UNE Council Open Business Paper 23 August 2013 Document … · UNE Council Open Business Paper 23 August 2013 Document Page 1 Agenda Report 2 2 1.2 Conflict of Interest Disclosure

UNE Council Open Business Paper 23 August 2013

Document Page

1 Agenda Report 22 1.2 Conflict of Interest Disclosure 83 3.1 Chancellor's Report #13279 94 3.2 Vice-Chancellor's Report #13280 135 3.2.1 Background Reading ITD Demo 246 3.3 Academic Board Chair's Report #13282 277 4.1 July 31 Dashboard 2008 4.2 Finance Chair's Report #13283 2229 4.3 Audit & Risk Chair's Report #13285 23110 4.4 Infrastructure Chair's Report #13287 23911 4.5 Presentation by Controlled Entity - ABRI #13277 24812 4.6 Academic Board Delegations #13274 26413 4.6 Revised Academic Board Constitution 26514 4.6 Use of the University Seal Rule 27115 4.8 GWP Report #13296 27416 5.1 V-C's Report on Progress Against 2013 Bus Plan #13272 28217 5.2 Convocation Chair's Report #13293 33118 5.3 Annual Governance Review #13270 33719 5.4 Report on Compliance with Stat Req #13275 34320 5.5 UNESA Update #13336 34521 5.6 Draft 2014 Meeting Dates #13273 35022 5.7 Media Update #13297 35323 6.1 75th Anniversary Celebrations 35424 7.1 2013 Council Work Plan 361

THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND MEETING OF THE COUNCIL

TO BE HELD ON 23RD AUG 2013 AT 10:30 COUNCIL ROOM, BOOLOOMINBAH

BOOLOOMINBAH DRIVE, ARMIDALE , 2351 NSW, AUSTRALIA

AGENDA

The University of New England Council 23rd Aug 2013 - Page 1 of 6

Item Purpose / Support Presenter(s) / Co-Presenter(s)

1. MEETING OPENING AND WELCOME COMMENTS

1.1. * Apologies

1.2. * Council Member Conflict of Interest Disclosures

1.3. * Order of Business (including adoption of non-starred items)

2. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

2.1. Confirmation of Minutes from meeting held on 21 June 2013.

2.2. Matters Arising

3. REPORTS

3.1. * Chancellor's Report #13279

Council is asked to NOTE the Chancellor’s Report to Council #13279.

Watkins, John

3.2. * Vice-Chancellor's Report #13280

Council is asked to NOTE the Vice-Chancellor’s Report to Council #13280.

Barber, Jim

3.2.1. * Presentation by Rob Irving, Director ITD Barber, Jim / Irving, Rob

2 of 362




AGENDA



3.3. * Academic Board Chair's Report #13282

Council is asked to:

• NOTE the Chair Academic Board Report #13282.

1. APPROVE the Higher Degree Research graduation list for 26 students and five student applications for Graduation in Absentia.

2. APPROVE the revised Policy Governing Research Institutes and Centres.

3. APPROVE the School of Arts Review Panel report and the School Response.

4. APPROVE the School of Rural Medicine Review Panel report and the School Response.

5. NOTE the approval of the conferral of Ms Ruth French’s Doctor of Philosophy cum laude and the abstract of her thesis entitled ‘Teaching and Learning Functional Grammar in Junior Primary Classrooms’.

6. NOTE the Unit Monitoring Annual Report 2012.

7. NOTE the Vice-Chancellor's Scholars - Detailed Concept, which has been endorsed and recommended by the Academic Board for adoption by the Vice-Chancellor, with program governance to be undertaken by the Academic Board Teaching and Learning Committee.

8. NOTE the UNE Regional Aboriginal Higher Education Strategy.

Reid, Nick

3 of 362




AGENDA



4. MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION

4.1. * Financial Management Report 31 July YTD Dashboard #13298

Council is asked to NOTE the Financial Management 31 July 2013 YTD Dashboard #13298.

Clarke, Michelle

4.2. * Finance Chair's Report #13283

Council is asked to

• NOTE the Chair Finance Committee Report to Council #13283

• APPROVE the revised Finance Committee Terms of Reference #13268.

Finch, Robert

4.3. * Audit & Risk Chair's Report #13285

Council is asked to

• NOTE the Chair Audit and Risk Committee Report to Council #13285

• APPROVE the revised Audit and Risk Committee Terms of Reference #13276.

Harris, James

4.4. * Infrastructure Chair's Report #13287

Council is asked to

• NOTE the Chair Infrastructure Committee Report to Council #13287

• APPROVE the revised Infrastructure Committee Terms of Reference #13266.

Raby, Gae

4 of 362




AGENDA



4.5. * Presentation by Controlled Entity - ABRI #13277

Council is asked to NOTE the Presentation by Controlled Entity – ABRI Report #13277.

Watkins, John / Skinner, Steve

4.6. * Academic Board Terms of Reference and University Seal Policy #13274

Council is asked to APPROVE the revised Academic Board Constitution (including Terms of Reference)

and

APPROVE the revised Use of the University Seal and Signing of Documents Council Rule #13274.

Peet, Brendan

4.7. * Verbal Update - Management Response to the Management Letter 31 Dec 2011 #13271

Council is asked to NOTE the verbal Upate - Management Response to the Management Letter 31 December 2011 - #13271.

This report has been deferred to the October Council meeting.

Clarke, Michelle

4.8. * Governance Working Party Chair's Report #13296

Council is asked to NOTE the Chair Governance Working Party Report to Council #13296.

Fox, Geoffrey

5. UNSTARRED ITEMS

5 of 362




AGENDA



5.1. Vice-Chancellor's Report on Progress Against 2013 Business Plan #13272

Council is asked to NOTE the 2013 Business Plan Report #13272.

Barber, Jim

5.2. Standing Committee of Convocation Chair's Report #13293

Council is asked to NOTE the Chair Standing Committee of Convocation Report #13293.

Hobbs, Jack

5.3. Annual Governance Review #13270

Council is asked to NOTE the Annual Governance Review Report #13270.

Peet, Brendan

5.4. Report on Compliance with Statutory Requirements & Risk Management #13275

Council is asked to NOTE the proposed plan for management of compliance at UNE (Report #13275).

Peet, Brendan / Kauffman, Kris

5.5. * UNE Student Association Update #13336

Council is asked to NOTE the UNE Student Association Update Report #13336.

Watkins, John / Mailler, David

5.6. Draft 2014 Meeting Dates (Council & Committees) #13273

Council is asked to APPROVE the Draft 2014 Meeting Dates (Council & Committees) Report #13273.

Taylor, Anita

5.7. Media Update #13297

Council is asked to NOTE the Media Update #13297.

6. GENERAL BUSINESS

6.1. * 75th Anniversary Celebrations

Council is asked to NOTE the 75th NEUC Anniversary Celebrations Update #13339.

Watkins, John / Denman, Brian

6 of 362




AGENDA



7. MEETING FINALISATION

7.1. Work Plan

7.2. Next Meeting

7.3. Meeting close

7 of 362

CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATION

Council members are asked to disclose any material interest, consistent with Schedule 2A clause 5 of the University of New England Act 1993 (NSW). 5 Disclosure of material interests by Council members (1) If: (a) a member of the Council has a material interest in a matter being considered or about to be considered at a meeting of the Council, and (b) the interest appears to raise a conflict with the proper performance of the member’s duties in relation to the consideration of the matter, the member must, as soon as possible after the relevant facts have come to the member’s knowledge, disclose the nature of the interest at a meeting of the Council. (2) A disclosure by a member of the Council at a meeting of the Council that the member: (a) is a member, or is in the employment, of a specified company or other body, or (b) is a partner, or is in the employment, of a specified person, or (c) has some other specified interest relating to a specified company or other body or to a specified person, is a sufficient disclosure of the nature of the interest in any matter relating to that company or other body or to that person which may arise after the date of the disclosure and which is required to be disclosed under subclause (1).

8 of 362

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/uonea1993281/s3.html#council






ITEM 3.1 Chancellor’s Report #13279 Council Meeting – 10:30am 23 August 2013

Page 1

Purpose

To provide Council with the Chancellor’s Report for the August 2013 Council Meeting.

Recommendation The Hon John Watkins, Chancellor

Council is asked to NOTE the Chancellor’s Report to Council #13279.

Report

Dear Fellow Council Members

On Monday 24th June, the Vice‐Chancellor and I travelled to Canberra to meet a number of Ministers, Shadow Ministers and public servants regarding UNE, its future, its current strengths and our views on higher education Policy. We met with Mr David de Carvalho, Group Manager, Higher Education – DEEWA; Minister Craig Emerson; Senator Brett Mason; Senator Barnaby Joyce; Mr Tony Windsor, MP, Graham Nuttal and John Clements. We were fortunate to meet up with Councillor Ben Crough who was also in Parliament House that day.

We had wide ranging discussions with the Parliamentarians about the challenges that are facing higher education in regional Australia and UNE, in particular. We made the point that we were not there to ask for extra funding but were hopeful for support if we approached the parties for a more flexible approach to the delivery of online courses. The meetings were also designed to simply fly the UNE flag and to ensure these important decision makers were aware of and are sympathetic to our university and its issues.

We were received warmly by all parties. They were interested in our views and all expressed support for UNE and the issues we raised. It was particularly pleasing to have the opportunity to speak to Mr de Carvalho from DEEWA, who was especially keen to understand our views.

Minister Emerson was very shortly replaced by Minister Kim Carr who has spoken to the Vice‐Chancellor since his appointment. After the Federal Election in September, it would be sensible to again make contact with relevant Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries.

I was pleased to see UNE celebrate NAIDOC week with a Flag Raising Ceremony on the Booloominbah lawn. There is much to celebrate about the history, culture and achievements of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people both at UNE and within the Armidale community. In relation to that issue, I have continued to meet a number of parties involved in the provision of education to Aboriginal people to try to distil some measures that could be introduced at UNE to ensure we play a greater role in educating Aboriginal people. I have met representatives of the Clontarf Foundation who support Aboriginal boys in high schools across Australia through football and mentoring programs and also Mr Andrew Penfold from the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation who supports hundreds of high school aged Aboriginal children across Australia to attend boarding schools. I discussed with both, the possibility of creating units that may increase the number of Aboriginal students enrolling and completing degrees at UNE.

On Friday 2nd August, Mr David Schmude and I were fortunate to visit the Clontarf Foundation students at Armidale High School. The students were welcoming and obviously happy with the opportunities the Clontarf support is providing.

9 of 362


Page 2

As Councillors are aware, a Business Breakfast for the Armidale Community was hosted at Booloominbah on Thursday 18th July 2013, to launch our refreshed Strategic Plan. I thank our fellow Council Member Mr Ben Crough (Undergraduate Representative) for speaking on the morning, to give his perspective on life in Armidale as part of his university experience. I met with many local business people, and heard their personal stories. It was a great opportunity to share our common ground on such a stunning Armidale morning and the sort of activity that we will do more of in the future.

Last month I also had the pleasure of writing to the UNE Enactus Team to congratulate them on their success at the recent Enactus Australia Championships. I am sure you join with me in wishing them all the best for the Enactus World Cup to be held in Mexico in September.

I was fortunate to meet the team members of the Farming Futures Business Careers Fair held at Lazenby Hall on Friday 2nd August. The organisers of the event did a remarkable job in putting together such a successful day. It was followed by a dinner that evening at the Ex‐Services club in town.

I have also congratulated Mrs Peggy McCleneghan for her outstanding achievement of 50 years’ service with UNE. What an exceptional milestone!

As Councillors would now be aware, we are awarding the following awards at our upcoming Graduations:

an Honorary Doctor of Letters honoris causa (Hon.DLitt) to His Excellency Rear Admiral Kevin Scarce AC, CSC, RANR.

an Honorary Doctor of Science honoris causa (Hon.DSc) to Neil Sidney Trudinger, Distinguished Professor of Mathematics at the Australian National University.

the University’s Distinguished Service Medal , to Dr Carmel O’Brien from UNE’s Legal Office.

They are most worthy recipients and the University is proud to recognise these outstanding Australians.

You are also no doubt aware of the result of the recent UNE Student Association Elections, and I have written to the successful candidates on the behalf of Council to congratulate them. The UNESA Elected representatives are as follows:

President David Mailler

Vice President Joshua Osborne

Postgraduate representative Sikiki Lloyd

Undergraduate representative Rachel Campbell

Internal student representative Adrian Le Gay Brereton

Residential College representative Penny Wright

International student representative Kholoud Hilal

External student representatives Ian Mathewson and Emily Willmott

General student representatives Samantha McIntyre and Polly Wong

10 of 362


Page 3

In relation to the vacancy on Council for a Minister Appointed Member, I can advise that Minister Piccoli has accepted the Nominations Committee recommendation to combine the recruitment process for this position with recruitment process for all Minister Appointed members when they fall due next year. The Nominations Committee has written to all applicants for the vacancy to advise them and invite them to renominate next year. We will be undertaking an ordered process to fill these positions.

As you are aware, the LH Martin Institute visited UNE to provide two bespoke governance update days for our Council members and Senior Executive. The focus of the sessions was to provide discussion and advice about ways to improve the way Council conducts its business, and several suggestions will be adopted (such as improvements to the reporting processes). The second day was on Academic Governance. This day was particularly enlightening and I hope to work with the Chair Academic Board to enhance that Board’s role in university governance.

On behalf of Council, I have attended the following events, meetings and appointments:

28 June 2013 Trimester 2 Commencement Ceremony, UNE Campus

Meeting with staff from Oorala, UNE Campus

Meeting with EDPPR and Lionel Pearce re ATSI Work‐Study Program

Meeting with Vice‐Chancellor, Deputy Vice‐Chancellor Research and Senior Executive, Booloominbah

17 July 2013 Infrastructure Committee Meeting, Booloominbah

Meeting with Vice‐Chancellor, Booloominbah

Meeting with Eliza Kent (UNE staff) and Rose Lovelock, (UNE staff member and local aboriginal community representative), Booloominbah

Meeting Chief Legal and Governance Officer, Booloominbah

Earle Park College Annual Politics Lecture and Dinner, Earle Page College

18 July 2013 Business Breakfast with members of Armidale business community to launch revised Strategic Plan, Booloominbah

Understanding University Governance Workshop, Booloominbah

Meeting with Vice‐Chancellor and Senator Fiona Nash

Accounting and Finance Merit Awards Ceremony and Dinner, UNE Business School

19 July 2013 Understanding Academic Board Governance Workshop, Booloominbah

11 of 362


Page 4

26 July 2013 Meeting with VC and Secretariat Staff, Booloominbah

Meeting with David Lamb, re Digital Rural Futures Conference, Booloominbah

Meeting with Brian See, Schools Liaison Officer, re Aboriginal Student Matriculation

Meeting with Adam Marshall and Vice‐Chancellor

Meeting with David Mailler, UNEG President Undergrads, Booloominbah

Meeting with Jim Maher, Mayor of Armidale.

