
The Committee
had before it a report on preparations for the survey of the
University’s copying activities (SMC 7/05/03). Mr Ian Wilson introduced
Ms Megan Deacon, who spoke briefly to the paper. In so doing, the
following matters were emphasised:
The University was legally
obliged to participate in the sampling survey under its license
agreement.
All levels of the
University would be subject to a sampling survey at some stage. It
would therefore be useful for everyone to be aware of the current
process.
Co-ordinators had been
appointed and would receive training from the Copyright Office. Due
to the time-consuming nature of their role, they would need support
from their Departments.
Individual staff were
responsible for recording relevant copying activity.
If the survey did not
proceed as planned, it would be extended for another three (3)
months.
A general information
session for all staff was scheduled for 29 November. Information was
also available from the Copyright website or staff of the Copyright
office.
Members were advised that printing activities were not subject to the
sampling survey, only photocopying, and strongly endorsed the need for
compliance by everyone involved. |
|
3.4 |
Higher Education Workplace Relations Requirements (Minutes item 3.1) |
| |
|
Members were
advised that the Enterprise Bargain had been certified that morning by
the Industrial Relations Commission and thus came into effect from the
date of certification. Information would shortly be communicated to
staff. |
|
3.5 |
Learning and Teaching Performance Fund (Minutes item 3.2) |
| |
|
Members were
advised that the Minister would announce which institutions were to
benefit from the Fund on 29 November. |
|
3.6 |
Staff Survey (Minutes item 3.3) |
| |
|
Members were
advised that the Staff Survey was ready for roll-out to members of
staff. |
|
3.7 |
Times Higher Education Supplement (Minutes item 11.2) |
| |
|
Members were
advised that, for 2005, Monash had again been ranked 33rd
overall. |
|
4. |
Vice-Chancellor’s Report |
| |
Professor Richard Larkins delivered a report on highlights for 2005,
touching on the following: Monash Directions 2025
Adoption of Monash Directions 2025 was a significant
milestone, defining what type of University Monash wished to be, and the
type of graduates it wished to produce. |
| |
Research Stunning progress had been made over the past year
towards Monash’s aim to be one of the top three (3) research-intensive
universities in Australia by 2008. Areas such as ARC Centres of
Excellence, Federation Fellowships, ARC Discovery Grants and NHMRC
Grants were highlighted. However, the need for greater numbers of staff
to submit grant applications was also emphasised. |
| |
Education Substantial improvements had been made in teaching and
learning at Monash over the past year. The introduction of unit
evaluations would facilitate continuous improvement of the student
education experience; the university had maintained its improved
performance in attracting the top 5% of VTAC applicants; the Monash MBA
had been ranked best in Australia, 2nd in Asia, and 6th
in the world (in
the category of personal development and
student experience). |
| |
Management Highlights included the progress towards sequencing
various planning cycles, and signing of an Enterprise Bargain advised by
DEST to be HEWRR-compliant (though the Minister had yet to give his
imprimatur). |
| |
International Lee-ann Norris and her team had performed
magnificently in reversing the downturn in commencing international
students. Monash South Africa was developing strongly, with an expected
total enrolment of 1200 for Semester 1/2006, reduced deficit, and
improved quality of programs and students. Monash University Malaysia
experienced improved student numbers for Semester 2/2005, and the
commencement of the medical school. Strong relationships with a range of
overseas institutions were being forged. |
| |
Equity The percentage of women in senior academic and general
staff positions had risen. The university had the highest number of
enrolments from low socio-economic backgrounds of any Go8 university.
The number of scholarships, bursaries and Access Monash enrolments had
expanded. |
| |
Environment
Monash was the leader amongst Australian universities with respect to
environmental matters, including triple bottom line reporting and
commitment to reduction in energy use of 20% by 2010. |
|
In summary, Professor Larkins emphasised
that 2005 had been an excellent year for Monash and that the progress
made was a compliment to all staff. Although there was considerable work
yet to do, Monash was heading in the right direction. |
| |
Members raised a number of issues in subsequent discussion, including:
The potential to increase
Monash’s public profile, particularly in areas left vacant by
Melbourne University.
The need for communication
of the Report throughout the Monash community.
Opportunities for Monash in
view of development of Melbourne University’s Growing Esteem
strategy. It was noted that a major review of coursework degrees
would be undertaken in 2006, and this represented an opportunity for
a detailed examination of program structure.
The need for a review of
university funding, given its current disordered state. One option
might be to move towards a ‘voucher’ system, in which funding was
directed to the student.
