Education Committee Meeting 2-2006

Meeting 2/2006 of the Education Committee was held on Wednesday, 19 April 2006, in the Sir George Lush Room, Building 3a, Clayton campus, between 2:18 pm and 4:25 pm.

Professor S Parker (Chair), Dr H Kreutz, Professors O Hughes and T Dingle, Dr G Hildebrand, Associate Professors B Doecke and G Codner, Professor D Arnott, Dr J Paterson, Associate Professor T Luff, Dr L McCall, Associate Professor L Roller, Dr C Varsavsky, Ms G Key, Mr C Holmes, Mr L Whiteley, Associate Professor J Hurst, Professors M Evans, G Webb and D Murphy, Ms C Cooze, Mr T Masocco, Ms S Bell, Mr P Yates, Mr M Hatwell, Ms A Lazar, Associate Professor M Lindorff and Ms A Shelton.

Professor W Young, Ms J Allen, Dr D Taylor and Mr C Vernon.

Ms S Chong (Secretary)

MINUTES OF MEETING

On behalf of the Committee the Chair welcomed Dr Gaell Hildebrand, Associate Dean Teaching, Faculty of Education, as a returning member.

The Education Committee recommended that Mr Terry Masocco, Manager Financial Resources Planning, Financial Resources Management Division, be co-opted into the membership of the Education Committee.

The unconfirmed minutes of meeting 1/2006 held on 8 March 2006, were circulated on 29 March 2006, and on the agenda.

4. MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

The Chair spoke to this item. A draft structure of the Academic Board committees was tabled at the meeting and is attached. The Education Committee discussed the draft structure of suggested committees reporting to the Education Committee, as presented by the Chair. It was noted that the Education Committee was proposed as a main sub-committee of the Academic Board, alongside the Research Committee (formerly CADRES) and the General Library Committee, with a hierarchy of subcommittees reporting to it.

The Chair informed members that the proposed hierarchy of committees would report to the Academic Board via the Education Committee and the Research Committee. The committee structure would, therefore, reflect the demarcation between teaching and research, and enable greater scrutiny and broader discussion of the issues surrounding the educational experience to occur via the reporting line of the Education Committee through its subcommittees.

The suggested committees reporting to Education Committee include:

• Learning, Teaching and Quality (refer to item 4.2);
• Education Policy and Programs (refer to item 4.3);
• Transnational Quality Assurance and Improvement Committee (TQAIC), via the Learning, Teaching and Quality subcommittee;
• Admissions;
• Scholarships;
• Exclusion Appeals;
• Central Discipline Committee / Central Discipline Committee (Appeals); and
• Student Experience Working Party (not shown on the chart).

The Education Committee considered the proposed committee structure. The Committee received feedback that the specialist functions and operations of various committees, including the Exclusion Appeals Committee, Central Discipline Committee and the Central Discipline Committee (Appeals), may require further re-examination in relation to their placement on the committee structure.

The Committee also noted the suggestion that committees that did not fit under research or education should remain as committees of the Board.

In order to gather further information regarding the issues and activities relating to these specialist committees, Professor Parker proposed to meet with the chairs, deputy chairs and executive secretaries of the committees, prior to refining the organisational chart. The Committee agreed to this proposed approach.

Members noted the suggestion that TQAIC, a specialist committee that reviewed the delivery and quality of offshore partnership programs in terms of academic standards and the equivalent student experience these programs provided, could be positioned under Learning, Teaching and Quality or Education Policy and Programs subcommittees.

Members noted that the Scholarships Committee had been recast as a subcommittee of the Admissions Committee.

Professor Parker confirmed that the Exclusion Procedures Subcommittee was now a working party of the Educational Policy and Programs Subcommittee and there would effectively be no change to its current situation.

The Committee further noted that further information regarding the Academic Advisory Committee (Malaysia), Board of Studies (Gippsland) and Board of Studies (South Africa), which have been proposed to report to the Education Policy and Programs subcommittee, would be provided in the revised draft, following consultation by the Chair and the respective Pro Vice-Chancellors of these campuses.

The Committee noted the advice of the Chair that a revised draft of the Academic Board committee structure would be presented at the next meeting for the Committee’s consideration, prior to the recasting of the terms of reference.