2 August 2013 Attend the opening session of the Farming Futures & Agri Business Careers Fair, Lazenby Hall

Remuneration Committee meeting

Meeting with David Schmude (SportUNE) and representatives of Clontarf Foundation, Armidale High School

Meeting with Malcolm Turnbull (Shadow Minister for Communications & Broadband), Barnaby Joyce (Independent Candidate for New England) and the Vice‐Chancellor.

Attend Malcolm Turnbull’s Guest Lecture on Fast Broadband in Australia.

Meeting with Deputy Vice‐Chancellor

Attend Farming Futures & Agri Business Careers Fair dinner, Armidale Ex‐Services Club.

9 August 2013 Meeting with Tom Briggs, Aboriginal Lands Council

Meeting with Brian Denman on 75th Anniversary preparations

Meeting with Principal of Armidale High School

Meeting with David Lamb re Digital Rural Futures program

Meeting with Chair Academic Board

Meeting with Secretariat staff

16 August 2013 Meeting with Chief Operating Officer

Meeting with Secretariat staff

Meeting with Deputy Vice‐Chancellor

Meeting with Martha Saw, Co‐ordinator for 75th Anniversary preparations

12 of 362

ITEM 3.2 Vice‐Chancellor’s Report #13280 Council Meeting – 10:30am 23 August 2013

Page 1

Purpose

To update Council with an overview of the recent:

management and operation of the University;

performance of UNE, in relation to academic, financial and organisational goals;

planning and development for the implementation of University policy;

strategic and organisational developments, including risks currently faced by the

University and strategies to manage them; and

other significant issues.

Recommendation Vice‐Chancellor, Professor Jim Barber

Council is asked to NOTE the Vice‐Chancellor’s Report to Council #13280.

Executive Summary

As would be expected in the lead‐up to a Federal election the Government, the Coalition

and universities are discussing various aspects of higher education policy. I have devoted

much of this report to highlighting the proposed shifts in higher education policy and the

wider external environment. Of particular note are discussions on:

higher education funding

setting a minimum ATAR for school‐leaver entry to university

$2,000 cap on self‐education expenses

student finances

student mobility

role of teaching‐focused positions

Some of these issues I have discussed in detail. For others, I have provided hyperlinks to

papers and/or vodcasts for Council members to peruse at their leisure.

I have also made a slight adjustment to the structure of my reports to Council. The Open

Report will continue to provide general information of interest to Council both in terms of

activities on campus and issues and concerns of sector‐wide significance. All information of

strategic significance, including load and revenue, will appear in my report to the

confidential session of Council. I have also provided a separate report on uneOpen as Chair

of the uneOpen Board.

13 of 362


Page 2

Open Report to Council

1 UNIVERSITY MANAGEMENT OPERATION AND PERFORMANCE

1.1 Distinguish ourselves by the quality of our student experience

1.1.1 Unit Monitoring

The 2012 Unit Monitoring Annual Report was considered at the most recent meeting of

Academic Board. I would like to highlight to Council that the consistently outstanding

outcomes that the University has been achieving in this area have been maintained. For

instance, the student rating for Overall Satisfaction at the University level has been

maintained at 3.99 (2011 = 3.98) on the 5‐point Likert scale.

For 2012, a total of 195 commendations were awarded across the University to individual

modes of units (where applicable individual units are assessed separately for performance

based on mode of delivery – internal or external) with high levels of overall satisfaction and

low attrition rates. This compares with a total of 233 unit commendations that were

awarded in 2011. Only 12 unit modes in 2012 required the preparation of action plans for

improvement, which matches the number of action plans that were required in 2011.

These results have been achieved against a backdrop whereby student load has grown by

14.2%, the unit pass rate has increased by 0.66% and the mean unit GPA has increased by

1.44%.

Since the inception of the unit monitoring management process in 2009, there has been

some debate within the academic community regarding the threshold values that have

been set for determining which unit modes merit a commendation and which unit modes

require an action plan. In order to provide evidence to inform these discussions, an

analysis was undertaken in 2010, which identified some statistically significant

relationships between unit monitoring outcomes and class size. The report was presented

to Academic Board and the decision was made to modify the rule for determining a unit

commendation to require higher levels of overall satisfaction for smaller class sizes. The

2010 analysis is currently being replicated to determine whether the relationships found in

2010 are still valid and whether any new significant relationships are found across the

whole UNE data set and between years. The results of this analysis will then inform any

further review of the thresholds set for the awarding of a unit commendation or for the

requirement to prepare an action plan and provide the basis for advice back to the

academic community regarding the correlations between metrics.

14 of 362


Page 3

1.1.2 Enactus Triumph

Enactus is an international non‐profit group that combines the skills of business and

community leaders and academic advisors to assist students to develop and implement

community‐based projects. A group of eleven UNE students recently triumphed in the

Enactus Australia Championships, competing against twenty‐one other universities

nationally.

The UNE team presented on three projects:

Farming Futures, meeting demand for skills and careers in agriculture;

Fin‐Lit, focusing on financial literacy in local indigenous schools; and

Minimbah, redressing the “identity crisis” facing under‐privileged communities

where many births are not recognised by a birth certificate or registration.

I am advised that the UNE team has devoted over 5,330 hours to these three projects over

the past year. They have raised just under $115,000 and estimate that they have

influenced the lives of 1,482 people.

The UNE team will now proceed to the World Cup to be held in Mexico later in 2013.

Congratulations to all UNE students and staff involved in Enactus.

1.2 Adopt innovative educational technology in support of student learning

1.2.1 FutureCampus

Within only a few months of opening, the FutureCampus is being well utilised by UNE

students and staff.

At the commencement of Trimester 2, sixty new students attend the “Welcome to

New Students” session. The welcome provided students with an opportunity to

engage with the Student Support Team based at the Armidale campus via the video

conferencing wall. The highlight was the ‘Toolkit’ session, providing students with

information on the necessary tools to aid them in their studies. This was followed

by a Q&A session with a recent graduate and a social supper to assist students to

develop a study network.

During the first week of this trimester academic skills sessions were run each night.

These too were well attended.

Students continue to engage with the campus by participating in live lectures

streamed to the FutureCampus using video conferencing facilities or accessing

lectures from a recording list.

FutureCampus facilities are also booked for 24 intensive workshops over each

weekend during late July and August.

15 of 362


Page 4

To further develop engagement with the FutureCampus a number of information sessions

have been run for Heads of School, academics and support staff which will enhance the

level of interaction between the two locations.

An IT upgrade is also planned for the second half of this year, with echo 360 to be

installed. This upgrade will allow UNE to offer an interactive experience within a wider

variety of units.

The concept of opening a café as part of the FutureCampus is being explored. Discussions

are underway with a both a potential operator and Council. Further information will be

available for the next Council meeting.

1.3 Achieve international distinction in all our specialist fields of research

1.3.1 Success with ARC Linkage Projects

The Australian Research Council has announced the funding outcomes for Linkage

Projects. A number of UNE researchers were successful with their applications in a very

competitive round.

Projects administered by UNE (UNE staff in green):

Em/Prof Trevor Parmenter; Prof Rafat Hussain; Dr Marie F Knox; Prof Matthew P Janicki; Ms Nicola Hayhoe; Dr Chez M Leggatt‐Cook; Ms Pauline M Armour; Mr Martin Kingstone: Title: Keeping my place in the community: achieving successful ageing‐in‐

place for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities Total Funding: $344,500 Partner Orgs: Ability Options Limited, Endeavour Foundation, UnitingCare Ageing NSW.ACT, The Ascent Group Australia Ltd Project Summary: This project, in partnership with aged care and disability agencies

across two States, aims to examine ways the aged care, social and health needs of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities may be met in rural and urban settings. It will explore mechanisms that will lead to a better integration of the aged care and disability sectors.

Administered through other Australian Universities:

Prof Bruce Knight; A/Prof Lorraine J Graham; Prof Michael Horsley; Mr Grant Webb Title: Bridging the gap for at‐risk readers: reading theory into classroom practice Total Funding: $150,000 Partner Org: Queensland Department of Education, Training and Employment Admin Org: Central Queensland University

16 of 362


Page 5

Project Summary: This project will merge theoretical and practical aspects of teaching reading through assimilating research with teachers' pedagogical knowledge and experiences to ensure sustainable, differentiated classroom reading interventions for all P‐3 (Preparatory Year to Year Three) readers, particularly at‐risk students.

Prof Suzanne C McGinty; Dr Riccardo A Welters; A/Prof Brian E Lewthwaite; A/Prof Katarina M Te Riele; Mrs Valda L Wallace; Prof Hurriyet Babacan; Mr Dale B Murray; Mr David M Murray; Mrs Eva Lawler; Ms Mary J Retel; Dr George Myconos; Dr Anthony McMahon. Title: Gauging the value of flexible learning options for disenfranchised

youth and the Australian community Total Funding: $309,000 Partner Org: Edmund Rice Education Australia, Victorian Department of Education

and Early Childhood Development, NT Department of Education and Children's Services, Catholic Education Office, Western Australia, Brotherhood of St Laurence, Centacare Townsville

Admin Org: James Cook University Project Summary: Investment in flexible learning options (FLOs) for young people who

have disengaged from schooling requires understanding of how they

work and evidence about their economic and social value. This project

will provide both through innovative and integrated methods,

analysing FLO sites across three Australian states and the Northern

Territory

1.3.2 Australian Research Council College of Experts

UNE has recently nominated five members of staff for membership of the ARC College of

Experts. ARC College members are appointed for three years and are responsible for

assessing and ranking ARC grant applications and for providing strategic advice and

funding recommendations to the ARC. UNE will be advised on the outcome of the

nomination process in October 2013.

1.4 To be a well‐managed organisation that meets the expectations of students and staff

1.4.1 2013 Business Plan

A full report on progress to date against the 2013 Business Plan has been provided in a

separate report.

17 of 362


Page 6

1.4.2 Budget Planning 2014

Preparation for the 2014 budget and business plan is well underway with a dedicated

management forum run on Friday, 26th July to inform key staff of budget and planning

parameters. Individualised planning sessions have also been set up for August and

September with Senior Executive and relevant heads of cost centres. I will be leading this

process.

Schools and administrative areas are being asked to consider and respond to the prompts

below as a part of this process, with the goal to have budget and planning aligned from

2014.

Where are you planning to take your school/directorate over the next 3 years?

Are there new ideas or changes to your business‐as‐usual that would help?

How does that work within your budget parameters and your workforce?

What risks does your school/directorate face?

By forging tighter alignment between budgets and planning UNE will be better placed to

align sub‐plans, objectives, targets, policies and process within our strategic framework.

2 GOVERNMENT RELATIONS

2.1 Higher Education Policy

The new Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research and Minister for Higher

Education has asked all Australian Vice‐Chancellors for their input into the development of

policy options to assist the Government in managing the quality of higher education whilst

meeting both its equity and fiscal objectives. In my response to the Minister I made the

following suggestions:

The Government allocate an envelope of Commonwealth funding for publicly

subsidised places to each university and allow the universities to deploy them

according to demand. This envelope would set a base using 2012 outcomes plus any

additional places allocated subsequently, with variations agreed during Compact

negotiations. This would retain the significant gains achieved by demand‐driven

funding in improving student access and participation from 2010 to 2013, in

particular those from low SES backgrounds.

It would become a base that gives universities confidence to plan the deployment of

places in a way that is more flexible and able to respond to opportunities presented

by changes in demand. The advantage for the government is that it would remove

uncertainty from forward estimates for the Commonwealth Grant Scheme (CGS)

while locking in the recent gains in student participation. This reduction in financial

risk, such as volatility in CGS liability in Commonwealth budget outcomes, would

reduce the need for hedging options such as the ‘efficiency dividend’ in future.

18 of 362


Page 7

Importantly also, the system would retain the Government’s commitment to the

demand‐driven and uncapped allocation of places since there would be no centrally

imposed funding cluster allocations.

UNE could reasonably accommodate a minimum ATAR of 60, providing this

benchmark is applied only to students who are admitted through the Tertiary

Admissions Centres on the basis of their ATAR.

It is imperative that universities are able to retain the variety of schemes that select

students who have the potential to progress and complete their courses without the

use of an ATAR. For example, the majority of UNE students are mature age and some

years past the HSC timeline when admitted and additional factors such as formal and

informal learning, employment and industry experience should obviously be

considered during the admission process.

The proposed introduction of a flat $2,000 cap on tax deductibility for self‐education

expenses be abandoned as it jeopardises the ability of working Australians,

particularly those who are low paid or from low SES backgrounds, to access

education and thereby the opportunity to improve their circumstances. It will also

serve as a serious disincentive for individuals to contribute to the cost of their own

education. Should there need to be an upper limit on the amount that can be

claimed, I have proposed that the ceiling should be set no lower than the

combination of the Commonwealth contribution and the student HECS fee

applicable to the relevant course.

UNE’s final proposition was that if further reduction in government funding is required after

the above initiatives are introduced, it should be levied at a variable rate proportional to

institutional revenue instead of the currently proposed flat rate efficiency dividend. As

currently conceived, the efficiency dividend is a flat tax and like all flat taxes will fall more

heavily on the less wealthy.

At the time of writing, the Minister is yet to publically announce any change to the current

arrangements.

2.2 Submission of the 2014‐2016 Compact

The Higher Education and Support Act 2003 (HESA) requires all Table A and B higher

education providers to enter into a Mission‐based Compact agreement with the

Commonwealth in order to receive Government funding. As previously reported to Council,

the template for the 2014‐2016 Compact arrived late December last year and work began

immediately on identifying the points of intersection between UNE’s Strategic Plan,

associated sub‐plans and the Government’s requirements.

19 of 362


Page 8

Whilst performance funding targets for low‐SES and other under‐represented groups are yet

to be determined by the Government, UNE was required to submit its draft Compact in May

and received a finalised version for signature on 16 July. I will provide a finalised version to

the next meeting of Council.

2.3 New Colombo Plan

On 18 July UNE attended an industry roundtable discussion on the Coalition’s New Colombo

Plan. The student mobility plan aspires to encourage and support Australian

undergraduate students to undertake study abroad in conjunction with an internship in the

Asia Pacific/Indian Ocean region. It also aims to inspire students from the region to study in

Australia.

The Coalition presented the broad outline of their Plan at the roundtable. Universities and

other industry groups were asked to make recommendations to help frame the detail of the

Plan and identify issues that may arise in its implementation.

