Skip to content | Change text size
Assets | Includes | header.shtml
 

Exclusion Procedure Advisory Committee

A Sub-committee of Education Policy and Programs Committee

Meeting 1/08 of the Exclusion Procedures Advisory Committee (EPAC) was held on Friday 25th July 2008 at 10am to 12 noon in the Peter Wade Room, First Floor, Building 3B, Clayton Campus.

MINUTES

1.    Membership, Attendance and Apologies

Attendance:   Dr Kate Brown (Acting Chair), Dr Michael King, Ms Glenda Beecher, Ms Dash Jayasuriya, Ms Zuzana Quinn, Ms Yvonne Joyce, Mr David Watson.

Apologies:   Professor Tony Luff, Miss Kelly Tsagournos, Mr Sean Murphy – Student Representative, Gippsland Student Union.

In Attendance:   Mr Rob Barrett - ESOS Compliance Manager; Ms Andrea Waller - Enrolments Manager; Ms Sally Trembath-Hastings - Manager University Community Services; Ms Krystal Barr – Student Rights Manager MONSU Caulfield.

Secretary:   Mr Kendall Williamson – Executive Services.

2.    Formal Items

The Committee agreed:
That all items on the agenda not starred be adopted without discussion, and the action recommended be taken or the information therein noted.

3.    Minutes of Meeting 1/2008

Resolution:

EPAC confirmed the minutes of meeting 2/2007 to be a true and accurate record.

4.    Matters arising from the Minutes

4.1   APC Working Party

Ms Andrea Waller presented an update of the APC Working Party and the recent Student Administration Network meeting. There has been continuing development of Callista functionality to deal with mid-year intervention strategies. It was identified that some of the Callista outputs were not truly accurate with errors in information, missing text, and discontinued students being picked up in the process. This resulted in a higher level of manual checking by faculty staff.

* 4.2   ESOS Code Implementation

Mr Rob Barrett presented an update of the implementation of the new National Code.

Key issues identified were:

  • There had been increased scrutiny from DEEWR after the submission of Section 20 Notices on university records including warning letters and applications to underload. Consistency of administrative record keeping is important to minimise DEEWR clarifications.
  • There needed to be further clarification on Appeals to the Dean process and advice to students on the 20 working days timeframe.
  • A need to ensure 20 working days is clearly included all pro forma letters.
  • The ESOS website has been revised with further information for staff and students.

EPAC members resolved that it was important to clarify the Appeals to the Dean process, ensuring “exceptional circumstances” is outlined. It was noted that communication to the Deans on their role and responsibility should be undertaken.

5    General Business

5.1   APC Training

Mr Kendall Williamson presented a report summarising the feedback on the APC Training conducted on 12th December 2007.

Members discussed the training options and were unresolved on the best model to pursue for 2008 training. The proposed date of training which coincided with the final day of semester break was discounted as it was not practical for students or academic staff.

Members discussed the developing need for APC Chairs and Secretaries to be aware of administrative law principles. Ms Glenda Beecher undertook to further investigate the possibility of the university undertaking a project. The Faculty of Business and Economics was supported this for their staff.

5.2   5 Minute Hearings

Following feedback from the several faculties, Executive Services and the University Solicitors Office developed a strategy to decommission 5 Minute Hearings from the Faculty APC Process for students who do not respond to their Notice of Referral letter.

Ms Glenda Beecher and Mr Kendall Williamson provided an oral report to the committee on the necessary changes to Regulations to achieve this.

It was emphasised that whilst students are not required to be present at an APC Hearing, it was essential that any decision is made “by committee” and not by a delegated authority. Members identified that the ad hoc nature of 5 minute hearings was impractical and administratively burdensome. It was noted that students would still have the opportunity to appeal in exceptional circumstances to the dean.

EPAC resolved that that the University Solicitor should proceed to modify the Regulations for Academic Board approval.

5.3   Revision of APC Pro forma Letters

Members noted that following feedback provided by DEWR in relation to Student Visa appeals, the new National Code for ESOS students and faculties, it was determined that the APC Pro forma Letters should be re-drafted to fully meet the university’s obligations. The revised pro forma letters would be drafted by Executive Services for faculty consultation in time for the 2008 APC process.

5.4   APC Timeframes

Members provided feedback on issues related to timeframes during the APC process. The primary concern was the number of students who were still engaged in the APC process at Week 4.

5.5   Deans Appeal Process

Members advised that there were a number of issues related to the Deans Appeals Process being:

  • The timeframe in which the student can apply does not meet ESOS requirements. The removal of a set date is necessary.
  • The decision that the dean can make.
  • The limited flow of information to ESOS Reporting Team of students who are under review.

5.6   APC Forum

Members resolved that the next APC Forum should be held once Professor Luff is returned post-long service leave in October.

5.7   Provision of documentation to Student Rights Officers

Members advised that there was confusion related to the provision of student documentation during the APC process to Student Rights Officers.

(Secretarial Note:  Student Response Forms have a section that students have the option to tick providing the faculty permission to provide documentation to student Rights Officers. If this is unticked, no documentation should be provided).

5.8   Record Keeping

Members were advised that the University Records Manager advised that records should be kept for 2 years and then destroyed in line with standard practice. Student Rights Officers did not need to return the documentation as the student had ticked and signed the privacy release form.

5.9   Mid-Year Intervention

Members requested clarification on the implementation of the Mid-Year Intervention Policy and Procedures and whether conditions can be applied.

5.10   APC Report to EPPC

Resolution:

EPAC confirmed the 2007 APC Report and endorsed its forwarding to EPPC for noting.

6    Other Business

7    Next Meeting

To be confirmed.