Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee Meeting 2-2009

A sub-committee of Education Committee

1.    Apologies and attendance

There were present: Professors Adam Shoemaker (Chair) and Stephen Barkoczy, Dr Lorraine Bennett and Angela Carbone, Associate Professor Gary Codner, Dr Stephen Legg, Dr Kristina Macrae, Associate Professor Louise McCall, Ms Lauren O’Dwyer, Dr Geoff Romeo, Professor Peter Stewart, Dr Cristina Varsavsky

Apologies: Associate Professor Robert Nelson, Professors Phillip Steele and Julian Teicher.

In attendance: Mr Jeff McLean and Mr Wayne Gumley, Faculty of Business and Economics, and Mr Jeffrey Bender, Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education) (ODVCE) (for item 7); Mr Adrian Devey, ODVCE (for item 8); and Dr Cecilia Hewlett, ODVCE. Professor Shoemaker welcomed members and presenters to the meeting.

2.   Arrangement of Agenda and Starring of Items

Items 5.2 to 8 were starred for discussion.

Resolution:

The resolutions were adopted without discussion for all items other than those starred.

3.   Confirmation of Minutes

The minutes of Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee meeting 1/2009, held on 19 February 2009, were confirmed.

4.    Matters arising

Matters arising were discussed at items 5.2 and 7.1. *5. Update on CALT Activities

5.1   Receipt of report

Resolution:

The Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee received and noted the report of the Centre for the Advancement of Learning and Teaching.

5.2   Unit Guide Template Policy

Introducing the item, Dr Bennett informed members that significant progress had been made in refining the draft policy and thanked Associate Professor Varsavsky and Dr Macrae for their input. She noted that the accompanying procedures offered flexibility, in that faculties could create additional procedures to reflect the ways in which they teach.

During discussion, the following points were made:

The responsibility for the development of each Unit Guide would be under the direction of the Chief Examiner;
Associate Deans’ Teaching/Education (ADTE) could be responsible for approving each Unit Guide;
If ADTE were responsible for approving the guides, there would be significant resource issues;
In the Faculty of Information Technology, Unit Guides are vetted by the Education Quality Control Committee;
Responsibility for vetting could be further refined by a statement within the Policy that discipline groups would vet the guides;
It was vital that information on assessments provided to students in unit guides and handbooks was consistent; and
The first dot point of the Policy Statement addresses the issue of the reliability of information by stating “the student will be provided with accurate and timely information”.

Resolution:

The Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee received and endorsed the Unit Guide Template Policy for transmission to the Education Policy and Programs Committee.

For Information/Action: Dr Bennett

5.3 Learning and Teaching Showcase Series

An updated draft program was tabled. Dr Bennett informed members that the program currently consists of seven showcases, with the first to be held on 19 May. She noted that:

event locations are flexible;
more than ten events could be held; and
sessions will include international presenters.

Dr Bennett invited members to provide suggestions of further themes and presenters to her.

Resolution:

The Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee received and provided feedback on the draft program for the 2009 Learning and Teaching Showcase Series.

For action/information: Dr Bennett, LTQC members

5.4 Vice-Chancellor’s Showcase of Teaching Excellence

An updated draft program was tabled. Introducing the item, Dr Bennett informed members that, in order to maximise attendance, the Showcase would be held during semester in Educate 09. The Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education) is coordinating the identification of an international speaker, and it was likely that the Poster Session would be scheduled to occur during the lunch break. She sought advice from members on the structure of the Showcase: parallel sessions, with each Faculty invited to nominate speakers for designated sessions, or single sessions that would maximise audience numbers and participation.

During discussion, the following points were made:

Parallel sessions had a tendency to ‘cannibalise’ the available audience;
Audiences would be maximised if the topics were diverse, had broad appeal, and all disciplines contributed events during the Showcase;
Keynote speakers should be actively engaged in teaching;
It was important to promote the Showcase at the departmental level;
Deans and Associate Deans Teaching/Education can generate awareness of the Showcase and encourage their staff to attend;
Lack of parking at Caulfield campus is a barrier to attendance by staff from other campuses;
Parallel sessions could be held at a number of campuses;
The possibility of re-branding the event to place an emphasis on teaching innovation; and
Podcasts that featured key points in a bulletin-style format could increase accessibility and participation regardless of where staff were located.

Resolution:

The Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee:

received and provided feedback on the draft program for the 2009 Vice-Chancellor’s Showcase of Teaching Excellence;
noted that Professor Shoemaker would seek the views of colleagues in regard to re-branding the event as the Vice-Chancellor’s Showcase of Teaching Excellence and Innovation; and
noted that a further iteration of the program would be considered by LTQC.