Action: The Education Committee:

• noted the advice of the Chair regarding the proposed restructure of the Education Committee subcommittees;

• noted that the Chair would consult with the chairs, deputy chairs and executive secretaries of the proposed subcommittees of Education Committee;

• noted that a revised Academic Board committee structure would be presented at the next meeting; and

• noted that a revised terms of reference would be presented, following confirmation of the subcommittees reporting to the Education Committee.

Documentation was circulated and the Chair spoke to this item. The draft terms of reference and membership structure were considered by the Committee.

The Committee provided feedback to the terms of reference, including:

• comments that there was considerable overlap in the wording of the terms of reference of both subcommittees regarding the issues of quality and compliance;

• the suggestion of ensuring a balanced representation of Associate Deans Teaching members in both subcommittees; and

• an introductory statement to provide greater clarification of the functions of each subcommittee.

It was agreed that explanatory information should precede the terms of reference in order to distinguish the objectives of the subcommittees. The Chair would present the revised terms of reference of both subcommittees at the next meeting.

Action: The Education Committee noted that a revised set of terms of reference and additional preface would be presented to Meeting 3/06 for consideration.

Ms Ann Shelton, Solicitors Office, was invited to provide a further update of this item. Documentation was circulated. Ms Shelton presented a summary report of faculties that had provided responses to a request from the Solicitors Office regarding the current state of faculty awards regulations against a copy of the relevant section of the Kronos report.

The Education Committee noted the report from Ms Ann Shelton, Solicitors Office and noted the advice from the Chair regarding the priority of the updating of faculty awards regulations.

The Chair provided a verbal report on this item.

The Committee noted that a draft paper proposing Swot Vac options would be ready for circulation, following a forthcoming meeting of the Academic Year Working Party and further consultation with the student community. The Chair informed members that a further student survey may be necessary to gauge their preferences for the options presented.

The Committee noted the Chair’s advice that Monash was the only institution from the Group of 8 universities that did not have a swot vac period prior to the commencement of examinations. A proposal would be finalised prior to Meeting 3/06 for consideration by faculties.

The Committee noted that the suite of documents, including a proposal, a student survey report, comparative data from Australian and Group of 8 universities and a GANTT chart, would be circulated to members, for further consultation in their faculties, as soon as practicable.

The Education Committee noted that the interim Biotechnology Board of Studies had met to consider the qualifications issue of the Bachelor of Biotechnology with Honours, following discussion of this item at Meeting 1/06.

The Committee noted the decision of the Board that the proposed course progression had been amended in order to allow students to complete the four-year program and exit at the end of the four years, with or without honours. The qualifications issue, therefore, does not require further consideration by the Education Committee.

The Committee further noted the status of the Bachelor of Psychology with Honours course proposal, which was flagged at the last meeting, being ‘professionally-based’ and developed through industry consultations, which may require further consideration by the Education Committee regarding an equivalent qualifications category issue.

Members noted the Chair’s advice that the Plagiarism Policy and Procedures would require further refinements to the wording, following consideration at Meeting 1/06, ahead of its submission to the Academic Board for approval.

*6. GRADING

Documentation was circulated. On the advice of the Chair, the Committee would consider the issue of adopting a university-wide approach to grade point average calculation, noting that the subsequent recommendations incorporated in the paper would be referred to the Education Policy and Programs Subcommittee, following discussions between the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning) and Mr Hatwell. Members were advised that a number of anomalies had arisen that required further consideration in relation to the accompanying principles.

Mr Mark Hatwell, Manager Policy and Publications, Student Administration, was invited to speak to this item. It was noted that a publication of a student’s GPA may enhance the student’s prospects for employment or further studies, noting that the grade point average was the most standardised form of international recognition of grade equivalence.

Mr Hatwell informed members that it was feasible for Callista to calculate the grade point average, noting that this calculation was currently based on the seven-point GPA scale, which was the scale utilised by universities in Australia. Members noted that the four-point GPA scale was the most widely recognised benchmark internationally and any decision to adopt this method should enhance students’ prospects externally.

Members noted that current procedures enabled the student’s weighted average mark to be provided to students, however, this was not published on academic transcripts.

Members provided comments to the proposal, including feedback that further consideration be given to the calculation of Honours coursework grade point averages. The Committee agreed to refer the issues of grade point average and weighted average mark for further discussion, noting indicative support towards the four-point GPA scale.