The recent Ministerial veto
of ARC grants was considered outrageous. Professor Larkins reported
that the Go8 and AVCC were both protesting; however, the
intervention in the ARC grants process was likely to be seen as an
opportunity to score political points and it was therefore doubtful
whether protests would achieve significant change.
|
| 5. |
Strategic Planning and Initiatives |
|
5.1 |
Advance Database |
| |
|
Members were
reminded that this item arose from a discussion by the Committee of
Deans regarding relationship management and the recommendation that a
presentation on the database be made to SMC. Mr Rob Andrew commenced
the presentation by informing members that the solution to the
collection and using of data for advancement purposes had culminated in
development of the My.Advancement system, which was web-based,
and utilised existing core data sources.
He noted that My. Advancement offered a wide range of
reporting and other services, and would facilitate the capture of
donations data by the Advancement Division. He emphasised that the
framework was already in place to allow the system to exist, but that
further development was required before implementation on a wide scale.
Mr Fairchild emphasised that this system would vastly improve
relationship management.
In discussion, members commented that:
The donations captured on
RM4 also needed to be captured by this system.
It was necessary to improve
and maintain alumni relationships. However, unless an alumnus signed
up to the alumni association, privacy issues prevented an ongoing
relationship. Members were advised that this issue was being worked
through, and was a common issue faced by every charity or similar
group and that, as long as there was no information sharing, some
freedom to operate existed.
It would be necessary to
define levels of intra-institutional access, and to implement a user
training program. Members were advised that Ms Birmingham had been
working with the Advancement Division on this matter.
Members were also advised that a number of meetings were being held
to define further system requirements e.g. identification of and
compliance with DEST requirements regarding donation identification. |
|
5.2 |
Annual Plan |
| |
|
The Chair
introduced this item by reminding members that the Plan was derived from
three (3) principal sources:
The annual senior
management summit.
University functional
plans.
Responses to changed
circumstances.
It was anticipated that the main source of future annual plans would
be existing plans.
Professor Evans emphasised that there was still some work to be done
on the document. The target date for completion was the forthcoming
Council meeting.
Members commented that:
The Plan contained a number
of very positive features e.g. the reference to mental health.
The third bullet point in
Section B: Monash in 2005 should be recast.
In conclusion, the Chair noted that reporting against the Annual Plan
would be included in this year’s Annual Report for the first time. He
also invited further feedback from members.
Recognising that it was subject to further refinement, the Committee
endorsed the Annual Plan for 2006. |
|
5.3 |
Monash University Museum of Art (MUMA) |
| |
|
In speaking to
this item, Professor Larkins noted that:
The proposal for relocation
of MUMA had been prepared by the Chair of the MUMA Committee,
Professor Redmond.
There were a number of
reasons to relocate MUMA, which were set out in the proposal.
Capital works funding for
the relocation had been set aside.
VCG was very supportive of
the proposal, which would also be considered by Academic Board,
before transmission to Council.
Noting the Vice-Chancellor’s advice, the Committee endorsed the
proposal to relocate the Museum of Art to the Caulfield campus. |
|
6. |
Quality Matters |
|
6.1 |
MEQ Symposia Report |
| |
|
Professor Webb
spoke briefly to the MEQ Symposia 2005 Report, observing that the
symposia had been fairly well-attended. It was hoped that the new CALT
would be able to engage more directly with this activity. Professor
Webb also advised members that the response rate for the MEQ05 had been
41% which compared favourably with the MEQ03 response rate of 40%. The
major MEQ reports would be available by the end of the year.
|
| 7. |
International |
|
7.1 |
Review of the Monash-Technology Management Centre (TMC) Agreement
(confidential) |
| 8. |
Education |
|
8.1 |
Education Plan |
| |
|
In introducing
the draft Education Plan, the Chair indicated that:
It was the product of a
team effort, SMC members of which included Professors Murphy, Evans,
Webb, Steele and Browne.
The Plan was for an
internationally-focused and research-led institution, and one that
not only wanted to be but was seen as excellent in learning and
teaching.
It was a component of the
Academic Plan (the second tier of the Planning Pyramid).
It was consistent with the
emerging Monash style of identification of objectives, strategies,
actions, targets and responsibilities.
There needed to be scope
for discussion regarding the applicability of actions at individual
levels.
|
| |
|
Members
canvassed a wide range of issues in subsequent discussion, including:
Whether the second set of
Objectives should be linked to graduate attributes. It was noted
that the revised graduate attributes were yet to be released.
Performance Based Funding
of Teaching (PBFT) (page 123 of the agenda papers) – observing that
PBFT was being introduced at sectoral level (including the
University of Sydney) the need to investigate its implications
internally in the first instance was emphasised.
The level at which the
requirement to include at least one research-active staff member in
the teaching team for each unit (page 127 of the agenda papers)
operated should be negotiated.