Student mobility is a key feature of both the Coalition’s New Colombo Plan and the

Government’s Asia Century initiative. UNE has confirmed its commitment to student

mobility as part of the Compact, putting forward an alternative model of delivery based on

e‐mobility. Physically living in‐ country for a short period is not the only vehicle for

encouraging cross‐cultural understanding and appreciation of the global context.

Pedagogically sound e‐contact and interaction with students, academics and employers

throughout the duration of the student experience also provides students with

comprehensive intercultural communication skills and an understanding of the international

environment.

2.4 TEQSA Update

In July TEQSA released information on a number of initiatives that will have a positive

impact on UNE’s regulatory load.

For low‐risk providers seeking re‐registration a streamlined re‐registration process is being developed. This will involve either a ‘Streamlined Registration’ track for providers with strong and mature quality records and no significant risks in their risk profile or a ‘Limited Risk Registration’ track based on the streamlined system but with an emphasis on specific standards of concern. Examples provided by TEQSA of examples of regulatory concern include known prima facie breaches of standards during the current registration term, rejection of course accreditation applications and material changes that TEQSA regards as giving rise to significant compliance risk.

TEQSA will reduce the number of risk indicators to focus on a core set of indicators (there are currently 46), based on the experience of the first full round of risk assessments of all providers.

20 of 362


Page 9

From the 2013–14 annual risk cycle onwards TEQSA will only issue risk assessments for providers for whom TEQSA has new or continuing concerns or if it is asked to do so by a provider. However, TEQSA will issue a preliminary risk assessment in the year leading up to re‐registration.

TEQSA will narrow the set of circumstances in which it expects a material change form to be submitted.

Quality assessments will be limited to one per‐year.

This is a positive response to considerable criticism of over‐regulation by TEQSA. More

information on how these changes will impact on UNE will be made available later this year.

2.5 Government and Industry Submissions

Over the past few months UNE has made a number of high‐level submissions to

Government in addition to the submission to Minister Carr discussed above.

Assuring the Quality while reducing the Higher Education Regulatory Burden –

submission to the expert review, 21 June

The University responded to a number of questions posed by the Expert Review of

regulation and red tape. It focused on Australia’s regulatory architecture in general,

the regulatory approach taken by TEQSA and consideration of a model of ‘earned

autonomy’ to inform proportionate risk.

Reform to Deduction for Education Expenses – submission to Universities Australia 27

June and Treasury, 12 July

The University provided advice in response to a discussion paper released by the

Commonwealth Treasury on the Government’s proposed $2,000 annual cap on tax

deductible work‐related education expenses. The University did not support the

reform as currently formulated due to the significant unintended consequences we

believe will result. I.e. lower student numbers and reduced annual revenue, higher

costs for students and disincentive to undertake education and the resulting

negative impact on Australia’s skills and knowledge base.

Moving to an Enhanced Indicator of Higher Education Students' Socio‐economic

Status – submission to DIICCSRTE, 28 June

The University supported the proposal that the indicator for low SES use only the

Socio‐Economic Indexes for Areas Index of Education and Occupation (SEIFA IEO)

classification of students’ home addresses at the SA1 geographical level, that the

Centrelink component be excluded and that parental education and school

background should not be used in the final indicator.

21 of 362


Page 10

Draft Standards for Research, Research Training and Learning Outcomes (Research

Training) – submission to Higher Education Standards Panel, 10 July

The University was broadly supportive of the draft standards proposed as part of the

review of the TEQSA Threshold Standards. The proposed standards for research

encompass responsibilities for the conduct of research, staff skills, academic

governance framework, data repository and analysis of research outputs.

3 SECTOR‐WIDE CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 Long‐term Challenges

I have recently asked Academic Board to consider a number of long‐term challenges that all

higher education providers will need to face, providing a number of resources, which I hope

will sharpen minds and open up serious debate. These resources may also be of interest to

Council.

Challenges from Cyberspace Clay Christensen, 2012, (vodcast) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiB6ZVhgHHk

Clay Christensen, 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUGn5ZdrDoU&feature=c4‐overview&playnext=1&list=TLP3w096ViHxA (vodcast)

Sebastian Thrun: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/03/ff_aiclass/3/

Rip Empson, 2013, http://techcrunch.com/2013/05/15/top‐10‐engineeringcollege‐

teams‐up‐with‐udacity‐att‐to‐offer‐6k‐online‐masters‐degree‐in‐computerscience/ Telecrunch.com, viewed May 2013

Andrew Norton, 2013 The Un‐bundling and Re‐Bundling of Higher Education, Grattan

Institute, Melbourne.

Barber, 2012 Educational technologies and the changing role of universities, http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/educationaltechnologies‐and‐the‐changing‐role‐of‐universities/3948822

3.2 Recent Reports

A number of reports and articles, which may be of interest to Council, have recently been

released. A short synopsis follows on each, taken from their weblink:

Taking university teaching seriously ‐ improve quality of teacher education by creating 2500

new jobs, Grattan Institute

A new scheme to create 2,500 teaching‐focused positions across 12 universities would

double the number of such positions in Australia and begin to spread a culture of high‐

quality teaching in our higher education system.

22 of 362


Page 11

Shifting student: Regional mobility of undergraduate students in Australia, ACER

This Joining the Dots (JTD) Research Briefing explores the mobility of university students in

Australia using Census data to track the movement of current students over a five‐year

period. The data captured in this analysis provide a unique insight into the mobility of the

student population in Australia, and allow us to examine the potential impact of internal

migration on student populations in Australia.

University Student Finance in 2012, Universities Australia

According to Universities Australia's comprehensive report, soaring personal debt levels ‐ these have risen from $28,861 in 2006 to $37,217 in 2012 ‐ have also resulted in far greater levels of financial distress among students, with more than two‐thirds of respondents now reporting worries about their financial situation. The level of financial distress is even greater amongst students from low socio‐economic backgrounds and indigenous students, for whom it jumps to over three quarters and four out of five students respectively.

23 of 362

CONFIDENTIAL

UNE Brings Distance Learning to New Heights with Microsoft Lync

Sydney, Australia – xx July, 2013 – Today, Microsoft announced the University of New England (UNE) is redefining the future of communication with Microsoft Lync 2013, which will give 23,000 students and staff anytime, anywhere communication and collaboration capabilities including instant messaging, video conferencing and voice calls. With 80% of UNE’s students classed as online learners studying off-campus, the university is leading the digital learning charge, enhancing their on-campus and online education system to one which embraces the digital future. The Microsoft Lync deployment, the largest within the Australian Pacific education sector, will enable UNE students, faculty and staff to make calls and benefit from online lecture delivery and collaboration, irrespective of where they are located. “We have a long history of pioneering distance education that began in the 1950s with Australia’s first distance learning courses,” said University of New England Vice-Chancellor, Professor Jim Barber. “Technology has allowed us to remove the ‘distance’ from education and bring face-to-face online learning to people in the areas in which they live.” Universities are changing rapidly to keep ahead of current educational developments providing students and staff with access to the most up-to-date resources, technology tools and information. As a result, for the 2013/2014 university year, UNE will be increasing its investment in technology infrastructure resulting in some of the highest relative investment in the university sector in Australia and New Zealand. “At UNE, our educators and students can benefit from the most innovative online learning experience through software-based audio, video, conferencing, and collaboration via Microsoft Lync,” said Robert Irving, IT Director, UNE. “Microsoft Lync will connect both current and potential future students with our educators and staff to improve overall learning experiences and support whilst giving our researchers the ability to achieve faster results by making it easier to connect people with people and people with knowledge” UNE will also take advantage of the global reach of Skype and its connectivity with Microsoft Lync as a new channel for student recruitment, both locally and offshore. Potential international and interstate students interested in the university will soon have the ability to call UNE for free via Skype, where previously they would have incurred international call charges. The rise in people studying later in life means that universities need to be sympathetic to the needs of students who are juggling lifestyle commitments such as work and family. UNE’s technology investment will provide new cost-efficient education to a broader demographic of students in an accessible and collaborative environment. It is also creating a new era of digital learning, where teachers and students can learn and work both in-person or virtually via their PC, tablet or smartphone. UNE also has plans to leverage the broader Microsoft hardware platform, in particular Xbox, PixelSense and Surface. “Today’s workforce and workplace is mobile and in order to prepare students to succeed, we need to encourage and enable them to become mobile learners and active participants beyond the walls of the classroom,” said George Stavrakakis, Education Director, Microsoft Australia. “They want to be able to learn in different places; not only in the real world but also in virtual environments – or a combination of the two – which Microsoft Lync and Skype enable.” For further information or interviews please contact:

Rudolf Wagenaar Ogilvy PR 02 8281 3879 or 043 908 2550 [email protected]

24 of 362

mailto:[email protected]

Skype to bring Xbox intouni's learning equationThe Lync platformwill prove a boon todistance learning

FRAN FOOTECHNOWGY

UNIVERSITY of New Englandstudents could one day find the m-selves booting up their Xbox con-soles for lectures instead ofattending in person or turning totheir trusty laptops.

That's one promise Microsoft'sSkype videoconferencing tech-nology holds for the university,according to its IT director RobIrving.

UNE has just scored a lucrativedeal worth millions of dollars withMicrosoft to equip about 23,000students and staff with its Lynccommunications platform.

The university, located in thenorthern NSW city of Armidale,has a distance learning popula-tion of about 80 per cent, MrIrving said.

"Skype is a very interestingproposition because we're a dis-tance learning education pro-vider," he said.

"We don't know exactly all thethings we can do with Skype butwe're excited about it because

obviously you also have the Skypeplatform in Xbox."

Mr Irving said Xboxes sitting instudents' houses "suddenly be-come videoconferencing units"which allows them to "participatein a lecture from home withoutany further investment intechnology".

"It's pretty exciting and thepotential is huge," he said.

Before the university dives intoSkype, it's busy rolling out Lync to20,000-odd students and 2500employees.

Each student will receive aLync "soft phone", a program formaking phone calls over theinternet and an IP-based phonenumber. Staff will receiveadditional Polycom handsets.

"We want to give them a softphone so they can connect withany faculty member consideringthese phone calls can have afinancial impact on them," MrIrving said.

All classes go online as soon asa lecture starts. which meansstudents can dial in and "attend"classes over Lync if they can'tmake it in person or live remotely,he said

"We see that as a really greatenabler for our students," MrIrving said.

"Lync can be accessed on a

browser or students can down-load the software to their Win-dows, Apple or (Google) Androidsmartphone," he said.

Mr Irving said the universitywanted Lync to be its "core teach-ing platform" over existing solu-tions such as Adobe Connect forweb conferencing.

UNE will use Skype as a re-cruitment tool so potential stu-dents, patricularly those overseas,don't have to incur hefty callcharges. Skype will be embeddedinto the university's contacts listso students merely have to clickthe icon and activate a call.

"The ability to market topeople using Skype and they thenclick on a button and get con-nected straight to our call centresand we enrol them into a course(presents a) pretty exciting oppor-tunity," Mr Irving said.

Lync will go live towards theend of the year, he said, addingthat Computer Systems Australiawas the university's systems inte-grator for the project.

UNE was looking to replace itsageing Alcatel PABX systembefore deciding on Lync, MrIrving said.

According to Microsoft, thedeal is its largest in the Asia-Pacific education sector.

Copyright Agency Ltd (CAL)licensed copy

The Australian, Australia06 Aug 2013

IT Today, page 30 - 239.00 cm²National - circulation 119,490 (MTWTF)

ID 00206956499 PAGE 1 of 1

25 of 362

That's one promise Microsoft's Skype videoconferencing technology holds for the university, according to its IT director Rob Irving.

UNE has just scored a lucrative deal worth millions of dollars with Microsoft to equip about 23,000 students and staff with its Lync communications platform.

The university, located in the northern NSW city of Armidale, has a distance learning population of about 80 per cent, Mr Irving said.

"Skype is a very interesting proposition because we're a distance learning education provider," he said.

"We don't know exactly all the things we can do with Skype but we're excited about it because obviously you also have the Skype platform in Xbox."

Mr Irving said Xboxes sitting in students' houses "suddenly become video conferencing units" which allows them to "participate in a lecture from home without any further investment in technology".

"It's pretty exciting and the potential is huge," he said.

Before the university dives into Skype, it's busy rolling out Lync to 20,000-odd students and 2500 employees.

Each student will receive a Lync "soft phone", a program for making phone calls over the internet and an IP-based phone number. Staff will receive additional Polycom handsets.

"We want to give them a soft phone so they can connect with any faculty member considering these phone calls can have a �nancial impact on them," Mr Irving said.

All classes go online as soon as a lecture starts, which means students can dial in and "attend" classes over Lync if they can't make it in person or live remotely, he said.

"We see that as a really great enabler for our students," Mr Irving said.

"Lync can be accessed on a browser or students can download the software to their Windows, Apple or (Google) Android smartphone," he said.

Mr Irving said the university wanted Lync to be its "core teaching platform" over existing solutions such as Adobe Connect for web conferencing.

UNE will use Skype as a recruitment tool so potential students, patricularly those overseas, don't have to incur hefty call charges. Skype will be embedded into the university's contacts list so students merely have to click the icon and activate a call.

"The ability to market to people using Skype and they then click on a button and

get connected straight to our call centres and we enrol them into a course (presents a) pretty exciting opportunity," Mr Irving said.

Lync will go live towards the end of the year, he said, adding that Computer Systems Australia was the university's systems integrator for the project.

UNE was looking to replace its ageing Alcatel PABX system before deciding on Lync, Mr Irving said.

According to Microsoft, the deal is its largest in the Asia-Paci�c education sector.

NEWCASTLE 60 Grif�ths Rd Lambton NSW 2299 p 02 4915 1100SYDNEY Suite1 / Level 4, 221 Miller St North Sydney NSW 2060 p 02 9017 3200MELBOURNE 220 / 23 Milton Pde Malvern VIC 3144 p 03 9421 5882

[email protected] www.csa.com.au

A U S T R A L I A’ S L E A D I N G I N T E G R AT O R O F R I S K - T O L E R A N T I N F O R M AT I O N A N D C O M M U N I C AT I O N S O L U T I O N S

education

Skype to bring Xbox into uni's learning equation:

"It's pretty exciting and the potential

is huge"

CSA helps deliver Xbox learning to Universities

themselves booting up their Xbox consoles for lectures instead of attending in person or turning to their trusty laptops.

