Meeting 4/2004 of the Education Committee was held on Wednesday, 14 July 2004, in the Sir George Lush Room, Building 3A, Clayton campus, between at 2:20 pm and 4.00 pm.

Professor A Lindsay (Chair), Associate Professor K Bensley, Dr G Hildebrand, Associate Professor I Snyder, Professor R Alfredson, Professor W Young, Mr C Avram, Associate Professor T Luff, Dr L McCall, Dr T Patti, Dr D Taylor, Professor D Kirkpatrick, Professor G Webb, Professor M Evans, Ms A Wong and Ms M Aldred.

Mr D Secomb, Associate Professor V Clifford, Associate Professor Y Ryan, Associate Professor M Lindorff, Mr T Hogan, Mr G Toohey, Ms S Chong (Secretary), Ms A Matchett and Ms S Stafford.

MINUTES

Apologies were received from Associate Professor M Page, Associate Professor J Hurst, Associate Professor L Roller, Professor C Browne, Dr H Kreutz, Professor M King, Ms A Healey and Mr T Szalek.

The Committee welcomed the new members from the Faculty of Education: Associate Professor Ilana Snyder, Associate Dean Professional and Postgraduate, and Dr Gaell Hildebrand, acting Associate Dean Teaching for Semester 2, 2004. Members also welcomed Professor Denise Kirkpatrick, the new Director Learning and Teaching, CeLTS, to the Education Committee.

Documentation was previously circulated.

Professor Lindsay informed the Committee of the processes that had occurred in the development of the Learning and Teaching Performance Fund. Following Monash’s submission to DEST last year, with input from a range of staff, particularly, Associate Professors Yoni Ryan and Val Clifford and Professor Chris Browne, a series of national consultations with the DEST advisory group was held.

Professor Lindsay advised that the Australian Vice–Chancellor’s Committee (AVCC) was considering the case for attaching funding to Stage 1 of the Fund. Members noted this signalled a significant shift in the AVCC’s orientation to the Fund and, if accepted by DEST, would require modifications to the fund’s structure and, consequently, a delay in its timelines. Currently Stage 1 provided for applications from institutions expressing interest in participating in the Fund, scheduled for January and February 2005. Outcomes from further consultative meetings by the AVCC working group on 15 July and the DEST advisory group on 26 July would provide further information on these developments.

Professor Lindsay recently attended a meeting of the AVCC and this discussion indicated support for a combination of qualitative and quantitative indicators as the preferred methodology for allocation of funding under Stage 2. He noted that the AVCC would lobby to DEST for support of a system that would assess a learning and teaching portfolio from each participating institution, containing a mix of quantitative and qualitative indicators. Further discussions in the consultative process would involve developing greater detail on the indicators and qualitative assessments, considering particularly the costs involved for institutions in this process.

The Chair added this item to the agenda at the meeting. Following considerable discussion of this item at Meeting 3/2004, Professor Lindsay updated the Committee on the progress of the internationalisation of the curriculum processes and activities of the Subcommittee.

Recent correspondence from the Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic) to Associate Deans Teaching, via email on 21 June 2004, advised of changes to IoC processes. Noting there was a degree of confusion about IoC activities within HEDU, the Internationalisation of the Curriculum Steering Subcommittee and the curriculum internationalisation project, coupled with the need for more active engagement from faculties in this area, it was agreed to rearrange the work of the Subcommittee from the other activities, following a review between Professor Lindsay and Associate Professor Clifford.

Professor Lindsay advised that Associate Professor Val Clifford would continue to lead HEDU’s work on its research initiatives and Professor Leon Piterman, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, had accepted the invitation to assume the Chair of the Subcommittee.

Members noted that Professors Lindsay and Piterman would conduct discussions on a range of matters including membership, priority tasks, strategies for faculty involvement, with input provided from the HEDU’s research outcomes.

Associate Deans Teaching were urged to address internationalising the curriculum in their faculty operations plan.

Professor Lindsay confirmed the Subcommittee would meet prior to the discussion with the International Self Review Panel at the forthcoming CADeT meeting on 26 August 2004. Both Professor Piterman and Associate Professor Clifford would be in attendance at the CADeT meeting for this item.