Several process issues
relating to development of the Plan were discussed, including the
involvement of the Committee of Deans and the Associate Deans
(Teaching), the perceived lack of time to debate actions and their
impact, and the opportunity for Faculties to input into Plan’s
development. Members were advised that the content of the Plan had
in fact been debated over several months in a number of fora and
that there had been consultation/opportunity for input by sections
of the Monash community at various levels, including full debate by
the Education Committee of Academic Board.
In discussing the impact on
the faculty planning process and lack of impact/resource statements,
members were reminded that it was necessary to settle relevant (and
high-level) objectives prior to considering implementation issues
such as resourcing etc. Thus, the Education and Research Plans,
which spanned five (5) year time frames, were overarching /
directional in nature, with consequent opportunity to negotiate
detailed actions if circumstances so required. Members were also
advised that a significant change in the approach to the faculty
operational plans consequent upon the adoption of the higher-level
plans was not expected.
The significant step forward in
Monash’s planning methodology was emphasised. Over time, it was
expected that greater synchronicity between the Annual Plan and
Education Plan would evolve, although linkages were already occurring.
The need to reverse the
order of the two high-level objectives, so that the Monash
educational ‘vision’ came first, followed by the measurement of
achievement of that vision.
Amendment to the
terminology used for the two high-level objectives and resolution of
the apparent incompatibility of language used in the Preface vis a
vis the Objectives were suggested.
It was considered that the
addition of a further measure relating to employment and starting
salaries would be a useful way to incorporate the student
perspective into the Plan.
|
| |
|
The following
course of action was recommended:
Receipt of comments from
Academic Board 23 November meeting.
Consideration of
adjustments recommended by members in discussion e.g. re-sequencing
of Objectives 1 & 2; recasting the Objectives.
Consideration of
implementation issues.
Production of a revised
draft and dissemination to members for further comment.
|
| 9. |
Research and Research Training |
|
9.1 |
Research and Research Training Plan |
| |
|
Professor
Cornish introduced the draft Monash Research and Research Training
Plan (2006-2008). In so doing, reference was made to the overarching
approach to the Plan’s having derived from the Research and Research
Management Review. Simplicity of approach was also a feature. The Plan
strove to impart a sense of a foundation of research excellence and
harnessing this for the benefit of the community.
Development of strategies and actions was undertaken following a half
day workshop in consultation with the Associate Deans (Research) and
Divisions responsible for supporting research. CADRES and the Research
Graduate School Committee were also consulted. Professor Cornish noted
that many of the strategies, actions and targets had been discussed in
other places e.g. the Research and Research Management Review.
The Plan also aimed to achieve a framework to facilitate the
Faculties’ development of their five (5) year research and research
training plans.
In generally endorsing the Plan, members commented that:
There was recognition
(along with some frustration) of the need for sacrifice to achieve
research objectives.
Both it and the Education
Plan represented considerable progress in planning for Monash’s
future.
|
| 10. |
Management |
|
10.1 |
Senior Management Development Program |
| |
|
Mr Peter
Marshall introduced the paper Senior Management Development Program:
Update and Future Directions, explaining that it represented a
synopsis of the program’s achievements to date and recommendations for
its future progress. Particular mention was made of the proposed
Reference Group (Appendix 5). The following suggestions were made in
discussion:
Inclusion of
representative/s from Graduate School of Business (management
programs) on the Reference Group.
The strategic issues
component was the least successful of the program, as it replicated
processes undertaken elsewhere. Time spent on this topic could be
devoted to other matters. In this regard, the intention for the
program to integrate better with other initiatives was emphasised.
An external/high-level
facilitator to deliver practical programs in information management
would be very useful.
The Committee endorsed the proposals contained in the paper Senior
Management Development Program: Update and Future Directions. |
|
10.2 |
Review of Careers and Employment |
| |
|
Introducing
this item, Mr Marshall explained that a series of drivers, including the
decline in GDS performance, had led to the review.
The Terms of Reference were as proposed in the agenda paper; however,
further refinement of the review timelines was required.
In endorsing the Review as proposed, members observed that it would
be useful to undertake some international comparative benchmarking.
|
|
10.3 |
Avian (Bird) Flu |
| |
|
Mr Marshall
advised members that advice would shortly be disseminated by global
email to the Monash community. In addition, and as part of Government
preparation, a large working group headed by Mr Coventry had been
established to undertake contingency planning for Monash in the event of
an avian flu outbreak.
Web-based information on avian flu was available from a number of
sites, including the WHO, DFAT, Federal and State Health Departments.
The Monash OH&S site had links to relevant sources.
Members were informed that, according to the WHO, the current phase
of alert stood at level 3 (animal to human transmission). |
| 11. |
Other business |
| |
There was no other business. |
| 12. |
Next meeting |
|
The next meeting of the Senior Management
Committee is scheduled for 2.15 p.m. Tuesday 7 February 2006
at the Clayton campus. |