The Committee recommended the principle of a university-wide approach to grade point averages and that further consideration on a calculation method of student GPA and weighted average marks be referred to the Education Policy and Programs Subcommittee.

Faculties agreed to forward any further comments to the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning).

• approved the recommendation that a university-wide approach to grade point averages be adopted; and

• referred to the Education Policy and Programs Subcommittee for further consideration, the proposed:

  • calculation method of a standardised grade point average, and

  • publication of student GPA and weighted average mark on academic transcripts.

Documentation was circulated. Mr Terry Masocco, Manager Financial Resources Planning, Financial Resources Management Division, was invited to speak to this item.

Mr Masocco referred members to the Financial Resources Management website for any changes or regular updates to the course and unit costing models.

Following brief discussion, the committee noted the three costing models available for utilisation for domestic campuses.

Documentation was circulated. The Chair spoke to this item.

The Committee approved the request for the imposition of unit quotas from the Faculty of Law. The Committee noted the advice of Dr Jeannie Paterson, Director Teaching, Faculty of Law, that the selection of students were made by the faculty on the basis of merit, with preference towards final year students, noting this was an anomaly to the policy, located at: http://www.adm.monash.edu.au/execserv/policies/Academic-Policies/policy/unit-and-course-quotas.html.

The Education Committee agreed to a proposal to amend the policy on courses and unit quotas in order to allow the approving authority to be devolved to faculties. Faculties were advised to ensure timely publication of the imposition of course and unit quotas.

Documentation was circulated and further documentation, regarding Monash’s response to the Federal Education Minister’s discussion paper, was tabled at the meeting and is attached to the minutes. Professor Merran Evans, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning), was invited to speak to this item.

The Committee noted the discussion paper The Bologna Process and Australia: Next Steps (4 April 2006) had been released to stimulate discussion on the educational reforms in Europe and stress the importance of aligning Australian higher education with European initiatives.

The Committee noted, on the advice of the Chair, that the three-year undergraduate degree plus two-year masters and the four-year undergraduate degree plus one year masters would be the preferred models. The Committee observed that any moves by an Australian university to align to a three-year undergraduate degree plus two-year masters program, akin to the European model, would have strategic considerations for Monash. In terms of international developments in higher education, Monash should also shift its awareness towards developments in North America and Asia.

The Committee noted the suggested increased use of the Diploma Supplement, noting a report was submitted by Monash to DEST in April 2005 as part of its study on the implications of issuing diploma supplements. This report is available at http://www.ups.monash.edu.au/academic/projects/dspp/dspp-final.pdf.

*9. FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING STANDARDS RMO2002/0656

Documentation was circulated and Professor Graham Webb, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Quality) and Professor David Murphy, Director Centre for the Advancement of Learning and Teaching, were invited to provide comments to this item.

The Committee noted the paper as a resource for information regarding national agreed standards of teaching to ensure that staff obtain professional status, with possible implications for Monash in the areas of the Graduate Certificate in Higher Education and professional development for sessional staff.

Documentation was circulated and Professor Graham Webb, Pro Vice-Chancellor (Quality), spoke to this item. Dr Sid Nair, Quality Adviser (Evaluation & Research), CHEQ, was an apology.

The Committee noted the advice of Professor Webb, regarding the following items:

• availability of all unit evaluation reports from the CHEQ website;

• consideration of timelines and improvements to procedures;

• efficiency of online questionnaires;

• closing date for MonQuest questionnaires; and

• initiatives to improve response rates.

Noting the last dot point, Professor Webb and the Chair highlighted the necessity of improving Monash’s response rates in terms securing significant funding from the Learning Teaching Performance Fund, noting that Monash’s current response rate for the Course Experience Questionnaire was 54 per cent.

In order to improve turnaround time efficiency with the processing of Unit Evaluations, the Education Committee accepted the recommendation of the Unit Evaluation Steering Group regarding the procedures for paper-based questionnaires. All paper based surveys needed to be received within two weeks of the close of the evaluation period.

Professor David Murphy, Director Centre for the Advancement of Learning and Teaching, spoke to this item.

Professor Murphy referred members to the new awards schemes within Monash and alignment with the national Carrick Awards, which arose out of the Senior Management Summit 2006. Members noted the procedures leading up to the due date of nominations for the Carrick Awards, noting that the University deadline for the Citation awards were due by 26 April.

