Monash University

Education Committee Meeting 2-2004

Meeting 2/2004 of the Education Committee was held on Wednesday, 17 March 2004, in the
Sir George Lush Room, Building 3a, Clayton campus, between at 2:20 pm and 3.45 pm.

There were present:

Professor A Lindsay (Chair), Associate Professor K Bensley, Associate Professor A Farley,
Ms S Joy, Dr P Richardson, Professor R Alfredson, Professor W Young, Associate Professor J Hurst, Mr C Avram, Mr L Morris, Associate Professor T Luff, Dr T Patti, Associate Professor L Roller, Professor C Browne, Professor J Harris, Ms A Wong, Ms M Aldred, Mr T Szalek,
Mr S Mc Loughlin, Mr T Stephens and Ms A Healey.

In attendance were:

Mr C Vernon, Mr D Secomb, Associate Professor V Clifford, Associate Professor Y Ryan,
Ms A Lazar, Associate Professor M Lindorff, Mr V Garth, Associate Professor K Jones, Ms R Clerehan and Ms S Chong (Secretary).

MINUTES

Part A Procedural and Policy Matters

*1. APOLOGIES & MEMBERSHIP:

Apologies were received from Professor Graham Webb, Associate Professor Michael Page (from whom the Chair received comments prior to the meeting), Professor Max King, Mr Peter Yates, Professor Merran Evans, Dr David Taylor and Dr Louise McCall.

The Committee welcomed Dr Paul Richardson, Ms Angie Wong and Ms Mary Aldred to their first meeting for the year and other staff members who had been invited to attend.

*2. STARRED ITEMS:

The Committee noted that certain items had been starred as requiring discussion. No further items were starred at the meeting.

The Committee approved without discussion all items other than those starred.

*3. MINUTES:

Documentation was previously circulated.

The minutes of Education Committee Meeting 1/2004, held Wednesday, 4 February 2004, were approved.

Action/Information: Shana Chong

*4. MATTERS ARISING FROM MINUTES:

Refer to items 7, 8 and 9.

5. ITEMS OF INTEREST FROM ACADEMIC BOARD MEETING 1/2004:

Members noted that the Academic Board had noted all matters that were submitted via the Report of Meeting 1/2004 of the Education Committee.

*6. AMENDMENTS TO GENERAL AND ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT ACTIVITIES AND
STATUTE 4.1 - DISCIPLINE:

Ms Amanda Lazar, Deputy University Solicitor, spoke to this item. She informed the Committee of a number of cases heard by various faculty discipline committees in 2003 that highlighted certain provisions in Statute 4.1, Discipline, that were deficient in dealing with academic and general misconduct matters for double degree students.

Ms Lazar sought advice and instructions from the Committee on proceeding with amendments to Statute 4.1, Discipline, to clarify procedures for double degree students appearing before the faculty discipline committee.

In response to a proposal that incidents of general or academic misconduct should be reported to the faculty manager of the faculty responsible for the unit in which the misconduct occurred, the Committee noted that:

Double-degree students were not the only students taking units from outside of their "managing faculty", students in most courses could take elective units. If, however, the same principle in was extended to all students in a unit, and the faculty that handled general or academic misconduct was determined by the unit taken, then there was the possibility that several cases (eg exam cheating) could arise for the same student without any coordination of that; and

as exclusion was a possible outcome of the disciplinary hearing, the matter should be referred to the managing faculty for action.

The Committee concurred that the addition of a member from the non-managing faculty in the hearing of the student’s case would neutralise the effects of a complex situation and permit equal say from both faculties in the student’s case.

After due consideration the Committee approved the following amendments to the procedures:

for incidents of general misconduct or academic misconduct involving double degree students to be reported to the faculty manager of the managing faculty of the student’s enrolment and for the faculty discipline committee to invite a member from the non-managing faculty to be constituted in the membership committee;

include a member from the non-managing faculty in the hearing of a discipline committee against a student who was enrolled a double degree; and

where an incident of academic misconduct involved students from more than one faculty, that the charges be heard by a Central Discipline Committee.

Consultation with student representatives would be sought following the re-draft of Statute 4.1 – Discipline.

It was agreed that further discussion and consideration to the issue of misconduct outside of university was warranted to define the behaviours that reflected the university’s values and provide a basis for discipline procedures against conduct outside the bounds of ethics and integrity, noting this foreshadowed a new category of misconduct. The Chair observed that in an era of increased professional and academic requirements by the university community and incidents of electronic plagiarism, it would be beneficial to identify a series of behaviours that met the university’s criteria in this area. Accordingly, the Committee formed a working group (comprising Ms Amanda Lazar, Professor Chris Browne, Ms Mary Aldred, Mr Timothy Szalek, Mr Leighton Morris and Associate Professor Ken Jones) to address this issue before presenting its outcomes to Education Committee.