For Information/Action: Dr Bennett

*5.5 Graduate Certificate of Higher Education (GCHE)

Introducing the item, Dr Bennett informed members that the proposal to restructure the GCHE had arisen in response to concerns about the cost and length of the GCHE in its current format. It would enable completion within a 12 month timeframe and the ability to overlay a Commonwealth Supported Place funding model for enrolments by Monash staff. Consisting of two core and two electives, each of six credit points, the course could be offered in part online. The electives would be selected from one of three possible combinations, as follows:

Option one, program A: for staff commencing their teaching careers, a series of workshops designed to bring about change in teaching practice and enhance student learning; program B: a portfolio that critically analyses the impact on practice of the workshops chosen in A.
Option two: for those staff with experience in the higher education sector, a negotiated project, where participants choose any area of teaching and learning related to their teaching practice in higher education, then design a project, conduct and report on it.
Option three: two electives on research supervision and leadership, primarily aimed at staff with extensive experience and outstanding potential as research leaders.

During discussion, the following points were made:

Option three was an excellent way to attract and develop early career researchers with high potential;
Pathways that articulated from the GCHE to diploma courses, then on to masters courses, could be created;
Heads of schools and departments would be more likely to encourage staff to enroll in the GCHE if the timeframe was reduced to 12 months and a stronger focus was placed on the role of the GCHE in staff development; and
As Monash has a diverse academic profile, greater flexibility in the proposed structure, with a mix of content that enabled staff to select from a cluster of electives, could be incorporated.

Resolution:

The Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee received and provided feedback on the draft proposal to restructure the Graduate Certificate of Higher Education.

For Information/Action: Dr Bennett

6. Chair’s Report

In commencing his report, Professor Shoemaker informed members that:

the response by the Federal Government to the Bradley Review of Higher Education, including the move to a more student-focused model of planning and funding, would pose significant challenges for Monash, including pressure on existing infrastructure and staffing levels;
funding in response to the Bradley Review was limited to an allocation of $2 million to Charles Sturt University to conduct a feasibility study into a proposal to create a regional/rural university offering online courses. Professor Shoemaker noted that this proposal would be in direct competition with Open Universities Australia (OUA) and open and distance learning courses offered by Gippsland campus; and
enrolments at Monash of students from a low socio-economic status (SES) constituted 13 per cent of Effective Full-Time Student Load (EFTSL), the second highest in the Group of Eight. To reach the Federal Government target of 20 per cent EFTSL across Australia would present real challenges in terms of student support funding and outreach; and
low SES students might be able to complete OUA introductory subjects could then be offered credits in OUA courses. This would be a cost-effective alternative.

Concluding his report, Professor Shoemaker commended the Monash Passport booklet to members. He noted that the Passport booklet encapsulates in an accessible and polished form the significant learning, leadership and international opportunities available to students to maximise their development on a number of levels during their time at Monash.

7. Update on CHEQ Activities

7.1 Revision of the Unit Evaluation Survey

Introducing the item, Dr Macrae informed the meeting that the proposal to revise the Unit Evaluation Survey had been circulated to members in soft copy for comment, and that valuable feedback had been received and incorporated into the proposal before members. She noted that unit evaluation is a measure of the quality of a unit and that it was proposed that the:

number of University-wide quantitative questions would be reduced from eight to five;
two open-ended questions would be retained; and
faculties would be limited to five faculty-specific questions.

The two open-ended questions would provide an opportunity to students to comment on teaching excellence, as well as provide a space for students to comment on poor teaching performance.

During discussion of the five core quantitative questions, the following points were made:

Question three of the Faculty of Law survey asks students to consider whether “the learning resources supported my study in this unit.” In comparison, the proposed revision to the University-wide core quantitative question three asks students to consider whether “the online, classroom and other information technology resources adequately supported my studies…” The scope of the adverb adequately would be open to interpretation and could be deleted.
With regard to question four, “constructive and timely” are two distinct and separate criteria to assess feedback.
A key consideration for students in their evaluation of units is the timeliness and adequacy of feedback provided to them by academic staff.
Where 70 or more students were enrolled in a unit, providing feedback to every one of them was a challenge.
As many units, particularly those offered by the Faculty of Law, are taught in an intensive format, it is difficult for staff to provide feedback within a short timeframe.
Two faculties have introduced training to develop the communication skills of academic staff when they are providing feedback to students: the Faculty of Information Technology had trained tutors to commence replies to questions from students about assessed work with the phrase ‘this is the feedback I am providing…’; The School of Medicine and Health Science, at Sunway campus, Malaysia, had conducted a comprehensive awareness campaign to educate staff on feedback components.
The Unit Evaluation and MonQueST surveys could be amalgamated.
A consistent theme of audits by the Australian Universities Quality Agency is an assessment of the scope of feedback that academic staff provide to students.