FRAN FOO : The Australian August 06, 2013 12:00AM

26 of 362

ITEM 3.3 Chair Academic Board Report #13282 Council Meeting – 10:30am 23 August 2013

Purpose

Academic Board report to Council:

• on the assessment of the quality of academic programs, advising on any changes to academic and higher research degree programs;

• on the development and review of academic policies; • on the coordination of the quality assurance processes, standards and activities

(TEQSA); • on the quality of standards and support for teaching and research; • on the performance against the UNE strategic and business plan with respect to new

academic development, priorities and policy related issues; • response to/ implementation of the recommendations arising out of the review of

schools, research centres, faculties and courses; • strategic matters covered by the Academic Board and committees, including any

recommendations; • of the exercise by the Academic Board of authorities for which Council has delegated

to the Academic Board (eg Awards); • recommendations on resourcing and staffing matters, and • other significant issues.

Recommendation Professor Nick Reid, Chair Academic Board

Council is asked to:

• NOTE the Chair Academic Board Report #13282. 1. APPROVE the Higher Degree Research graduation list for 26 students and five student applications for Graduation in Absentia.

2. APPROVE the revised Policy Governing Research Institutes and Centres.

3. APPROVE the School of Arts Review Panel report and the School Response.

4. APPROVE the School of Rural Medicine Review Panel report and the School Response.

5. NOTE the approval of the conferral of Ms Ruth French’s Doctor of Philosophy cum laude and the abstract of her thesis entitled ‘Teaching and Learning Functional Grammar in Junior Primary Classrooms’.

6. NOTE the Unit Monitoring Annual Report 2012.

Page 1

27 of 362


7. NOTE the Vice-Chancellor’s Scholars – Detailed Concept, which has been endorsed

and recommended by the Academic Board for adoption by the Vice-Chancellor, with program governance to be undertaken by the Academic Board Teaching and Learning Committee.

8. NOTE the UNE Regional Aboriginal Higher Education Strategy.

Executive Summary

1. Recommendations for Award of Higher Research Degrees and Graduations in Absentia

Council is asked to approve the award of research higher degrees to candidates who were endorsed at the Standing Committee of Academic Board meetings held on 20 June 2013 and 16 July 2013.

Council is asked to approve the applications for Graduation in Absentia for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy from candidates who were endorsed at the meeting of Standing Committee of Academic Board held on 16 July 2013.

Council retains the authority to approve the award of Higher Research Degrees (HRD) and HRD Graduations in Absentia. Refer to the attachments for the names and details of the Higher Degree Research Students who have completed all requirements for their respective HRDs, and those who have applied to graduate in absentia.

2. Revised Policy Governing Research Institutes and Centres

Council is asked to approve the revised Policy Governing Research Institutes and Centres.

The Academic Board reviewed the Policy and Procedures Governing Research Institutes and Centres at its meeting held in December 2012. Minor modifications to the documents were requested, which have been discussed and ratified at Academic Board Research Committee. These updated documents were re-presented to the Academic Board and endorsed for Council’s approval at the board’s meeting of 29 July 2013. The Academic Board resolved to allow its Standing Committee to endorse any minor editorial changes in relation to positions and structure, once the university’s new senior management structure is finalised.

Page 2

28 of 362


3. Review of The School of Arts

Council is asked to approve The School of Arts Review Panel report and the School Response, which were recommended for Council approval at the Academic Board meeting held on 29 July 2013.

These documents have been approved by the Vice-Chancellor’s Committee, noted by the Standing Committee of Academic Board and endorsed by Academic Board.

4. Review of The School of Rural Medicine

Council is asked to approve The School of Rural Medicine Review Panel report and the School Response, which were recommended for Council approval at the Academic Board meeting held on 29 July 2013.

These documents have been approved by the Vice-Chancellor’s Committee, noted by the Standing Committee of Academic Board and endorsed by Academic Board.

5. Ms Ruth French’s Doctor of Philosophy Conferral cum laude

Council’s attention is drawn to the outstanding achievement of Ms Ruth French in being recommended for the Conferral of her PhD cum laude.

A doctoral candidate is awarded a PhD cum laude where the examiners, unanimously and independently, agree that the thesis is of exceptional quality in every respect and can be awarded without requirement for more than minor editorial amendment. Please refer to the attachment for the thesis abstract, for the information of members.

6. Unit Monitoring Annual Report 2012

Council is asked to note the Unit Monitoring Annual Report 2012, which was prepared under the authority of the Course Profile Planning Committee and noted by the Academic Board at its meeting held on 29 July 2013.

The University is committed to the regular, systematic and ongoing monitoring of units to assure staff and our stakeholders about the quality of our teaching and learning activities and to identify (and act on) opportunities for improvement. The attached report assesses the annual unit monitoring outcomes that were achieved in calendar year 2012.

The Report is provided to Council for information.

Page 3

29 of 362


7. Vice-Chancellor’s Scholars – Detailed Concept

A detailed concept paper prepared by a working party led by Assoc Professor Jennifer Clark was considered by the Academic Board at its meeting held on 29 July 2013, and was endorsed and recommended for adoption by the Vice-Chancellor. The program governance is to be undertaken by the Academic Board Teaching and Learning Committee.

An overview of this proposed program was presented to the Academic Board at its May meeting and was approved, in principle. At that meeting, development of the detailed proposal was requested.

This paper is provided to Council for information.

8. UNE Regional Aboriginal Higher Education Strategy

Council is asked to note the UNE Regional Aboriginal Higher Education Strategy. The UNE Regional Aboriginal Higher Education Strategy has been developed by the UNE Regional Aboriginal Higher Education Strategy Committee and presented to Senior Executive at a meeting on 6 May 2013. This strategy was noted by the Academic Board at its meeting held on 29 July 2013, and is provided to Council for information.

Page 4

30 of 362


Attachments

1. Recommendations for Award of Higher Research Degrees and Graduations in Absentia 1.1 Memorandum from Dr Eliza Kent dated 23 May 2013 1.2 Memorandum from Prof Heiko Daniel dated 2 July 2013 1.3 Memorandum from Prof Heiko Daniel dated 12 July 2013 1.4 Letters of application to graduate in absentia from:

1.4.1 Raed Alhargan 1.4.2 Amanda Doughty 1.4.3 Hassan Khormi 1.4.4 Peter Quain 1.4.5 Giregon Olupot

2. Revised Policy Governing Research Institutes and Centres

The tracked-change version of the revised Policy Governing Research Institutes and Centres is attached.

3. Review of The School of Arts 3.1 The Review of the School of Arts Report by the External Review Panel is

attached. 3.2 The Response of the School to the Report by the External Review Panel and

the School’s Action Plan in response to the recommendations is attached.

4. Review of The School of Rural Medicine 4.1 The Review of the School of Rural Medicine by the External Review Panel is

attached. 4.2 The Response of the School to the Report by the External Review Panel and

The School’s Action Plan in response to the recommendations is attached.

5. Celebration of Ms Ruth French’s Doctor of Philosophy Conferral cum laude

The abstract of Ms Ruth French’s PhD thesis entitled ‘Teaching and Learning Functional Grammar in Junior Primary Classrooms’ is attached.

Page 5

31 of 362


6. Unit Monitoring Annual Report 2012

The Unit Monitoring Annual Report 2012 is attached.

7. Vice-Chancellor’s Scholars – Detailed Concept

The Vice-Chancellor’s Scholars Detailed Concept paper is attached.

8. UNE Regional Aboriginal Higher Education Strategy

The UNE Regional Aboriginal Higher Education Strategy is attached.

Page 6

32 of 362

Research Services

Armidale NSW 2351 Australia

Phone 61 2 6773 2120 Fax 61 2 6773 3543

Email [email protected] www.une.edu.au/research-services/

Memorandum

To: Secretary Academic Board From Dr Eliza Kent, Secretary, Academic Board Higher Degree Research Committee Date: 23 May, 2013 Re: Items for the Flying Minute of the Standing Committee of the Academic

Board to be sent in place of the meeting scheduled for the 4th June, 2013, which has been cancelled

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Admission to Higher Research Degrees

Please find below a list of students who have completed satisfactorily the required amendments to their theses and whose examiners’ reports have been reconsidered and are now recommended that the students be awarded their respective higher research degree.

FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Name: Peter Quain Thesis Title: ‘Event-Related Potential Indicators of Working Memory

Activity During Subitizing’ School: School of Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences Principal Supervisor: Dr Bruce Stevenson

Name: Christine Walela Thesis Title: ‘Storage and Stability of Soil Organic Carbon Down the

Profiles Under Native Woodland, Native Pastures and Cultivation’

School: School of Environmental and Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Professor Heiko Daniel

MASTER OF ARTS WITH HONOURS

Name: Francis Windolf Thesis Title: ‘Permanent Reflections? Public Memorialisation in

Queensland's Sunshine Coast Region’ School: Humanities Principal Supervisor: Associate Professor Janis Wilton

#13282 Attachment 1.1

33 of 362

Research Services


Phone 61 2 6773 2120 Fax 61 2 6773 3543

Email [email protected] www.une.edu.au/research-services/ FACULTY OF THE PROFESSIONS


Name: Siew King Ting Thesis Title: ‘An Empirical Analysis of Administrative Productivity and

Efficiency in Sabah Local Government’ School: UNE Business School Principal Supervisor: Professor Brian Dollery

Yours sincerely

Dr Eliza Kent Secretary Academic Board Higher Degree Research Committee

34 of 362

Research Services


Phone 61 2 6773 2120 Fax 61 2 6773 3543


Memorandum To: Secretary Academic Board From Professor Heiko Daniel, Director, Research Services Date: 2nd July, 2013 Re: Items for the Standing Committee of the Academic Board Meeting to be

held on the 16th July, 2013 _______________________________________________________________________________________




MASTER OF SCIENCE

Name: Judith Ann Hopper Thesis Title: ‘Improving Treatments for Wing Injuries of Bats, Order

Chiroptera’ School: School of Science and Technology Principal Supervisor: Dr Gemma O’Brien


Name: Raed Abdulaziz Alhargan Thesis Title: ‘The Impact of Transnational Civil and Political Rights

Advocacy on the Saudi Government with Special Reference to the Spiral Model’

School: School of Humanities Principal Supervisor: Professor Helen Ware

Name: Yadunath Bajgai Title: ‘Effect of Alternative Cropping Management on Soil Organic

Carbon’ School: School of Environmental & Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Dr Paul Kristiansen

Name: Yuval Berger Title: ‘Vertical Habitat Use by Whale Sharks (Rhincodon typus) School: School of Environmental & Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Dr Mark Meekan

Name: Ilona Maria Ciller Thesis Title: ‘Investigating the Role of Bone Morphogenetic Protein

Receptor IB and Putative Ligands in Reproductive Development and Steroidogenic Regulation in Male Mice’

School: School of Environmental and Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Associate Professor Jim McFarlane

Name: Amanda Kirstan Doughty Title: ‘Factors Influencing the Motivation of Sheep for Food’ School: School of Environmental & Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Professor Geoff Hinch


35 of 362

Research Services


Phone 61 2 6773 2120 Fax 61 2 6773 3543


FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES Continued

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Continued

Name: Peter Duncan Phipps Jones ( Title: ‘Islamic Schools in Australia: Muslims in Australia or

Australian Muslims’ School: School of Humanities, School of Behavioural, Cognitive &

Social Sciences Principal Supervisor: Professor Howard Brasted

Name: Hassan Muhsan A Khormi Thesis Title: ‘Modelling of Dengue Fever and its Vector Risks Based on the

Impacts of Socioeconomic, Meteorological and Environmental Factors: A Geographic Information System-Based Case Study of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia’

School: School of Environmental & Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Associate Professor Lalit Kumar

Name: Lisa Maree McFadyen Title: ‘Canopy Management Strategies for Macadamia (Macadamia

integrifolia, M. Integrifolia x M. Tetraphylla) School: School of Environmental & Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Dr Paul Kristiansen

Name: Timothy Ian McLaren Thesis Title: ‘The Form and Availability of Slowly Available Phosphorus in

Depleted Vertosols’ School: School of Environmental and Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Dr Chris Guppy

Name: Sarah Jessie Mika Thesis Title: ‘Restoring Vertical Connectivity in Rivers: Geomorphic,

Hydrologic and Biogeochemical Responses to Log Sills in the Williams and Hunter Rivers, NSW, Australia’

School: School of Environmental & Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Professor Andrew Boulton

Name: John Chisnall Moore Thesis Title: ‘Monitoring the Health of Timber Bridge Beams’ School: School of Environmental & Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Dr Saeed Mahini

Name: Giregon Olupot Thesis Title: ‘Plant Root Contributions to Carbon Sequestration on the

Northern Tablelands of New South Wales, Australia’ School: School of Environmental & Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Associate Professor Brian Wilson

Name: Austin O’Malley Thesis Title: ‘Spatial Patterns in the Distribution of Truffle-Like Fungi,

Mutualistic Interactions with Mammals, and Spore Dispersal Dynamics’

School: School of Environmental & Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Associate Professor Karl Vernes

Name: Khadijah Saad Thesis Title: ‘Moisture Requirements for Successful Development of

Haemonchus contortus ’ School: School of Environmental and Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Associate Professor Lewis Kahn

36 of 362

Research Services


Phone 61 2 6773 2120 Fax 61 2 6773 3543


FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES Continued

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Continued

Name: Rajendra Lal Shilpakar Thesis Title: ‘Floodplain Vegetation Landscapes: An Ecotone or a Dynamic

Patch Mosaic?’ School: School of Behavioural, Cognitive and Social Sciences Principal Supervisor: Professor Martin Thoms

FACULTY OF THE PROFESSIONS

MASTER OF EDUCATION WITH HONOURS

Name: Thesis Title:

School: Principal Supervisor:

Aaron Michael Peeters ‘Exploring the Effect of Professional Development on Primary Teachers' Practice in Northern Ghana: A Two-Cycle Action Research Project’ School of Education Professor Neil Taylor

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY cum laude

Name: Ruth French Thesis Title: ‘Teaching and Learning Functional Grammar in Junior Primary

Classrooms’ School: School of Education Principal Supervisor: Professor Len Unsworth


Name: Deki Chhojom Gyamtso Thesis Title: ‘An Inquiry Into the Nature of Teaching and Learning

Practices at the Royal University of Bhutan School: School of Education Principal Supervisor: Dr David Paterson

Name: Hasnah Thesis Title: ‘The Potential of the Cacao Agribusiness for Poverty

Alleviation in West Sumatra, Indonesia’ School: UNE Business School Supervisors: Professor Renato Villano

37 of 362

Research Services


Phone 61 2 6773 2120 Fax 61 2 6773 3543


APPLICATION FOR A TESTAMUR IN ABSENTIA

Please find attached letters requesting a Testamur in Absentia from:

Raed Alhargan ( – Doctor of Philosophy Amanda Doughty ( – Doctor of Philosophy Hassan Khormi ( – Doctor of Philosophy Peter Quain ( – Doctor of Philosophy

Yours sincerely

Professor Heiko Daniel Director Research Services

38 of 362

Research Services


Phone 61 2 6773 2120 Fax 61 2 6773 3543


Memorandum To: Secretary Academic Board From Professor Heiko Daniel, Research Director Date: 12th July, 2013 Re: Items for the Standing Committee of the Academic Board Meeting to be

held on the 29th July, 2013 _______________________________________________________________________________________





Name: Mohammad Abul Hossain ( Thesis Title: ‘Improving Vegetable Protein Diets for Broiler Chickens’ School: School of Environmental and Rural Science Principal Supervisor: Associate Professor Paul Iji

FACULTY OF THE PROFESSIONS

MASTER OF EDUCATION WITH HONOURS

Name: Ian Robert Hoddinott ( Thesis Title: ‘English Literature in Qatari English Language Classrooms’ School: School of Education Principal Supervisor: Dr Keita Takayama

Yours sincerely

Professor Heiko Daniel Research Director


39 of 362

S/N:

1st July, 2013

Ms Anita Taylor University Council Office of the Secretariat Booloominbah University of New England ARMIDALE NSW 2351

Dear Ms Taylor

Testamur in Absentia

Recently I have completed the amendments to my Doctor of Philosophy thesis, which has been endorsed by my Principal Supervisor and Head of School. I have been advised that the Standing Committee of the Academic Board will note the recommendation from Research Services that I have completed all requirements of the degree at the meeting to be held on the 16th July, 2013.