Members noted that the Academic Board had noted all matters that were submitted via the Report of Meeting 3/2004 of the Education Committee.

Documentation was circulated and members noted a small amendment to the Teaching Calendar and Census Date Model that was tabled in relation to the proposed dates for the Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Science’s Ambulance Teaching Period 1.

Mr Gerard Toohey, Student and Staff Services Division (SSSD), spoke to the item. He informed members that a working group within SSSD had done considerable work for next year’s proposed schedule of census dates and institutional teaching calendar, in preparation for the implementation of the Higher Education Support Act (HESA) 2003, with respect to census dates. Members noted the work on census dates and teaching calendar was part of a series of wider implications of higher education institutions and their reporting requirements to DEST. Mr Toohey asked the Committee to raise any items for discussion in relation to the proposed structure. Mr Toohey noted that endorsement at Education Committee of an agreed model would enable SSSD to conduct further planning into its preliminary work for next year’s introduction of the new calendar system and census dates.

Members noted that the deregulation of census dates and teaching calendar had subsequently removed the notion of semesters and universities were now unrestricted in setting their own teaching periods for the purposes of reporting and loading. The increased frequency and complexity of reporting cycles represented an increased workload on faculties and administrative divisions. The working group considered options for reporting timelines and identified a structure for faculties and central reporting in order to meet the DEST census dates, including the minimum criteria that these dates must not occur less than 20 per cent into the teaching period, to minimise impact on administrative procedures. To ensure consistency the working party proposed census dates for Semesters 1 and 2, 2005, to remain at 31 March and 31 August and this was also indicative of other higher education providers’ dates for the year ahead.

Mr Toohey outlined the principles used to establish the teaching periods and the census dates, including:

• a series of four Date Alias Instances (DAIs) within each teaching period that may determine a student’s academic transcript record: Withdrawn Early; Withdrawn No Load; Withdrawn Late; and Withdrawn Fail;
• some units may not align with an identifiable teaching period under the proposed model and faculties were advised to select teaching periods that best fit their teaching delivery to those units; and
• the relationship between the new dates and their implications to load, fee and reporting requirements, as outlined in the detailed flowcharts.

The rounds of consultation with faculty managers, student systems and administrative staff have resulted in a series of recommendations, outlined below, for consideration.

4.1.1 That the teaching periods and census dates in the document titled ‘Teaching Calendar and Census Date Model’ be adopted as presented.

4.2.1 That the following principles that were used to establish the census dates in the above mentioned document are accepted:

The standard University census dates are: 15 January, 15 February, 31 March, 30 April, 30 June, 31 August, 30 September, 31 October and 30 November.

The census date should fall on a mid-month (eg. 15^th) or end of month date (eg 30^th or 31^st).

Census Dates for Semester 1 and Semester 2 remain at 31 March and 31 August.

Where possible all Census Dates are set in a range of 20 – 45% into the semester and comply with one of the standard University census dates

When calculating the census date as a percentage range into the period, the period will consist of all dates from the Teaching Calendar Start Date to the Teaching Calendar End Date ie. Weekends, mid-semester breaks or public holidays will be included.

4.2.2 For all current and future established teaching periods if a census date must be set over the 45% range then it is to the next best standard census date available.

4.2.3 Where a teaching calendar has a census date that is more than 4 weeks into the teaching period then a date alias of WD-NO-LD will apply from the 4 week period until the census date. (Note: this is a reconfirmation of current University policy.)

4.2.4 The Withdrawn Late (WL) Date Alias is set as an off-set of one day (ie. Next day) after the census date.

4.2.5 The Withdrawn Fail (WN) Date Alias is set as an off-set of against the teaching period start date. For a standard 13 week teaching period (eg. Semester 1 and Semester 2) this off-set would be the first day of the 10th week of semester (as per current University policy) and for all other teaching periods with a different duration the WN Date Alias would be set pro rata.

4.3.1 That the following principles that were used to establish the teaching periods in the above mentioned document are accepted.

