Biannual Exclusion Forum 1-2006

Notes of the discussion forum held on Tuesday 30 May 2006, from 10:05am to 11.25am in the Council Room, first floor, Building 3a, Clayton campus.

Notes

Associate Professor Tony Luff, incoming Chair, Exclusion Procedures Working Party, opened the proceedings. The Chair thanked Associate Professor Marg Lindorff, past chair, for her work in the subcommittee and the APC training sessions.

Participants noted the focus of the Forum in developing ways to improve the process of exclusion for unsatisfactory progress and identify issues that arose from the recent exclusion cycle.

The Chair referred to issues in relation to the Centre for the Advancement of Learning and Teaching (CALT), which has replaced CeLTS, noting that the services provided by Language and Learning Services, in assisting at risk students with study approaches, language skills and work presentation, had been raised as an area of concern.

The list of participants and apologies were noted.

The notes from the Forum 2/2005 were noted. Introductory remarks from student members and student rights officers about the role of the exit support person at APC hearings were received and the information provided noted there were varying practices across different faculties.

The Forum noted the advice from the Chair regarding the re-establishment of the subcommittee into a working party, however, the functions of the group had not changed.

Ms Sally Trembath-Hastings, Manager Community Services, was invited to provide a verbal report about the outcomes of the evaluation.

The Forum noted that feedback provided following the inaugural training in December 2005 had been incorporated into the second training session held in January 2006.

Following the completion of APC hearings, a further evaluation form was distributed to staff and students to seek feedback following their actual experiences. Thirteen completed forms were returned. Ms Trembath-Hastings provided a summary of the responses. All the respondents would recommend APC training to others. Suggestions on the ways in which the training could be improved ranged from:

• Training for secretaries,
• More time spent on cross-cultural communication,
• Focus on the role-plays, and
• Emphasis on the statute, regulations and functions and procedures.

The Chair advised that the suggestions provided from the evaluation would be considered by the working party that formulated the APC training (Sally Trembath-Hastings, Tony Luff, Megan Petrass, Louise Lees and Shana Chong) when it meets later in the year. The main changes to the training program would be an additional item on ESOS reporting and student visas. A light lunch had been planned for the training.

A submission from MSA had been circulated to the working party for consideration. Mr Chris Holmes, MSA, was invited to make comments on this item.

MSA reported that the system of centralising communications with the Education Officers to source APC student members had worked quite well. The task of sourcing students would be greatly assisted if faculties provided information regarding the dates of hearings to Education Officers prior to October (noting that October/November was a peak time for office bearers, including student elections) or as early as possible, in order to ensure organisational efficiency and handover of information.

Comments received in relation to conflicting information on the web regarding the maximum number of members in an APC. The Faculty APC Functions and Procedures confirm that "the APC must consist of a maximum of six members at any hearing". Clarification regarding the maximum number of voting members was sought.

In some faculties, the APC extended the panel to include counsellors, who did not have voting rights but were allowed to direct questions, and the secretary, thereby increasing the number of people participating in the APC to eight people. Feedback from student members expressing concern regarding the number of people on APCs was noted.

The Forum noted that the presence of counsellors in one Faculty APC worked on the basis of a "triage", where student needs were assessed on an individual basis, and determined in order of how serious their requirements were.

The Chair advised that the issues would be referred to the Working Party for further consideration.

The following comments were received, including:

• A possible mid-year review of students at risk;
• Are the criteria for sending out mid-year letters too broad, noting that students that fail one unit received letters?
• Perception among many students, in particular first year students, that no action would be taken against them if they failed second semester units;
• Tailoring different letters for different cohorts, including those that may be identified as early as week six of the academic year, noting that Survival Week covered a number of related-issues;
• Concerns regarding the termination of Language and Learning Services. The Chair advised that CALT would be able to continue to provide their support to at risk students via workshops and presentations but not individual counselling. The loss of individual counselling services to students at risk is seen to be a detrimental setback in the services provided to assist those students.

Secretary’s Note: Further advice received post Forum has suggested that reference to the International Office in the Notes section of the letter be amended to the "International Student Support Unit on any campus".

Representatives from MONSU advised that information sessions regarding the early warning letter would be held for students in semester two. At this stage, two one-hour sessions will be held at Caulfield and Peninsula campuses, with a view to taking it to all campuses. Student Rights has collaborated to produce a document written in simple language about the early warning letter. This will be attached to the mid-year early warning letter.

It was suggested that the Working Party look at ways to simplify the letter in plain language to include only essential information about the consequences of failing. A suggestion was also received about a possible amalgamation of the university correspondence and the student rights document.

The Forum noted the advice of a member of the Disability Liaison Unit that the Disability

Liaison Unit should be included as one of the Support Services available to students on the mid-year early warning letter.

The Forum noted advice from Rob Barrett, Manager ESOS and Visa Support and Compliance, regarding the revised draft National Code, which is expected to be finalised mid-year. Three components of the Code have been raised as potential issues for university-wide procedures:

international student attendance at tutorials and other learning activities;

1. academic progress reporting; and
2. providers implementing an early intervention strategy for international students at risk of not meeting satisfactory academic progress and attendance requirements.
3. Mr Barrett advised that the University may need to meet more stringent criteria regarding academic progress and early intervention as set out in the draft Code if the attendance component for international students is not introduced.