The Committee approved the following amendments to the procedures and the Deputy University Solicitor would make the subsequent amendments to Statute 4.1 - Discipline:

for incidents of general misconduct or academic misconduct involving double degree students to be reported to the faculty manager of the managing faculty of the student’s enrolment and for the faculty discipline committee to invite a member from the non-managing faculty to be constituted in the membership committee;

include a member from the non-managing faculty in the hearing of a discipline committee against a student who was enrolled a double degree; and

where an incident of academic misconduct involved students from more than one faculty, that the charges be heard by a Central Discipline Committee.

The Committee formed a working group to formulate a series of statements in relation to the University’s policy on ethical behaviour and professional standards, to provide the basis for a definition and development of a new category of misconduct.

Action/Information: Ms A Lazar, Professor C Browne, Ms M Aldred, Mr T Szalek, Mr L Morris, Associate Professor K Jones

*7. AMENDMENTS TO THE OPEN LEARNING AUSTRALIA STUDENTS DISCIPLINE PROCEDURES:

This item was deferred from the last meeting and Ms Lazar recommended the Committee endorse the amendments to allow consistency in the wording of the policy with Statute 4.1 - Discipline.

The Committee noted that prior consultation with student representatives had occurred in relation to these amendments and that any amendments to the definition of Discipline, as foreshadowed in item 6, would be reflected in the Open Learning Australia student procedures.

The Education Committee approved and endorsed two amendments to the Open Learning Australia Discipline Procedures, submitted by the Deputy University Solicitor:

That the definitions of ‘cheating’ and ‘general misconduct’ be added to clause 1 of the Open Learning Australia Students Discipline Procedures; and

That clause 7, Powers and Duties of a faculty discipline committee, be amended by inclusion of the power to exclude a student from any open learning programs offered by the University.

Action/Information: Ms A Lazar, Ms K Garland-Gobbi

*8. WORKING PARTY ON EXCLUSION FOR UNSATISFACTORY PROGRESS PROCEDURES REVIEW:

Discussion and consideration of Item 10 was incorporated into this item. Associate Professor John Hurst, Chair, Working Party on Review of Exclusion Procedures, spoke to this item.

Subsequent to Meeting 1/2004 and amendments to the working party’s report (p5-9), Associate Professor Hurst provided a background to the reasons behind the submissions from the Faculty Managers’ Group and the Faculty of Law, following the publication of the working party’s recommendations. In formulating the recommendations to double degree procedures, Associate Professor Hurst outlined that the working party worked in consultation with the Faculty of Law (noting its management of most double degree programs with the Faculty of Business and Economics) and developed a set of procedures that provided a workable outcome to the Law faculty at that time.

According to Mr David Secomb, representing the Faculty Managers’ Group, the most feasible approach for dealing with double degree students was to endorse handling by the managing faculty to ensure the most simple process, in a system of highly complicated procedures, and eliminate any possibility that allowed identification of students in breach of progress to go undetected, noting that the endorsed approach was prone to "slip through the cracks".

Associate Professor Hurst recommended discussion occur at Education Committee prior to any further actions taken by the working party and noted that if the Committee supported the proposal made by the Faculty Managers’ Group, the working party would endorse those recommendations. The Committee noted that members were, in principle, supportive of a consistent and simpler process for double degree students in light of existing procedures.

After considerable discussion, the Chair advised and members concurred that the working party should finalise the matter, in consultation with all faculties and bring its outcomes to Education Committee for implementation, noting that the Law faculty indicated its agreement to reach a practicable compromise.

On other outstanding exclusion matters, Associate Professor Hurst raised the issue of interpreters and membership of the academic progress committee for consideration. On the issue of interpreters, the following issues were discussed:

whether a case could be made for international students who considered that their level of English was inadequate in order to represent themselves before a committee;

cost considerations, resourcing and availability of interpreters;

the extent to which language proficiency was a criteria for academic progress;

the university’s duty of care to its international students, to ensure that these cohort of students understood the process they were undergoing, noting the consequences and stresses faced by these students;

whether the Student Rights area should be the first point of contact for international students and assess whether students be referred to interpreters;

if interpreters were allowed, misinterpretation may be permissible as a course of appeal;

provision of interpreters either made available to students before the hearing or made available to students appealing an exclusion or where recommended by the faculty APC;

differences between entry IELTS (International English Language Testing System) standards and the actual level of speaking and listening skills as well as expectations of some students that support systems should be in place to assist their progression in written and verbal communication; and

it was noted that the issue of interpreters had never been raised as an issue in relation to exclusion hearings undertaken at Monash College.

Members agreed that this was a problematic and highly complex issue but noted from past experiences that the availability of staff on hand to translate or student members who acted as interpreters had provided much assistance to these students. The Committee referred the matter to the working party for further consideration.

The Committee noted feedback from members on the high quality of preparation and assistance provided by student rights officers at the recent faculty academic progress committee hearings.

On the matter membership of the APC, the Committee recommended that the APC may invite a non-Faculty Board member to the committee only on the capacity to provide advice, without voting rights.