The University has a ‘standard’ set of teaching Calendars which include: *Semester 1, *Semester 2, *Winter, *3 Summer Periods (C, A and B), *Full-Year, a Trimester arrangement, Northern Hemisphere Calendars, Research Calendars and a Four Term arrangement. All other teaching calendars are considered ‘non-standard’ and a strong business case must be established before additional non-standard calendars are established.

*Note: These teaching periods will also have an identical ‘Alternate’ Teaching Period established for fee assessment purposes only.

Teaching Calendars are not named or specifically allocated to a Faculty.

The current ‘FLEX’ teaching periods and S%30 Medical Institute for Reproductive Development are disestablished as these can be subsumed by other pre-existing teaching periods.

4.3.2 The University accepts that not in all instances will the Teaching Calendar Start and End Dates match exactly with the teaching delivery.

4.3.3 All Teaching Calendars must have at least the Withdraw Early, Withdrawn No Load (where appropriate/in line with the policy), Withdrawn Late, Census Date and Withdrawn Fail Date Aliases.

No additional items were raised by the Committee and members endorsed the Working Party’s recommendations without further discussion.

The Chair introduced this item. Members noted that the issue of blind marking had been discussed from time to time at Education Committee and CADeT and the Chair referred to the 2002 Still Learning institutional self-review’s recommendation that ‘markers of examination scripts should not have access to the student’s name at the point of marking, and that consideration be given to a system used at other universities where the student ID number was converted to an examination number, with the code being known only to particular staff’. In previous discussions members had supported the sole use of student ID number on the examination script as the preferred and efficient way of implementing blind marking.

The Chair asked members to consider support for the principles behind blind assessment, noting considerable equity grounds to support its case, to discuss this issue further in their faculties, and to provide feedback prior to a detailed paper being prepared for discussion at the Education Committee Meeting 5/2004.

A key advantage provided by the use of student ID number was the protection for staff and students from deliberate bias and the provision of an adequate level of protection at a reasonable cost, without the use of an additional examination number. Members noted the use of an examination number would potentially be very costly with little added value. Professor Lindsay advised it was important to seek input from faculties on preferred options for a practicable system.

Members noted that blind marking was generally thought to be widely used at other domestic and international universities and that the Faculties of Law and Science had utilised blind marking practices within Monash.

Mr Terry Hogan, Student and Staff Services Division, encouraged faculties to include all staff involved in examinations in their consultations on this issue. He outlined the following procedural issues for consideration, including:

• procedures for distance education examinations as currently the name on the exam script provided the identification key;
• development of a consistent set of marking procedures for all faculties;
• introduction of a cohesive definition of blind marking;
• use of a ‘number-name’ checking system or equivalent to significantly reduce errors in the data entry and validation processes and
• a system to reduce errors involving multiple markers of examinations.

Mr Hogan flagged the idea of using initials or a combination of one name and student ID number for the purposes of eliminating bias during marking and minimising error rates during the data entry processes.

In the discussion that ensued, the following issues were noted:

• a self-checking number that already existed in the student identification number would help avoid errors occurring in instances of an incorrect identification number against the student name;
• there were already some systems in place to combat bias in examination marking, such as double marking for failed assessments and the final approval of results by relevant committees;
• acknowledgement of potential ‘systematic bias’ arising from the ability of markers to identify particular cohorts (eg students enrolled in transnational cooperative delivery programs).
• easy identification of exam booklets from distance education and international students; and
• issues for faculties where units incorporated little or no examination assessment, in units where the weighting of an assignment significantly contributes to the student’s final assessment or for direct panel assessments (eg, artistic and performance activities).

It was agreed that this issue be discussed at the next meeting of the Faculty Managers Group. Members supported a survey of Group of Eight universities’ practices and procedures on blind marking, incorporating items on associated issues and possible resolutions to problematic areas. The Chair observed that it would be useful for the Assessment Working Party explore the related issue of criteria for consistent marking of assignments.

Documentation was circulated and Mr David Secomb, Chair, Academic Policy Subcommittee of Education Committee, spoke to this item. Originally falling under the terms of reference of the Academic Policy Bank Project, these academic policies were subsequently considered by the Academic Policy Subcommittee, in its review of outstanding matters highlighted in the Academic Policy Bank Project’s final report.