The Chair advised that the suggestions would be put to the Working Party for consideration.

The Chair advised that the proposed amendment to the Regulations pursuant to Statute 6.2 had been approved by Academic Board. Ms Amanda Lazar, Deputy University Solicitor, explained that a student must have completed a minimum of two semesters of study before being referred to an APC. Provided this requirement was met, a Faculty Board may refer a student who has passed less than 50 per cent of the student’s enrolment to an APC without requiring that the failure be across two semesters. The benefit of the amendment/clarification was that students who fail 50% of their enrolments in one semester and then intermit, can now be referred to an APC provided the students have studied for at least two semesters in total.

The Forum noted the advice from Associate Professor Marg Lindorff that only failures across the current academic year (semesters 3, 1, 2) met the requirement.

Ms Rebecca Dianiska, Student Systems, was invited to speak to this item.

Faculties accepted the Forum recommendation to enter unsatisfactory progress data into Callista for the 2006 academic year, commencing from the mid-year early warning letter.

Student Systems would liaise with Faculty administrative staff regarding the data requirements in the progression outcomes recorded for mid-year to ensure consistency in the parameters.

The Forum noted that further training would be provided in the Student Systems - Unsatisfactory Progress Callista training held towards the end of the year.

The Chair reminded the Forum of correspondence that had been circulated to APC Chairs and Secretaries regarding this issue, for noting and future practice.

One faculty wrote to the overseas students who were due to appear before an APC and advised them that they would be permitted to discontinue their courses by a certain date and, if they did not do so, they would be excluded from all courses in the faculty for the 2006 academic year. This was not good practice as it involved subverting the decisions of APCs and avoidance of the DIMA reporting requirements.

A student who has met the criteria for exclusion by an APC may be given an opportunity to discontinue his/her course only if the Committee considers that it would be appropriate to give the student a chance to apply for a place at another university. In this circumstance, the Committee should adjourn the hearing (and its decision on exclusion) for 24 hours to allow the student an opportunity to effect the discontinuance.

Faculties accepted the recommendation that supporting emails would be sent regarding the student’s confirmation of the date and time of hearing, to the student’s email address. The email is to contain reference that correspondence has been sent to the student by mail on …..(date) to the student’s postal address.

This would be incorporated into the Faculty APC Functions and Procedures.

The Forum unanimously accepted the proposed change to add a section asking the student to complete details of how he/she would improve their academic performance and study practices.

The Forum further noted the initiative of one faculty to tailor the questions in order to get the most effective responses from the students in their faculty. It was agreed that the Faculty of Arts would send a copy of its Notice of Referral response form to the Working Party, for reference.

The faculty has proposed that the letter be simplified and that it is currently too long and detailed.

The Chair advised that the issues would be referred to the Working Party for further consideration.

In relation to the recommendation that guidelines are needed to cover what information the student rights officers should be given, the Forum received the advice from Student Rights that information distributed to the APC should also be made available to them.

The Working Party would develop guidelines in the Functions and Procedures.

In relation to the recommendation that a training session for student rights officers be held, the Forum received clarification from Student Rights that these processes were already in place. The training included input from APC Chairs and the EAC Law Chair.

Also refer Item 7.

Faculties provided feedback on the experiences they had with the use of the exit person. The Forum noted that in many cases, the student rights officer had a dual role by providing assistance at the hearing and exit support after the hearing. They were limited by time constraints to provide exit support to the excluded student because of their next scheduled hearing, which prevented the student from being escorted to University Counselling offices.

In faculties where counsellors were present at the hearing, they also acted as a support person and the triage system had worked quite well.

The Chair advised that the issues would be referred to the Working Party for further consideration. Mr Ian Bell, CALT, convenor of a working group looking at strategies to support faculties regarding the system of APC referrals, would be invited to the next meeting of the Working Party.

The Forum was advised of the proposed amendment to the Functions and Procedures, as a result of an appeal against exclusion and the reasons for the Chair’s determination.

The working party suggested an amendment to the Faculty APC Functions and Procedures, that:

4.1.1  In exceptional circumstances the APC may adjourn in order to obtain additional information. Where the student is enrolled in a summer unit, in exceptional circumstances the APC may, at its discretion, adjourn the hearing until the official release of summer semester results. Such a decision is made at the discretion of the APC and is not an automatic right. The adjournment must be with the consent of the student, and the student must be advised that only assessment completed prior to the official release date may be accepted for consideration, and the adjournment cannot be extended to allow for the resolution of any withheld or deferred results. The adjourned hearing is to be re-convened with the same APC chair and membership (as far as practicable) as the original hearing.

The Forum agreed to the suggested approach.

15.1  Hearings for students that did not respond to the Notice of Referral.

This item was flagged by one APC Chair. It seems that students that appeared at their hearing, who had not responded to the Notice of Referral, were seen by committee members as having an unfair advantage over those students that had gone through the proper processes.

It also threw the hearing schedules out of proportion, with a number of hearings having to be adjourned to another date, thus granting the "non-response" students further time than those students who had prepared a submission.

The Chair advised that the outcomes for non-responses should be monitored at the next cycle of APC hearings.

Biannual Forum 2/06 is to be held at 11am to 12.30pm on Wednesday, 4 October 2006 – Council Room, first floor, Building 3a, Clayton campus.