I would like to ask permission to have the degree of Doctor of Philosophy awarded as a Testamur in Absentia at your next meeting to be held on the 23rd August, 2013, which would enable my position to be upgraded.

Thank you for considering my request.

Yours sincerely

Raed Alhargan

#13282 Attachment 1.4.1

40 of 362


41 of 362

S/N:

27th June, 2013


Dear Ms Taylor





Yours sincerely

Hassan Muhsan A Khormi


42 of 362

S/N:

25th June, 2013


Dear Ms Taylor


Recently I have completed the amendments to my Doctor of Philosophy thesis, which has been endorsed by my Principal Supervisor and Head of School. I have been advised that the Standing Committee of the Academic Board will note the recommendation from Research Services that I have completed all requirements of the degree at the meeting held on the 20th June, 2013.



Yours sincerely

Peter Quain


43 of 362

S/N:

15th July, 2013

Ms Rachel Thorsen Secretary to Academic Board Office of the Secretariat Booloominbah University of New England ARMIDALE NSW 2351

Dear Ms Thorsen



I would like to ask permission to have the degree of Doctor of Philosophy awarded as a Testamur in Absentia at the next meeting of the UNE Council, to be held on the 23rd August, 2013, which would enable my position to be upgraded.


Yours sincerely

Giregon Olupot


44 of 362

Policy Governing Research Institutes and Centres

Document type: Administering Entity: Records management system number: Date Endorsed by Academic Board: Date last approved:Approved by: Indicative time for review: Responsibility for review: Related policies or other documents:

Policy Research Services

29 July 2013

Council 5 years from date of Council approval Academic Board Research Committee Academic Quality Management Policy (SED08/115) Knowledge Assets and Intellectual Property Policy (VCD07/2838)

1. Scope

1.1 This policy regulates the establishment, administration, approval and review of research Institutes and Centres. Cooperative Research Centres (CRCs) are not covered by this policy as they are subject to different approval mechanisms under the auspices of the Commonwealth Government. For further information on CRCs, refer to the Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research). Joint venture Institutes, Units and Centres are also not covered by this policy as their constitution and governance must be negotiated between UNE and the other joint venture partners. Such joint ventures would, however, have a formal reporting line to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research).

2. Purposes

2.1 Research Institutes and Centres are established for defined periods to achieve the following outcomes:

1. an enhanced research reputation of UNE and its academics in the wider community;

2. delivering, where appropriate, on the UNE vision of research-informed teaching andlearning; and

3. maximising the amount of externally funded research conducted at UNE.

2.2 All approved Research Institutes and Centres are expected to establish and maintain a current web presence with a link advised to Research Services.

2.3 All Research Institutes and Centres, approved under this policy, are bound by the principles set out in the University’s Knowledge Assets and Intellectual Property Policy.

3. Responsibilities of Research Institutes

3.1 Research Institutes are intended to pursue major UNE research initiatives and to be substantially self-funding. The precise funding arrangements and arrangements for the flow of Research Block Funding will be negotiated and agreed between relevant stakeholders as part of the process for formulating the proposal for establishing the Institute.

3.2 Institutes are managed and evaluated at a University level, with any UNE academic staff, excepting the Director, also reporting to relevant Heads of Schools for the purpose of workload and performance review. Institute staff may be drawn from across Faculties as well as appointed to the Institute for specific externally-funded projects.

32#13282 Attachment 2

45 of 362

3.3 It is expected that an Institute will demonstrate success against the following criteria, weighted as appropriate for the strategic objectives of the Institute in the context of the overall UNE Strategic Plan:

1. a coherent body of ongoing research and consultancy work, that represents a strongprogram, in either a focused area or a cohesive area of inter-disciplinary or multi-disciplinary work, that distinctively advances the UNE reputation and research income inareas of strategic importance to UNE;

2. interaction between the Institute’s funded research and the University’s teaching andlearning enterprise focused on Higher Degree Research students to help achieve UNE’svision and enhance its reputation with respect to research-informed teaching;

3. provision of substantial collaborative opportunities for staff to be engaged in well-funded research of high impact;

4. relationships with or the capacity to develop relationships with national or internationalcollaborators and with those in a position to adopt or drive adoption of the results ofresearch;

5. sufficient scale to allow UNE to enhance its brand and competitive capacity in thecompetitive research market; and

6. ability to be fully or substantially self-funded.

3.4 These criteria, appropriately weighted, will form the basis of any Key Performance Indicators proposed for the Institute. The nature of the funding model to be applied in criterion 6 can be negotiated with the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research), in consultation with other relevant stakeholders as well as members of the University senior executive.

4. Responsibilities of Research Centres

4.1 Research Centres focus on externally funded research conducted through Schools, and are managed and staffed within the Faculty/School structure. Centres are the basis for researcher collaboration, with a particular emphasis on securing external resources for research activities. They assist with providing research development opportunities for staff, and to provide a focus for strengthening the Schools and Faculty’s research reputation. Cross-disciplinary teams across schools are also encouraged with the reporting and other arrangements being agreed between the Schools concerned.

4.2 Centres are managed and evaluated at a School level, with any UNE academic staff reporting to their relevant Heads of Schools for the purpose of workload and performance review. Centre staff may be drawn from one or more Schools.

4.3 It is expected that a Centre will demonstrate success against the following criteria, weighted as appropriate for the strategic objectives of the Centre in the context of the overall UNE Strategic Plan and Faculty/School strategic objectives:

1. pursuit, by a number of staff, within and beyond the School, of a coordinated researchand consultancy program or programs which will enhance the School’s/Faculty’sreputation and research income in areas of strategic importance to the School/Faculty;

2. support of the research program through external funding;

3. interaction between the Centre’s research program and the teaching and learningenterprise of the School/s concerned to help achieve UNE’s vision and enhance itsreputation with respect to research-informed teaching;


46 of 362

4. development of the research careers and reputation of the staff of the Schools concerned;and

5. active collaboration with other relevant institutions and users of the research.

4.4 These criteria, appropriately weighted, will form the basis of any Key Performance Indicators proposed for the Centre.

5. Reporting Structures

5.1 All academic staff at UNE report to a Head of School for the purposes of workload and performance reporting, to ensure coordination and the delivery of research-informed teaching. Research secondments to an Institute or Centre do not relieve an academic of their obligations of service, nor their obligations to support or engage in teaching roles for their School. The duration of any research secondment to a Research Institute or Centre for a staff member is subject to negotiation between the Institute or Centre Director and the relevant Head of School for the staff member.

5.2 The Director of an Institute is a Professor from within UNE and has the same status and administrative delegation as a Head of School on all matters except workload and performance review for UNE staff working into the Institute from Schools. An Institute Director:

1. reports to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) for the period of time they are theDirector with salary and on-costs transferring to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research)for the period of their Directorship;

2. is responsible for the budget, research direction and resourcing of the institute;

3. is responsible for the management of staff within the institute, subject to the reportingarrangements for academic staff; and

4. negotiates with relevant Heads of School for: (a) the release of staff to work within theInstitute; and (b) the terms under which staff are released.

5.3 The Director of a Centre is a senior researcher within a School and reports to their Head of School (or to their relevant Faculty PVC/Dean, as appropriate, given the nature and level of the Centre). Issues of funding, workload and other matters are determined at the School level. A Centre Director:

1. is responsible for the research direction of the centre; and

2. negotiates with Heads of School for: (a) the release of staff to work within the centre;and (b) the terms under which staff are released.

6. Establishment

6.1 Institutes: Proposals should be assembled and submitted as described in the accompanying Procedures. The proposal will be reviewed by the Academic Board Research Committee, prior to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) making the final approval decision.

6.2 Centres: Proposals should be assembled and submitted as described in the accompanying Procedures. The proposal will be reviewed by the relevant Faculty Executive Committee and Faculty Research Director, prior to the relevant PVC/Dean making the final approval decision. Once approved at the Faculty level, the PVC/Dean will advise the ABRC and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) of the Centre’s approval.


47 of 362

7 Performance Review

7.1 Institutes and Centres will submit an annual progress report in accordance with the guidelines set out in the accompanying Procedures to facilitate on-going monitoring and recording of achievements.

7.2 Institutes will be formally reviewed, informed by evidence of performance against nominated performance indicators, every five years, by a Review Committee established by the Academic Board Research Committee.

7.3 Centres will be reviewed, informed by evidence of performance against nominated performance indicators, within the review and reporting cycle and process for Schools under the Academic Quality Management Policy.

8. Actions after Performance Review

8.1 The relevant review committee shall recommend either that the Institute or Centre be: a) continued, b) continued subject to modification and review as specified, or c) dis-established.

1. If the recommendation is: a) be continued, the review committee may recommendexpected or suggested adjustments to the relevant Director.

2. If the recommendation is: b) be continued subject to modification and review, thecommittee shall specify modifications which are mandatory and shall also determine thereview process and timing to evaluate compliance.

3. If the recommendation is: for c) dis-establishment, the committee shall determine thetiming and mechanism for dis-establishment.

8.2 The only avenue for review appeal of committee findings is to the relevant PVC/Dean for a Centre and the Deputy-Vice Chancellor (Research) for an Institute within 1 month of the review committee recommendations, and respective decisions by the PVC/Dean and Deputy Vice Chancellor (Research) shall be final.

8.3 The Deputy Vice Chancellor (Research) will report to Academic Board on any decisions made with respect to establishment, modification or dis-establishment of a Research Institute or Centre.


48 of 362

Procedures Governing Research Institutes and Centres

Document type: Administering Entity: Records management system number: Date approved: Approved by: Indicative time for review: Responsibility for review: Related policies or other documents:

Procedures Research Services ABC10/12 29 July 2013 Academic Board 5 years from date of Council approval Academic Board Research Committee (ABRC)Policy Governing Research Institutes and Centres

Proposals for Establishment

Researchers may make application for the establishment of a Research Institute or Centre at any time by following the steps outlined below.

1. Appendix 1 provides an outline of the format for a proposal to establish an Institute. The proposal mustdemonstrate the capacity to meet the criteria for an Institute within a nominated timeframe. Proposalsshould be forwarded to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) who will forward the proposal to theAcademic Board Research Committee for discussion prior to approval.

2. Appendix 2 provides an outline of the format for a proposal to establish a Centre. The proposal mustdemonstrate the capacity to meet the criteria for a Centre within a nominated timeframe. Proposals shouldbe forwarded through the relevant Head(s) of School(s) to the relevant Faculty Research Director who willforward the proposal to the Faculty Executive Committee for discussion prior to approval. Onceapproved, the PVC/Dean will advise the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research).

3. Once a Research Institute or Centre has been approved, arrangements should be made to immediatelyestablish and maintain a current web presence with a link advised to Research Services. This webpresence will include, at a minimum, a description of the Research Institute’s or Centre’s purpose, itsresearch goals and objectives, current projects, information regarding its Director and contact details.

Annual Interim Report

Institutes and Centres will provide an annual report based on the template provided at Appendix 3. In the case of a Research Institute, this report will be submitted to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research). In the case of a Research Centre, this report will be submitted to the relevant PVC/Dean of Faculty and Faculty Research Director with a copy to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research). The annual reports will be submitted in March of each year, and will address the entire preceding year’s activities.

The annual reports will provide a key component of the self-review document for the performance review of a Research Institute or Centre.

Performance Review

Institutes

Institutes will be reviewed every five years, by a Review Committee established by the Academic Board Research Committee (ABRC). Six months’ notice of a performance review will be provided to the Institute by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research). At that time, the ABRC will constitute a Review Committee and clarify its terms of reference, after consultation with the Director of the Institute.

The Review Committee will include:

1. an external Professor who has experience as a Director of a Research Institute at another University;

2. the Research Directors of each Faculty; and

3. a Professor from within the university, nominated by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research).


49 of 362

The Director of the Institute will produce a self-review document to be considered by the Review Committee. This document will contain at least the following information:

1. all annual reports since the time of last performance review or establishment, as appropriate;

2. a summary of all achievements and financial position since the time of last performance review, orestablishment, as appropriate, linked clearly to the performance KPIs; and

3. the plans for the Institute over the next five year period, showing how these plans are linked to theUniversity’s overall strategic plan.

The Review Committee will report to the ABRC providing recommendations as to continuation, dis-establishment or change of focus, informed by evidence of performance against nominated indicators prior to the Deputy Vice Chancellor (Research) making a decision.

Centres

Centres will be reviewed within the review and reporting cycle for Schools under the Academic Quality Management Policy. The Review Committee will report to the Faculty Executive Committee and Faculty Research Director ABRC providing recommendations as to continuation, dis-establishment or change of focus, informed by evidence of performance against nominated indicators prior to the PVC/Dean making a decision and informing the ABRC and Deputy Vice Chancellor (Research)..

Where a Centre operates across Schools, the primary School of alignment for the Centre as well as the review cycle will be specified at the time of establishment by the relevant PVC/Dean, but in no case will reviews be less frequent than every five years.

For a review of a Centre, the minimum information to be considered will be all annual reports since the time of last performance review or establishment, as appropriate.


50 of 362

APPENDIX 1

Proforma: Proposal to establish a Research Institute

Those proposing to establish a Research Institute must read the Policy Governing Research Institutes and Centres and Procedures Governing Research Institutes and Centres and provide the following information.