Members noted that the Graduate Studies Policy, section 7, and the Education Policy, section 9.2, were no longer applicable and were superseded by the Academic Review and Course Review Policies and Procedures currently in use.

Upon its consideration of the policies on Non-Award Programs, the Committee noted that the 1999 Report by the LTOP Working Party on Non-Award Offerings/Quality Assurance (Non-Award Offerings) was received but not approved. Mr Secomb noted that these policies were discussed at Academic Board Meeting 5/1999 and members expressed reservations concerning the prohibition on the use of the university crest on non-award certificates and, subsequently, referred the matter to the Committee of Deans for further consideration. Members noted that no further action was taken on these issues. Members observed that marketing templates provided specific guidelines for use and this may reduce any concerns about the applications of the university crest.

The original Working Party report detailed three categories of non award courses:

• Faculty, Executive or Professional Certificate courses consisting of 24 credit points of units;
• various short courses or subjects offered involving an assessment component; and
• programs offered by various faculties, departments and centres without an assessment component.

Mr Secomb noted that there was scope for further development of the Working Party’s findings, noting the breadth of work represented in the report in its articulation of non-award principles. The Committee agreed that the original Working Party report constituted a solid foundation on which to base a statement of current policy. Accordingly, the University Academic Projects and Services will undertake the drafting of an academic policy on non-award programs to come forward to the Education Committee for consideration and approval.

Two reports were circulated. Professor Denise Kirkpatrick, Chair, Flexibility Subcommittee of Education Committee, spoke to this item.

Professor Kirkpatrick noted that the Subcommittee had been meeting for some time and it was timely to provide a progress report to the Committee. Members noted the preliminary work undertaken on the strategic plan for off campus learning and progress of its work against an amended set of Terms of Reference in the Subcommittee’s first report. In addition a comprehensive draft report on Flexibility Definitions and Measures was submitted to Education Committee for endorsement at the first level, to obtain support for data collection from undergraduate and postgraduate units from all faculties and data from support divisions.

This report was based on a flexibility study by the Faculty of Business and Economics and adapted by the Subcommittee to expand the study to include support divisions.

In relation to comments that some faculties may not be able to offer a number of flexible units and pathways, members were reminded that the institution-wide measure of flexibility was a collection of baseline data for unit reporting and not a ‘test’ of flexible units in faculties and departments. The survey would capture the way in which faculties and divisions were being flexible and members noted this would have varying results on different disciplines and applicable to what was appropriate at that time as not all faculties could provide flexible pathways and timing.

Members supported the notion to conduct a baseline study and discussion occurred about the provision to establish a position to collect the data. After consideration the Chair advised that it was appropriate for the position to be funded by CeLTS, noting that the work was identifiable under the area of Flexibility within the Learning and Teaching portfolio.

During discussion of item 4.2, members noted that a substantial amount of funding from DEST would be made available for offshore quality projects. Professor Graham Webb, CHEQ, stated information available at this stage indicated that funding was available for projects for higher education providers. DEST will provide additional funding of $1.35m in the form of 15 competitive grants of up to $100,000 for projects to develop best practice models for offshore delivery. In addition, $100,000 will be provided to AUQA to enhance current offshore auditing arrangements. The Chair proposed and Professor Webb agreed that Monash should put together a proposal for funding, in consultation with the relevant parties within this area.

The next scheduled meeting of the Education Committee (Meeting 5/2004) will be held at 2:15 pm on Wednesday, 8 September 2004.

Professor Alan Lindsay (Chair)

Associate Professor Karen Bensley

Dr Heinz Kreutz

Associate Professor Alan Farley

Ms Sally Joy

Dr Gaell Hildebrand

Associate Professor Ilana Snyder

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 Denise Kirkpatrick

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)

Mr Clive Vernon

Mr David Secomb

Mr Peter 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)

Faculty Managers/Registrars (*9)

Mr T Calder

Ms K Wilson-Reid

Ms P Williams

Ms P Herman

Ms S Stafford