Resolution:

The Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee:

received and endorsed the proposal for the reduction of the number of core University-wide quantitative questions from eight to five;
endorsed the core University-wide quantitative questions for transmission to Education Committee, subject to the following amendments (deletions in italic, additions in bold):

The unit enabled me to achieve theits learning objectives.
I found the unit to be intellectually stimulating.
The online, classroom and other information technology learning resources adequately supported my studies in this unit (eg. MUSO, MULO, etc) supported my study.
I received constructive and timely feedback on my work The feedback I received in this unit was useful.
Overall, I was satisfied with the quality of this unit.

noted that proposals for the revision of the Monash Experience Questionnaire and Monash Support Experience Questionnaire will be considered by the Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee at a later date.

For Information/Action: Dr Macrae

8. Mapping Sustainability in the Curriculum Project

Introducing the item, Mr McLean informed members that it was almost two years to the day since Monash had become a signatory to the Talloires Declaration. The ten action points comprising the Declaration commit the University to do the following:

Increase awareness of environmentally sustainable development.
Create an institutional culture of sustainability.
Educate for environmentally responsible citizenship.
Foster environmental literacy for all.
Practice institutional ecology.
Involve all stakeholders.
Collaborate for inter-disciplinary approaches.
Enhance the capacity of primary and secondary schools.
Broaden the service and outreach nationally and internationally.
Maintain the movement (Association of University Leaders for a Sustainable Future (ULSF), 1990).

In 2008, a proposal for a project to map sustainability issues at Monash and develop a Talloires Implementation Plan was funded by the Education Portfolio Strategic Initiatives. The project was sponsored by the Faculty of Business and Economics, in collaboration with the Monash Sustainability Institute, and undertook a wide range of activities and consultations across the majority of the ten Talloires Declaration action points, throughout the University community. Mr McLean noted that the Declaration provided an excellent framework to inform an assessment of the place of sustainability in the curriculum and the development of a resource base to support the mainstreaming of sustainability studies at Monash. Mr McLean noted that any topics considered by LTQC are part of the ‘bigger picture’ encompassed by sustainability and climate change.

During discussion, the following points were made:

there is a significant body of evidence-based research that supports the theory that critical climate change is occurring, in particular the destruction of the capacity of the biosphere to absorb carbon emissions;
there remain a significant number of skeptics in the community who are yet to be convinced that climate change is a serious problem;
awareness of sustainability issues at school/departmental levels was disjointed and uneven;
the promotion and integration of sustainability and climate change issues in research and education could be led by faculty-based working parties at each campus that would report to the University Education Committee;
each working party could focus on local issues eg. in South Africa, the spread of HIV/AIDS is a critical issue;
the recent Senior Management Summit had considered sustainability issues and it was vital that ongoing work to mainstream them within teaching and research at Monash was undertaken; and
the mainstreaming of sustainability in the curriculum at Monash should be supported by appropriate external and internal funding.

The Chair informed members that a Education for Sustainability Working Group would be created. The working party would report to Education Committee and consider:

the development of a University Plan to embed sustainability within research-led teaching activities at Monash. Mr Jeffrey Bender, Project Manager, Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education) will provide secretarial support to the working party;
in consultation with the Deans, the funding of sustainability programs and the refocusing of current program priorities to these areas;
preparation of a generic online presentation to promote sustainability and climate change programs across all schools and departments;
development of a checklist to promote at the school/department level the creation of sustainability programs; and
opportunities to work with Associate Deans (Teaching/Education) to develop cross/multi-disciplinary programs.

Resolution:

The Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee:

received and provided feedback on the report of the Talloires Declaration: Mapping Sustainability in the Curriculum Project; and
noted that the Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education) would prepare a University Plan to embed sustainability within teaching activities at Monash.

For Action/Information: Professor A Shoemaker,
Dr C Hewlett, Mr J Bender

9. Proposal for a Vice-Chancellor’s Award for Honours Supervision

Resolution:

The Learning, Teaching and Quality Committee received and noted the proposal by the Honours Project Task Force to establish the Vice-Chancellor’s Award for Honours Supervision.

For action/information: Professor M King, Mr A Devey, Ms A Lucas

10. Other Business

No other business.

11. Next Meeting

The next LTQC meeting will be held on Thursday, 7 May 2009, in the Sir George Lush Room, Building 3a, Clayton campus, commencing with informal discussion from 12.30pm and followed by the meeting commencing at 1.00pm.