1. Objectives

1.1 This section should contain statements on the:

strategic objectives of the Institute;

relationships with the University’s Strategic Plan and Research Plan, and

operational objectives, including the time-scale for achieving these objectives and outcomes (milestones) of the Institute.

2. Nature of work to be undertaken

2.1 This section should explain the major research, teaching, consultancy and community/industry/profession-based service programs to be undertaken by the Institute.

A performance plan should be included which defines key performance indicators and targets such as external grants, publications, higher research degree completions, and other income if appropriate. Non-quantified KPIs may include external relationships and partnerships, and reflections of research impact, including, for example, innovation adoption, policy influence, community/industry/ profession development &change where appropriate. This section should also argue for the desired weighting of key performance criteria given the objectives set out in the first section.

2.2 Information should be provided on arrangements for the enrolment and supervision of students (all students will be enrolled through Schools).

3. Arrangements for administration

3.1 This section should contain the operational details of the Institute including:

selection of the Director;

the role and contribution of the Institute Director to the Institute;

key academic staff, their reporting lines and their time commitment to proposed activities (including other commitments);

organisational structure and governance considerations; and

organisational links and support.

3.2 Recommendations regarding the composition of any management committee or independent advisory board must be provided, but final approval of the composition will rest with the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research).

3.3 Agreements with external parties must be approved by the UNE Legal Office, and signed by the University.

4. Required resources

4.1 This section should detail the resources required to operate the Institute, such as:

funding;

space; and

other specific resources (e.g. computing infrastructure).

5. Budget

5.1 The budget should cover an establishment period and the first five years of operation of the Institute. The principles for the budget should be agreed with the UNE Chief Operating Officer or their delegate.

5.2 Where appropriate, the following resource management principles should be clearly documented, with assurances that all relevant stakeholders (including those external to the University) are in agreement:


51 of 362

amount, source and duration of any University contribution to the Institute;

cost/income splitting arrangements for research activities, teaching students, Institute staff and, in particular, the Institute Director,

and the distribution of returns, including Research Block Funding, from activity, based on outputs.

6. Arrangements for review and termination

6.1 A sunset period for the Institute should be specified (usually 5 years), at which time an independent review should be conducted prior to continuation or dis-establishment of the Institute.

7. Support

7.1 The proposal should be accompanied by letters of support from the relevant PVC/Dean and, where appropriate, relevant Heads of School and other stakeholders indicating the level of their commitment, financial or otherwise, to the proposed Institute.


52 of 362

APPENDIX 2

Proforma: Proposal to establish a Research Centre

Those proposing to establish a Research Centre must read the Policy Governing Research Institutes and Centres and Procedures Governing Research Institutes and Centres and provide the following information.

1. Objectives

1.1 This section should contain statements on the:

strategic objectives of the Centre;

relationships with the University’s Strategic Plan, Research Plan and Faculty and/or School research priorities; and

operational objectives, including the time-scale for achieving these objectives and outcomes (milestones) of the Centre.

2. Nature of work to be undertaken

2.1 This section should explain the major research, teaching, consultancy and community/industry/profession-based service programs to be undertaken by the Centre.

A performance plan should be included which defines key performance indicators and targets such as external grants, publications, higher research degree completions, and other income if appropriate. Non-quantified KPIs may include external relationships and partnerships, and impact, including innovation adoption where appropriate. This section should also argue for the desired weighting of key performance criteria given the objectives set out in the first section.

2.2 Information should be provided on arrangements for the enrolment and supervision of students (all students will be enrolled through Schools).

3. Arrangements for administration

3.1 This section should contain the operational details of the Centre including:

selection of the Director and reporting lines;

the role and contribution of the Centre Director to the centre;

key academic staff, their reporting lines and their time commitment to proposed activities (including commitments to other Schools/Centres);

organisational structure and governance considerations; and

organisational links and support.

3.2 Agreements with external parties must be approved by the UNE Legal Office, and signed by the University.

4. Required resources

4.1 This section should detail the resources required to operate the Centre, such as:

funding;

space; and

other specific resources (e.g. computing infrastructure.)

5. Budget

5.1 The budget should cover an establishment period and the first five years of operation of the Centre. The principles for the budget should be agreed with the UNE Chief Operating Officer or their delegate.

5.2 Where appropriate, the following resource management principles should be clearly documented, with assurances that all relevant stakeholders (including those external to the University) are in agreement:

amount, source and duration of any Faculty or School contribution to the Centre;

cost/income splitting arrangements for research students, teaching activities and Centre staff and, in particular, the Centre Director; and


53 of 362

the distribution of returns, including Research Block Funding, from activity, based on outputs.

6. Arrangements for review and termination

6.1 A sunset period for the Centre should be specified, at which time an independent review should be conducted prior to continuation of the Centre.

7. Support

7.1 The proposal should be accompanied by letters of support from the relevant Head of School and, where appropriate, other stakeholders indicating the level of their commitment, financial or otherwise, to the proposed Centre.


54 of 362

APPENDIX 3

Annual Progress Reporting Template for Research Institutes/Centres

Research Institute/Centre Name:

Director:

Year established:

Year being reported on:

Date of Progress Report submission: Please supply comments and/or data/evidence under each of these headings for the previous 12 months of activity. 1. Participants in the activities of the Institute/Centre (academics, technical & administration)

2. Research students (new, continuing, length of candidature, completions, project title or area)

3. Publications (including citations)

4. Research Grants (numbers, project titles, chief investigators, amounts and duration)

5. Research Consultancies/Contracts (area(s) of consultancy, commissioning body, relevant dates)

6. Research Impacts (e.g., how results were delivered; project follow-through; policy and/or change influences; media exposure; awards & prizes; paradigm shifts in discipline or area of application; invitations to contribute to national and international fora; enhanced HDR recruitment)

7. Community/Business/Industry/Government/Profession engagement indicators (where appropriate, include comments on social inclusion and other important social and environmental issues implicated in the Institute/Centre’s engagements):

Local

National

International

8. New innovations and pathways for adoption/adoption progress for previous innovations

9. New collaborations or expansions of previous collaborations

10. Role in contributing to the strengths of the University, Faculty, Schools (as appropriate)

11. How is the Institute/Centre’s research informing teaching?

12. What has the Institute/Centre achieved that would not have otherwise been achieved without the


55 of 362

existence of the Institute/Centre?

13. Financial performance of the Institute/Centre against budget (attach summary balance sheet)

14. Looking Forward – Plans & Priorities for the next 12 months

15. Any other information or comments relevant to the Institute/Centre’s operation over the past 12 months?


56 of 362

University of New England

Review of the School of Arts

Report by the External Review Panel

26 – 29 November 2012


57 of 362

1

Table of Contents

Terms of Reference .................................................................................................................... 2

Membership of the Review Panel ............................................................................................... 4

Procedure ................................................................................................................................... 5

General Comments on the Review Process ................................................................................ 6

Preamble .................................................................................................................................... 6

Teaching and Learning ............................................................................................................... 6

Research ..................................................................................................................................... 8

Community Service .................................................................................................................... 10

School Operations, Management, Administration and Relationships ....................................... 11

The School and Its Future ........................................................................................................... 13

Appendix 1: People interviewed by the Review Committee ...................................................... 14

Appendix 2: Submissions received by the Review Committee ................................................... 15


58 of 362

2

Terms of Reference School Reviews are regulated by the University’s Academic Quality Management Policy (SED08/115). School Reviews form part of the University’s continuing cycle of planning, development and improvement. The overall aim of School Reviews is to achieve improvement in the performance of a school through a process of self-‐assessment, benchmarking, critical reflection, forward planning and external peer review. Schools are reviewed to ensure their regular renewal, to improve the quality of their teaching and research activities, the allocation of resources, the management of their strategic priorities and their future development. School reviews also provide information to assist the University to evaluate its performance against strategic priorities and targets, informing planning for future directions and activities. The following principles underpin the School Review process:

a. School Reviews have external input, with membership of review panels including external academic and professional disciplinary experts; b. School Reviews encompass all of the School’s major activity areas – teaching, research, community service, links with relevant professions or disciplines, and their internal planning and administrative activities; c. In reviewing the School’s teaching and learning progress, a review of the courses which are taught in the School, or which form a major component of the School’s teaching, should form an explicit part of the School review process and terms of reference; d. In reviewing courses which have an external professional accreditation requirement, due regard should be given to the findings and requirements of professional accreditation bodies; e. Centralised oversight of the schedule, execution, and implementation of review processes and outcomes is provided by the University’s senior executive, through Vice-‐Chancellor’s Committee, and by the Academic Board and its Committees, in order to strengthen the conduct of reviews and the implementation of recommendations and outcomes; f. Each School is reviewed at least once every five years.

Term of Reference 1: Teaching and Learning Achievements relating to teaching will particularly focus on the strategic teaching and learning directions and goals of the University. They will also consider the quality, scope, focus, direction and balance of the School’s courses and teaching at undergraduate and postgraduate levels in light of agreed teaching and learning indicators. Term of Reference 2: Research Achievements relating to research will particularly focus on the strategic research directions and goals of the University. They will also consider the research performance of the School and its constituent disciplines.


59 of 362

3

Term of Reference 3: Community Service Achievements relating to service to the University, the community and the constituent discipline/s will particularly focus on the strategic community goals of the University. They will also consider the role played by the School and its constituent disciplines in relation to relevant industries, professions, professional associations, partners and the community. Term of Reference 4: School Operations, Management, Administration and Relationships Review of the operations of the School will focus on internal management, organization, administration and staffing arrangements of the School in the context of the strategic directions and goals of the University. The review will also consider resource allocation, and the effectiveness of the School’s use of resources in relation to accommodation, space, and teaching and research equipment and facilities. It will also focus on the key relationships and dependencies that exist between the School and other schools and administrative directorates of the University. It will comment on the performance of the School in providing an effective working and learning environment for staff and students.


60 of 362

4

Membership of the Review Panel

Panel Professor Kay Ferres (Chair) School of Humanities Griffith University Professor Paul Makeham Head of School School of Media, Entertainment, Creative Arts Queensland University of Technology Dr Elizabeth Thomson Director Defensive Force School of Languages Australian Defence Force Mr Tony Grybowski Executive Director Arts Organisations Australian Council of the Arts Professor Alison Sheridan Head of School UNE Business School University of New England Administrative support Mrs Penny Purvis Secretary to the Review Committee Faculty Office Arts and Sciences Mrs Kerryn Reeves Assistant to the Review Committee Teaching and Learning Centre


61 of 362

5

Procedure The Review of the School of Arts was instigated by the Vice Chancellor’s Committee (VCC) in February 2012. The Chair of the Academic Board, the Head of School and the Pro Vice Chancellor and Dean established the membership, terms of reference and timing of the review and assisted the School in its preparation for the Review. The School completed a self assessment following a meeting of the School convened to discuss the process and address concerns. All School staff, General and Academic, were invited to attend the meeting which was chaired by the Head of School and to provide input to the review report. Individual disciplines also conducted a number of meetings and contributed to the Self Review report. Copies of the Self Review and associated information were prepared by the School for the Review Committee. Within the School staff and students were invited to make submissions to the Review Committee. The Chair of Academic Board invited submissions from interested parties in other schools and Administrative Directorates. The Standing Committee of Academic Board established the Review Committee in consultation with the Head of School and the PVC Dean. The Committee comprised: three external members with national/international expertise from relevant disciplines or professional fields; one Head of School from another faculty of the University and one community representative. The Review Committee met and conducted interviews during the period 26 to 28 November with senior officers of the University, staff from the School, other University staff and Industry (see Appendix 1). Following an open invitation from the School, the Review Committee met with a self selected group of undergraduate and postgraduate students. The Committee considered carefully the written submission (see Appendix 2), visited the School facilities and met informally with staff members over lunch. The Committee also met informally with the administrative and technical staff over morning tea. The members of the Review Committee discussed their draft recommendations with the Pro Vice Chancellor and Dean, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, and the Head of School prior to finalising their report.


62 of 362

6

General Comments on the Review Process The panel noted that reviews of schools at the University had historically been conducted over a five day period and that a previous panel had recommended that this be reduced to four days. Members felt that the current period of three days does not allow all members of the panel to contribute to the drafting of the report’s recommendations prior to these being discussed with the PVC Dean and Head of School. This has also contributed to the delay in the submission of the final report. The panel suggests that all members of the review panel should draft the report on the fourth day and participate in the presentation of recommendations to the PVC Dean and Head of School. Preamble The School of Arts brings together a distinctive group of creative and performance disciplines with the traditional disciplines of foreign Languages and English. Members of its academic staff in these disciplines have much in common, working across the areas of communication, performance and culture. The School’s future requires staff to recognise and capitalise on this commonality through its activities in learning and teaching, research and community engagement. At present, a heightened awareness of disciplinary difference presents obstacles to future strategic development. The pleasing and positive signs of growth in student numbers present real opportunities for the School. Increased student demand, together with recent and prospective renewal, will enable generational change, refocussing of courses and new research collaborations. The new policy landscape within the sector, created by AQF, ERA and TEQSA, and the increasingly competitive market place presents opportunities and challenges. UNE’s position as a distance provider needs to be maintained and enhanced as the potentials of online delivery are realised by a wide range of institutions. This is a critical time for the School to ensure that it maintains its position and enhances its reputation in the areas of learning and teaching, research and community engagement. In these circumstances it is essential that the School works collaboratively and cohesively to realise a vision for the future. The panel’s commendations and detailed recommendations are intended to inform future planning, as the terms of reference indicate. Teaching and Learning The School is recognised as a provider of quality distance education and has successfully developed programs for niche markets, for example in Music. The recent introduction of trimesters will allow students to progress more quickly through their degree programs, but it also presents some challenges for staff managing curriculum. While the School’s leaders in learning and teaching are responding to the new policy environment and recognise the importance of adapting to new markets, it is vital that staff are afforded professional development opportunities if the School is to realise the potentials of new online technologies. If the School builds on its established reputation and consolidates its expertise as an online provider, it will be able to expand into international markets.


63 of 362

7

Commendations

1. Leadership in learning and teaching from the Teaching and Learning Committee and its Chair is an evident strength in the School.

2. The development of the blended learning model in languages in partnership with other universities was innovative, and reflects the forward thinking of the School. While we recognise that this is a risky area, it presents UNE with an opportunity to be an important provider of language learning and to position itself to be part of the Asian Century.

3. The review panel noted evidence of staff engagement with the scholarship of teaching and learning and their success with ALTC/Carrick teaching awards and grants. The panel commends these initiatives and encourages the School to further strengthen the nexus between teaching and research.

Recommendations

1. A shared approach to unit design should be adopted, in order to ensure that the School improves its online provision. It should work with the Learning Innovations Hub to achieve an enhanced online presence and to capitalise on the affordances of new learning technologies.