Faculties were advised to provide up to four nominations, preferably in rank order, in order to assist the Monash selection panel. The three categories of awards were:

• 26 Awards for Teaching Excellence ($25,000)

• One Prime Minister’s Award for the Australian University Teacher of the Year ($50,000 and a medal);

• 210 Citations for Outstanding Contributions to Student Learning ($10,000 each); and

• 14 Awards for Programs that Enhance Learning ($25,000).

*12. REGULATIONS PURSUANT TO STATUTE 6.2 – EXCLUSION FOR UNSATISFACTORY RMO2001/0500

Documentation was circulated. Ms Amanda Lazar, Deputy University Solicitor, and Associate Professor Marg Lindorff, Chair, Exclusion Procedures Working Party, were invited to attend to speak to this item.

The Committee was informed that students currently needed to complete two semesters of study in one academic year before they were considered for exclusion. Ms Lazar advised this had created a situation where students, who did not meet academic progress requirements in first semester, could avoid an Academic Progress Committee (APC) hearing by taking intermission in second semester. Having not completed at least two semesters of study in the one year, they could not be considered by an APC.

Ms Lazar confirmed the reason for the requirement of at least two semesters was to ensure that students who were admitted mid-year were not excluded after only one semester. The Committee noted the advice of Ms Lazar and Associate Professor Lindorff that the proposed amendment to the Regulations would enable clarification of the procedures, in order for faculties to consider students that had completed studies for one semester in the current academic year who had previously completed study in a previous semester, for the purposes of unsatisfactory progress review, and capture the loophole of intermitted students. Ms Lazar advised that the amendment would ensure students who were admitted at mid-year would be protected from exclusion after only one semester.

The Committee considered the proposed amendment:

3.1.1 in the period commencing in December of the previous year and including at least two semesters of candidature, passed less than 50% of the student's enrolment;
3.1.1 completed at least two semesters of candidature and, in the period commencing in December of the previous year, passed less than 50% of the student's enrolment.

The Committee noted comments regarding the significant portion of students that commenced candidature at mid year and the suggestion that the Regulations should reflect equivalence for students that commenced candidature at any time of the academic year. In response to a query from a member regarding a possible mid-year review of unsatisfactory progress, Ms Lazar and Associate Professor Lindorff advised that this was not feasible due to logistical considerations.

The Committee endorsed the proposal and the Chair also flagged the possible review of the processes pertaining to unsatisfactory progress.

The Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning) informed members of a follow-up review of education policies and procedures and faculty compliance to be undertaken in May 2006.

DEVELOPMENTS

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

The next scheduled meeting of the Education Committee (Meeting 3/2006) will be held at 2:15 pm on Wednesday, 31 May 2006. The venue is the Clayfield Room, Building A1, Caulfield campus.

Membership:

Professor Stephen Parker (Chair)

Ms Jenny Allen

Dr Heinz Kreutz

Professor Owen Hughes

Professor Tony Dingle

Associate Professor Sally Joy

Associate Professor Brenton Doecke

Associate Professor Gary Codner

Professor William Young

Professor David Arnott

Dr Jeannie Paterson

Associate Professor Tony Luff

Dr Louise McCall

Associate Professor Louis Roller

Dr David Taylor

Dr Cristina Varsavsky

Dr Tony Patti

Professor Max King

Associate Professor John Hurst

Professor Merran Evans

Professor Graham Webb

Professor David Murphy

Ms Glenda Key

Ms Emily Greco, MONSU – Caulfield

Mr Tim Brown, MONSU – Peninsula

Mr Chris Holmes, MSA – Clayton

Mr David Hayes, MUBS – Berwick

Mr Kirk Slywa, MUGSU - Gippsland

Pharmacy Students Association – position vacant

Mr Leslie Whiteley - MPA masters by coursework

MPA – graduate/postgraduate diploma – position vacant

Mr Terry Masocco

Mr Clive Vernon

Mr Peter Yates (alternate for Mr P Marshall)

Ms Christine Cooze (alternate for Ms Cathrine Harboe-Ree)

Ms Sue Bell

Ms Shana Chong (Secretary)

Faculty Managers/Registrars (*9)

Mr T Calder

Ms P Williams

Ms P Herman

RMO