The Committee received the updated report of the Working Party and noted the subsequent proposal from the Faculty Managers’ Group and the response from the Faculty of Law in relation to those recommendations. The Working Party on Exclusion for Unsatisfactory Progress Procedures Review, agreed to consult with all faculties on any outstanding matters, in addition to those set out below, prior to forwarding its recommendations for implementation at the next meeting of Education Committee:

double degree procedures;

provision of interpreters at hearings; and

membership of the faculty academic progress committees.

Action/Information: Associate Professor J Hurst, Mr D Secomb, Mr K Hobbs, Ms S Chong

*9. EXCLUSION FOR UNSATISFACTORY PROGRESS – DOUBLE DEGREE PROCEDURES:

Refer to item 8.

*10. IMPLEMENTATION STEERING GROUP ON SPECIAL EXAMINATION CONDITIONS FOR NON ENGLISH SPEAKING BACKGROUND STUDENTS:

Ms Rosemary Clerehan, Head, Language and Learning Services, was invited to provide comments to this item.

The Chair noted that the Assessment Working Party would be an appropriate group to oversee the implementation of the following recommendations of the review conducted on ‘Special examination conditions for NESB students’:

more systematic publicity of the policy so that students were aware of it;

more systematic publicity of the policy so that faculty staff were aware of it; and

development of a consistent template for the student application form

and, accordingly, an Implementation Steering Group was not required for these purposes.

Ms Clerehan recommended that the Examinations Branch and Equity and Diversity be consulted in the working group, following the first cycle of the policy’s implementation. She informed the Committee that implementation of the policy had been fairly smooth and recommended that Examinations Branch and Equity and Diversity representatives be included in that group.

The Committee endorsed the Assessment Working Party, with additional representation from the areas of Examinations Branch and Equity and Diversity, to review the recommendations of the review conducted on ‘Special examination conditions for NESB students’.

Action/Information: Professor C Browne, Mr P Yates, Ms K Gardner

*11. OTHER BUSINESS:

Members were notified of a forthcoming forum on the impact of electronic resources on teaching and learning, to be held on 26 March 2004, which was open to all staff and students. Professor Lindsay noted that the forum, presented by the Library, CeLTS and HEPCIT, may develop into a recurring event and encouraged members to support the event.

The Committee noted the Chair’s comments.

Action/Information: members

PART B: FACULTY REPORTS AND PROPOSALS

*12. BIANNUAL FACULTY REPORTS OF APPROVED COURSE AND UNIT DEVELOPMENTS TO EDUCATION COMMITTEE

Biannual reports from all faculties were circulated (p17-173).

As noted by Associate Professor Page, the Chair requested members to note a reference in the Faculty of Business & Economics biannual report to the Associate Degree in Business and Commerce, a two year program that was granted provisional approval on a pilot/trial basis, subject to a bi-annual review.

The Education Committee received and noted the biannual reports of approved course and unit developments, presented by the Faculties of Art and Design, Arts, Business and Economics, Education, Engineering, Information Technology, Law, Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Pharmacy and Science.

Action/Information: S Stafford, A Farley

PART C: NEXT MEETING

The next scheduled meeting of the Education Committee (Meeting 3/2004) will be held at 2:15 pm on Wednesday, 19 May 2004.

All final submissions for the agenda for that meeting are due by Wednesday, 5 May 2004.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Membership:

Professor Alan Lindsay (Chair)

Associate Professor Karen Bensley

Dr Heinz Kreutz

Associate Professor Alan Farley

Ms Sally Joy

Dr Debbie Corrigan & Dr Paul Richardson

Professor Robin Alfredson

Professor William Young

Associate Professor John Hurst

Mr Chris Avram

Mr Leighton Morris

Associate Professor Tony Luff

Dr Louise McCall

Associate Professor Michael Page

Dr Tony Patti

Associate Professor Louis Roller

Dr David Taylor

Professor Max King

Professor Chris Browne

Professor Merran Evans

Professor John Harris

Professor Graham Webb

Ms Mary Aldred (MONSU – Caulfield)

Ms Taryn Macfarlane (MONSU – Peninsula)

Ms Angie Wong (MSA – Clayton)

Mr Timothy Szalek (MUBS – Berwick)

Mr Sean Mc Loughlin (MUGSU - Gippsland)

(Pharmacy Students Association) – position vacant

Mr Tim Stephens (MPA – masters by coursework)

Ms Ann Healey (MPA – graduate/postgraduate diploma)

In Attendance:

Mr Clive Vernon

Mr David Secomb

Mr P Yates (alternate for Mr P Marshall)

Ms Cathrine Harboe-Ree

Associate Professor Valerie Clifford

Associate Professor Yoni Ryan

Associate Professor Marg Lindorff

Ms Shana Chong (Secretary)

Further Distribution:

Faculty Managers/Registrars (*9)

Mr T Calder

Ms K Wilson-Reid

Ms P Williams

Ms P Herman

Ms S Stafford

Ms B Le Grand