2. Technical support needs to be provided to academic staff to improve unit site design. This will ensure consistency of the student experience of learning environments.

3. The School has a potential advantage as an online provider of in the creative disciplines. Staff will need to work collaboratively with Educational Developers and designers to realise the potential for enhanced delivery of these units and to reach new markets. There is already experience in the School (for example, the Master of Applied Theatre Studies was developed with ALTC funding). Now that internal strategic funding is available to support further developments of this kind within the University’s platform, the School should vigorously pursue these opportunities.

4. The School should explore opportunities to promote Arts courses to international markets. This would be a way of optimising enrolments in curricula which are already designed for online delivery and available across three semesters.

5. We note that the School is teaching 242 units and we recommend that there be a systematic process to achieve rationalisation, renewal and reduction through the academic organisational units and the Teaching and Learning Committee. Efficiencies should also be sought where there are instances of doubling up—teaching the same material to online and on campus cohorts. This process must take appropriate account of the requirements of AQF and TEQSA.

6. The School must realise the opportunities that trimesterisation offers. We recognise the difficulties that this presents for languages. However, developing opportunities for short


64 of 362

8

periods of in-‐country study would address the need for continued exposure to language acquisition over trimester 3. In addition, staff in the language disciplines should develop shared units for offer in trimester 3 that enhance students’ cultural, linguistic and teaching methods competencies, and enable them to achieve high level learning outcomes from their language study.

7. With limited staff and core language subjects spanning the three years of undergraduate majors, it is difficult to reduce the amount of teaching in Languages. The Committee recommends instead that staff investigate ways of reducing assessment. We recommend that Languages staff collectively agree, where possible, on a minimum, common assessment regime to reduce workload without reducing exit standards in core languages subjects. We recommend, for example, taking advantage of the computer-‐based quiz options in the LMS, particularly for knowledge-‐based assessment.

8. Trimesterisation has created some challenges for assessment regimes in various disciplines. We recommend that assessment regimes are reviewed to address problems of timing and sequence. This is also an opportunity for the languages to review their approaches to their assessment regimes.

9. We note that this school has a relatively high proportion of on campus students and we recommend that innovative approaches to face to face teaching should be investigated and implemented. In the case of theatre and music, these improvements clearly depend on the provision of better accommodation and learning spaces.

Research We note that there are many instances of sustained excellence in individual research performance in the School in both traditional and creative disciplines. Literary studies research stands out, and the School’s profile in creative research is embodied in the present Head of School who is internationally recognised for his creative practice. The interdisciplinary context of the School mix offers fertile ground for the development of research collaborations. The award of a Future Fellowship to a mid-‐career researcher whose interdisciplinary work crosses over Theatre and English highlights this potential. However, while there a number of productive individual scholars, there appears to be a ‘long tail’ in the School’s overall research profile. We noted a relative absence of collaborative research effort and enterprise. In general, the School appears to lack a coherent research ‘story’ that all researchers can identify with and contribute to. In formal and informal representations, we heard rhetoric about individual freedom to conduct research for its own sake without having to justify it in economic terms. While staff do not give appropriate regard to current metric-‐based gauges of research productivity and impact, the School’s research potential will be weakened. Our recommendations are designed to improve research culture, to build capability, to encourage research collaboration and to enable greater research productivity and impact.


65 of 362

9

Commendations We commend the school for its success in fostering creative research which is reflected in the high level of HDR enrolments in Music, Theatre and Writing. This foundation will assist in building critical mass in these disciplines and will support the School’s efforts to improve performance in ERA into the future.

Recommendations

10. We have noted there is a vacuum around research leadership and that this has serious impact on the research culture of the School. The School must act urgently to develop research leadership and to provide a policy framework that improves research culture, builds research capability and encourages research collaboration.

11. While the panel recognises the importance of research ambition we believe the proposal to establish Arts New England is premature. The difficulty in recruiting an appropriate leader for this initiative is an indicator of this, as is the lack of progress in defining a direction that would engage collaborative, cross disciplinary teams in significant projects. The panel recommends that recruitment of a Director and other efforts to establish Arts New England are suspended until such time as the School is able to realise their ambitions to provide a focus for innovative inter-‐disciplinary collaborative research.

12. We recommend that the School instead focuses its research policy and resources on the development of cross-‐disciplinary research clusters whose purpose is to identify research projects and partners with potential for success. It must develop strategies for supporting and integrating both creative practice as research and traditional publications outputs.

13. The current emphasis on symposia and visiting scholars needs to be redirected toward the development of emerging areas of research strength and enhancing staff research capability. While publication outcomes can be achieved from these activities, collaborative activity needs to be directed toward building sustainable programs of research.

14. The allocation of research resources in the School should be reviewed and funds redirected to support capacity building.

15. Inclusive inter-‐disciplinary research clusters should be established as the first stage of building toward a dynamic research centre.

16. The opportunities to develop scholarship around the teaching and learning (SOTL) innovations within the School offer an opportunity for a rich collaboration across the disciplines, and could be one of the emerging research clusters. The School should develop strategies for enhancing the status in the School of such research. This will be a way of further capitalising on the work of those staff already busily engaged in teaching. In Languages, on-‐line learning, second language acquisition, language pedagogy and methods, linguistics and literature are some examples of areas which lend themselves to contrastive/multilingual analysis.


66 of 362

10

17. Staff without PhDs should be supported to complete their projects and achieve that

qualification.

18. The policy and processes relating to study leave should be reviewed, so that this leave is used to conduct strategically aligned and productive research activity, that will benefit the School.

19. Measures should be put in place to welcome and incorporate HDR students into the School research culture and to improve the intellectual climate in which they work. This should include ensuring that they are provided with new computers and appropriate accommodation.

20. Staff must be encouraged to take engage in professional development opportunities including such things as grant writing workshops that are offered by Research Services. In addition, the School should put in place arrangements for review of grant applications and other work in progress for example, a facilitated school workshop to help with review of papers/publications/creative practice in progress.

21. Future recruitment of academic staff to the School should place emphasis on the ability to demonstrate a capacity to lead in online teaching and in collaborative research in order to build critical mass in relevant ERA research classifications.

22. Support should be provided for research clusters to engage with potential industry and community partners to develop research projects that will address partners’ needs and have impact in wider academic and industry contexts.

Community Service It is clear the School has long established relationships with the local Arts community and other groups. We heard some reports that suggest that this may be in decline as some activities have been discontinued. The sad state of repair of the Newling campus means that the School cannot capitalise on this location to promote these relationships. We also note that the School recognises the need for a coordinated school strategy and resourcing for community engagement if these relationships are to be deepened and enriched. The panel suggests that such a strategy should be framed around ‘engagement with’ rather than ‘service to’ communities. This will enable the School to focus its priorities on more advantageous and targeted activities.

Commendations

The panel recognised the extensive engagement in wide ranging community arts initiatives. In particular the success in securing recurrent funding to support the project “Writers and Illustrators in the New England Region”. We also support the School’s aspiration to build on these valuable activities and to foster a cohesive outreach strategy.


67 of 362

11

Recommendations

23. The School should investigate the opportunities available through Smart Technology and the NBN to reach a wide range of regional communities. There may be opportunities for collaboration around the Smart Farm initiative.

24. The School should exploit Open Educational Resources to provide opportunities for wide community engagement, for example with language learning.

School Operations, Management, Administration and Relationships The panel noted staff concerns about leadership in the School of Arts. However, this view was countered by the many statements of support for the Head of School and his efforts to build a collegial, professional and inclusive culture. His aspiration to develop a healthy environment in which individuals could flourish was shared by many staff in key organisational roles. The administrative staff in the School also demonstrated a high level of support and commitment to the School and its leadership. However, the current flat management structure of the School tends to isolate the Head of School and to enable an oppositional or combative staff dynamic. The panel recognised that many staff in the School worked in poor facilities, felt burdened by a bureaucratic culture of compliance, were disengaged from the broader policy environment and were overwhelmed by demands of the online learning environment. The panel observed that there was an aging work force with a relatively junior academic profile. There has been a high level of staff turnover and a pronounced ‘us and them’ division between academic and general staff. Many staff remain anchored in the past and lack entrepreneurial and innovative drive. We were dismayed by the visible evidence of disrespectful behaviour to colleagues and by the general culture of disempowerment, pessimism and cynicism displayed at the staff forum. These attitudes diminish the exercise of agency, and the optimism that would allow the School to seize opportunities as they arise. Commendations

We commend the Head of School and his leadership group for their patient determination and resilience in driving necessary change in this environment. We also commend the administrative team for their dedication in these trying circumstances.

Recommendations

25. There is an urgent and pressing need to appoint a Deputy Head of School. This must take priority to achieve effective management and good governance in the School. The Deputy Head should be responsible for staff workload allocation, should share responsibilities for staff supervision and act as standing deputy to the Head. Resources to support this position should be found in the School budget for 2013.

26. The panel also sees a need to ensure succession planning in the School. To this end we recommend that a position description should be developed for Discipline Convenors. They


68 of 362

12

should receive an appropriate workload allocation to enable them to provide leadership within the discipline, to have a role in work load allocation and to oversee quality assurance of course and unit offerings in compliance with AQF and TEQSA requirements and standards. If administrative roles are reframed as leadership roles in this way, the overall operating culture of the School will be enhanced.

27. The School should investigate ways to better align the various School committees and working groups, with a view to improving their strategic purpose and efficiency.

28. Additional technical support should be provided within the School for the preparation of online teaching materials. The current capacity is inadequate to meet routine needs. We recommend that the existing casual appointment is extended to full time. There is also a pressing need for ongoing educational development support. The School should take full advantage of the new opportunities available through the Learning Innovations Hub to secure this support.

29. The panel saw a need for continuing professional development for both academic and general staff. The changing tertiary environment demands high level skills and capabilities. Professional development would provide both individual benefits and a greater benefit to the School. We were made aware of the participation of other Heads of School in leadership programs at Harvard and elsewhere. This opportunity should be made available to the School’s senior leadership and funded at the University level.

30. Currently the School hosts seven separate language disciplines, each with small enrolments and a small staff complement. This produces inefficiencies and unnecessary stress on those staff as each area responds to multiple demands. The panel recommends that Languages becomes one academic organisational unit with one discipline convenor. This will enable efficiencies of scale, strategic development and forward thinking as UNE consolidates and extends its position as a Language provider. This model is evident with the Communications, Media and English group.

31. The School is a leading provider of courses in the creative disciplines. At present Music is based at the Newling campus and Drama at the main campus. The facilities that house students and staff in these disciples are in a state of shameful disrepair and are possibly unsafe. The panel was advised that refurbishment and repair of the Newling building was not a priority for the University. Nevertheless we believe that this accommodation compromises the wellbeing of staff and students and the viability of the Music Discipline. The drama studio is not a contemporary performance space and does not meet the needs of drama education in the 21st century. In addition, the School’s arrangement with TAFE New England to provide opportunities for UNE students to study film is increasingly unworkable as TAFE cannot guarantee the availability of units. Because media studies have now moved increasingly into the digital space this arrangement may no longer be viable or appropriate. Instead facilities to support teaching and learning in digital media should be provided. In combination all of these factors suggest that it is time that UNE supported innovative curriculum in these disciplines by providing space where these


69 of 362

13

disciplines can be co-‐located. The panel has been made aware of the potential of the Wright Centre for this purpose and urges the University to give priority to refurbishment of this space to make it fit for purpose.

The School and Its Future As we noted in the preamble, the School of Arts brings together a distinctive group of creative and performance disciplines with the traditional disciplines of foreign Languages and English. In reviewing submissions and meeting with staff and students, the panel recognised that the Head of School has not yet been able to achieve an inclusive culture. Our recommendations are designed to support his efforts to do so by identifying strategic policy and organisational priorities. It is important that this prospect is not jeopardised at this time by further restructuring. Instead cross-‐school collaboration should continue to be encouraged and supported. If the School is to strengthen and revitalise through its activities in learning and teaching, research and community engagement, staff must look beyond their individual interests and embrace a common vision. It is also vital that staff in the School recognise the realities of professional academic life in the current policy environment. An investment of resources and energy in identifying and sustaining the commonalities among staff and disciplines in the School will be repaid in higher levels of excellent creative and traditional research. At present there are obstacles in the way of this outcome but also opportunities with two new appointments recently approved. If the pattern of growth in student enrolments continues there is likely to be further renewal. It is important that new appointments are made with a view to increasing critical mass to support new research directions and to enhance the intellectual climate. Furthermore, the role of the professorial staff in mentoring and supporting early career researchers and postgraduate students will be critical to the future of the School. School strategic planning must promote collaboration in both teaching and research and cooperation with external industry and community partners. Individuals and groups in the School have engaged in an array of community activities. This has created a rich network of stakeholders that could provide a platform for a new vision for the future. This network is the basis for new markets, new research relationships and future success. Recommendations

32. The School of Arts must maintain its position at the forefront of online educational provision by embracing innovative technology.

33. It must continue to encourage staff performance in research and to ensure that research outputs can be captured by ERA and HERDC processes.

34. Professorial staff must engage with mentoring, research development and support the career progression of junior staff.


70 of 362

14

Appendix 1 -‐ People interviewed by the Review Committee The following people were interviewed during the Review.

Executive Officers Acting Vice Chancellor Deputy Vice Chancellor Research – Professor Annabell Duncan PVC Educational Innovation & International -‐ Professor Michael Crock PVC Students and Social Inclusion – Ms Eve Woodbury PVC and Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences – Professor Jennie Shaw Chair of Academic Board – Professor Eilis Magner Chief Operating Officer – Mr Peter Enlund School of Arts Staff Professor Darryl Poulsen -‐ Head of School Ms Therese Burton – Convenor of Japanese Ms Anna Cavallaro – Joint Convenor of Italian Dr Alan Davison -‐ Convenor of Music Dr Jeremy Fisher – Chair, School Research Committee Dr Jenny Hatte – Convenor of French Dr Astrid Gesche – Convenor of Languages & Spanish Dr Jennifer McDonell – Convenor of English, Media and Communications Associate Professor Anne Pender – Convenor of Theatre Studies Ms Isabel Tasker – Convenor of Chinese Dr Ruth Thompson -‐ Theatre Studies Mr Brennan Wales – Joint Convenor of Italian Professor Dugald Williamson -‐ Chair, School Teaching & Learning Committee Ms Gill Willis -‐ School Manager External to the School Professor Jennifer Clark – Academic Director, Faculty of Arts and Sciences Postgraduate students Rowena McDonald James Vicars Chairil Korompot Undergraduate students Rebecca Balfour Melanie Bovis Peta Jeffery Sam Stephenson


71 of 362

15

Appendix 2 -‐ Submissions received by the Review Committee Submissions were received from the following people. Megan Ainsworth Herman Beyersdorf Therese Burton Michaela Campbell Cate Dowd Chris Enright Reginald Forest Jennifer Hatte Craig Hazell Victoria Holdsworth Eric Livingston Carl Moore Louise Noble Jodie Ostenfeld Rebecca Roeland Constance Rolfe Jelena Schmalz Helen Timmers One submission was received that did not relate to the review or the School and hence on the recommendation of the Chair it was not considered.


72 of 362

1

Review of the School of Arts November 2012

Response to the Report by the External Review Panel and Action Plan in response to the recommendations

1. Introduction The “Guidelines for Schools and Review Panels” states that: The Head of School will provide to the PVC Dean, within 6 weeks of receipt of the report, a written response to the report which includes an action plan in response to the recommendations. The response may also, where applicable, correct errors of fact and / or challenge perceived occurrences of inappropriate emphasis in the review report. However, the Guidelines do not state how the response is to be developed, and the level of consultation that is appropriate. In the absence of this detail, the Head of School with support from the School Advisory Committee (SAC) committed to undertake a fully inclusive process consistent with the initial development of the School Review Report. This process is detailed below and was made available to the School at the following link: http://www.une.edu.au/arts/staff/school-‐review/schedule.pdf (School of Arts staff only access). As it was considered essential to take sufficient time for all the representative bodies in the School to have appropriate input into the response, the process ran over ten weeks rather than six.

1.1 Consultation and development process The Review Report was received by the Head of School on 21 March 2013 and distributed to the School on 22 March. The SAC, Teaching and Learning and Research Committees were then provided with a three week period to convene, and draft responses and implementation strategies. These responses were then circulated to all members of the School on 16 April, for Discipline based discussion and Convenors and any interested individuals were asked to provide responses by 1 May. The SAC considered all the responses on 2 May and provided its direction to the Review Working Group. The Review Working Group, (comprising the Head of School, Chairs of the School Teaching and Learning and Research Committees, and the School Manager, Resources and Administrative Services), met on 3 May to agree on format and content of the Action Plan. The draft Plan was developed and endorsed by the Working Group on 14 May, and forwarded to members of the School Advisory Committee on 15 May for consideration on 22 May. The SAC met on 22 May and approved the Action Plan. The Plan was then circulated to the School on 23 May for information and discussion at a School meeting on 29 May. The Action Plan will be forwarded to the Dean/PVC on 30 May with the expectation that it and the Review Report will be considered by the following bodies as set out in the Guidelines:

• Vice-‐Chancellor’s Committee on 19 June 2013 for approval; • Standing Committee of Academic Board on 16 July for consideration; • Academic Board on 29 July 2013 for endorsement; and • Council on 23 August 2013 for approval.

1.2 Response to Review Report Recommendations

The Review Report and all the recommendations with the exception of one (Recommendation 30) have been received positively by the School, and there has been strong support for the intent of all the recommendations. Recommendation 30 was initially totally rejected by the staff in Languages. However their concerns were worked through in detail by the SAC at its 2 May meeting, and it is believed that many of the concerns are a result of misunderstanding the consequences of the recommendation, and the University’s multiple usages of the term ‘discipline’ (in relation to Academic Organisational Unit). The School’s response as outlined below has been carefully considered, and has the unanimous support of the SAC.


73 of 362

2

1.3 Action Plan In lieu of any prescribed format for Action Plans, the following Plan has been developed in order to provide clear guidance to the School on: what strategies are considered appropriate to implement the recommendations; the timeframe; and the responsible officer or forum for overseeing each strategy. In 12 months time, the Follow-‐up Report will complete the Plan with an additional column for reporting on achievements against the strategies. Furthermore, as many of the recommendations from the Review Panel contained significant narrative or editorial comment, the Review recommendations have been presented in the Action Plan as rewritten Recommended Actions. In editing the original recommendations, to focus the actions that will implement them, every attempt has been made to preserve the intent of the original recommendations. If considered appropriate, the Action Plan could be forwarded to the Chair and Secretary of the Panel to ensure that the Recommended Actions are consistent with the Panel’s recommendations.

Finally, the School welcomes the Report by the External Review Panel and the opportunity it offers to inform future planning. It should also be noted that the recommended actions and strategies set out in the Action Plan are consistent with the School’s Strategic Plan, which was developed as part of the Review process in late 2012.

School Advisory Committee

School of Arts

22 May 2013


74 of 362

3

Action Plan

No Recommended Actions Implementation Strategies Timeline Responsible Officer/forum

Teaching and Learning

1 A shared approach to unit design should be adopted, in order to ensure that the School improves its online provision.

The School should work with the Learning Innovations Hub to achieve an enhanced online presence and to capitalise on the affordances of new learning technologies.

1. Teaching and Learning Committee to develop and implement processes to ensure a shared approach to unit design is established including:

a. A template for consistent unit design and delivery; and

b. Strategies for sharing information on best practice in pedagogy and use of educational technology to inform unit design and delivery.

2. Liaise with the Learning Innovations Hub (LIH) to focus School-‐based engagement with its courseware redevelopment project in 2013 (including SAF projects) and beyond, by inviting a representative of LIH on Teaching and Learning Committee when appropriate, and holding Teaching and Learning fora for all School members.

3. As part of wider professional development, discuss with all staff uptake of LIH programs on teaching online to capitalise on innovative technologies during annual PPR meetings.

1 July 2013 -‐ All units in Trimester 2 to have utilised template which will have been imported into Moodle – ongoing each following Trimester

October 2013 -‐ Include in Teaching and Learning Plan

1 July 2013

Fora to be held twice a year

Ongoing

Teaching and Learning Committee

Unit Coordinators, Academic Coordinator, School Moodle and Web support, Teaching and Learning Committee


Head of School/other supervisors


75 of 362

4


2 Technical support needs to be provided to academic staff to improve unit site design.

See response to recommendation 28.

3 The School should vigorously pursue the opportunity to enhance online provision in the creative disciplines.

1. Clarify role of LIH online developers for supporting creative practice in the School disciplines.

2. Review nature and scope of creative practice in School Disciplines particularly in relation to the online environment, and provide report to Teaching and Learning Committee.

3. Provide resourcing and staffing to pursue opportunities for strategic and sustainable outcomes.

4. Pursue agreed opportunities for enhanced and sustainable online design and delivery of the creative practice in School Disciplines, including partnering with other providers.

See response to recommendation 28 re clarification of LIH online developers

October 2013

2014 First half 2014

Head of School, School Manager, School Moodle and Web support

Convenors, Music, Theatre Studies and English, Communication and Media (ECM),Teaching and Learning Committee, Academic Coordinator

Head of School, Convenors, Music, Theatre Studies and ECM LIH, Online developer (once clarified – see recommendation 28) Convenors, Music, Theatre Studies and ECM


76 of 362

5


4 The School should explore opportunities to promote Arts courses to international markets.

1. Clarify level of support with International Marketing and Pathways (IMP) and other relevant offices.

2.

a. Investigate which discipline offerings are best suited to pursue these opportunities.

b. Identify relevant staffing capacity and resources (including for any curriculum redesign and delivery).

June 2013, outcomes to be documented for discussion by School Advisory Committee

End 2013 – Report to School Advisory Committee

2014

Head of School

Teaching and Learning Committee, representative IMP

Head of School, School Manager

5 A systematic process to achieve rationalisation, renewal and reduction of units taking appropriate account of the requirements of AQF and TEQSA be implemented.

1. Subsequent to the review, the School has removed two courses.

2. Clarify the present number of units, (including combined units) and their role in relation to the appropriate structure of majors and courses, as a basis for making decisions on further rationalisation of units and on discipline-‐based academic renewal of units / courses.

3. Optimise use of trans-‐disciplinary units within majors and courses at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels.

4. Explore efficiencies of delivery across on-‐campus and off-‐campus modes where relevant.

May 2013

End 2013

2014

Ongoing as part of above exercises

Teaching and Learning Committee and Academic Coordinator




77 of 362

6


6 The School must realise the opportunities that trimesterisation offers.

The Languages to develop opportunities for short periods of in-‐country study which would address the need for continued exposure to language acquisition over trimester 3, and develop shared units for offer in trimester 3 that enhance students’ cultural, linguistic and teaching methods competencies, and enable them to achieve high level learning outcomes from their language study.

1. The School has extensively engaged in the opportunities for trimesterisation including increasing the number of courses for commencement in trimester three. It will continue strategic reviewing and curriculum planning to optimise the use of trimesters.

2. In curriculum planning, the School will continue to liaise with the First Year Teaching and Learning Development Network.

3. The School already offers Trimester 3 in-‐country unit in Indonesian and the generalist in-‐country unit ICLU300, but will consider how demand could be increased.

4. The School will explore the financial and practical implications of in-‐country study.

5. The Languages will continue to explore the development of an appropriate unit or units in Trimester 3. It should be noted that SPAN204 (a cultural unit) has recently been added.

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Report due end T3, 2013

Ongoing



Languages and Cultures Convenor

Languages and Cultures Convenor, Academic Coordinator

Languages and Cultures Convenor

7 Languages staff collectively agree where possible, on a minimum, common assessment regime to reduce workload without reducing exit standards in core languages subjects. For example; taking advantage of the computer-‐based quiz options in the LMS, particularly for knowledge-‐based assessment.

Languages staff will continue to explore ways of rationalising assessment, including with online assessment techniques, in relation to specific learning objectives and requirements.

Report on progress March 2014 to Teaching and Learning Committee

Languages and Cultures Convenor and Unit Coordinators, Faculty Educational Developer, School Moodle and Web support, Teaching and Learning Committee


78 of 362

7


8 Assessment regimes to be reviewed to address problems of timing and sequence given Trimesterisation.

The School will continue to review assessment forms, timing and sequencing, in a context that includes trimesterisation, blended model, and first year developments.

See recommendations 6 and 7.

Ongoing Convenors and Teaching and Learning Committee

9 Innovative approaches to face to face teaching should be investigated and implemented. In the case of theatre and music, these improvements clearly depend on the provision of better accommodation and learning spaces.

Review current practice and explore flexible models of face-‐to-‐face teaching, in tandem with the exploration of efficiencies in online delivery noted in the response to recommendation 5 above.

On Theatre and Music facilities see response to recommendation 31 below.

Ongoing with review of units

Faculty Educational Developer, Convenors, Teaching and Learning Fora, Teaching and Learning Committee, liaise with First Year Teaching and Learning Development Network


79 of 362

8


Research

10 The School act urgently to develop research leadership and to provide a policy framework that improves research culture, builds research capability and encourages research collaboration.

1. The School will develop a policy and organisational framework, consistent with University level policy and School Strategic Plan, including articulation of:

• foci of existing and future Fields of Research (FORs);

• capacity-‐building clusters; and

• School incentive and other support schemes to focus on identification and development of the above.

2. School research resourcing will be strategically aligned with the policy framework.

3. Senior researchers in the School will be identified for leadership roles in relation to the above-‐mentioned framework, and these responsibilities will be communicated to the School.

End 2013

Development of 2014 Budget – Sept 2014

End 2013 for implementation in 2014 PPR

Research Committee and School Advisory Committee

Head of School, Research Committee

Research Committee, Head of School

11 Recruitment of a Director and other efforts to establish Arts New England (ANE) are suspended until such time as the School is able to realise their ambitions to provide a focus for innovative inter-‐disciplinary collaborative research.

The School agreed not to proceed with the appointment of an ANE Director at the School meeting on 7 December 2012 pending the Review Report.

Outcomes of actions in relation to recommendation 10 will form the basis of future planning in relation to recommendation 11.

Implemented December 2012

Review progress of Recommendation 10 mid 2014

Head of School

Research Committee


80 of 362

9


12 The School focus its research policy and resources on the development of cross-‐disciplinary research clusters whose purpose is to identify research projects and partners with potential for success.

Develop strategies to support creative practice as research with recognised publications output.

1. See response to recommendation 10.

2. The School will develop processes for:

• Identifying and approving viable research clusters;

• ensuring that creative practice as research can be included in clusters; and

• reviewing funding to ensure that it is directed to School approved clusters.

3. Identify potential research partners in creative practice.

Mid 2014

Mid 2014

Research Committee, Convenors, Music, Theatre Studies and ECM, and HOS

Convenors, Music, Theatre Studies and ECM

13 The current emphasis on symposia and visiting scholars needs to be redirected toward the development of emerging areas of research strength and enhancing staff research capability.

These activities will be reviewed as per the response to recommendation 10. Alignment of symposia and visiting scholars to research clusters and for purposes of capacity-‐building will be undertaken and included in the Research Framework.

End 2013 Research Committee

14 The allocation of research resources in the School should be reviewed and funds redirected to support capacity building.

See actions in relation to recommendations 10 and 12.

Review end 2013, Implementation 2014

Research Committee, Head of School

15 Inclusive inter-‐disciplinary research clusters be established as the first stage of building toward a dynamic research centre.

See response to recommendation 12. Mid 2014 Research Committee


81 of 362

10


16 The School consider developing a research cluster based on scholarship around teaching and learning (SOTL) innovations. The School should develop strategies for enhancing the status in the School of such research.

1. See recommendations 10, 12 and 15.

2. The Research and Teaching and Learning Committees will explore the potential to capitalise on the activities of staff involved in the scholarship of teaching and learning.

2014 and ongoing

Mid 2014

Research Committee and Senior researchers Research and Teaching and Learning Committees, First Year Teaching and Learning Network Coordinator, Senior researchers and staff with expertise

17 Staff without PhDs should be supported to complete their projects and achieve that qualification.

Approved staff will be invited to submit a completion plan with milestones to be met which will then be supported through appropriate mechanisms such as teaching relief.

Undertaken as part of 2014 PPR process

Head of School

18 School processes relating to study leave should be reviewed, so that this leave is used to conduct strategically aligned and productive research activity, to benefit the School.

1. A University review of the SSP policy is currently in train, and School processes will be reviewed following revised policy.

2. Candidates will be required to link proposed outcomes to ERA-‐reportable FOR areas of strength in the School, and/or work of identified approved research clusters.

2014

Mid 2013 onwards

Academic Board

Staff applying, Head of School


82 of 362

11


19 Measures should be put in place to welcome and incorporate HDR students into the School research culture and to improve the intellectual climate in which they work.

1. All existing Higher Degree Research (HDR) students will be made aware of the research clusters and their activities, and be invited to associated events.

2. A formal orientation program for new HDR students will be systematised as well as the development of an annual calendar of HDR activities for all HDR students.

3. The HDR Sub-‐committee will investigate the feasibility of regular HDR fora/seminars in consultation with HDR students.

4. See also action in relation to recommendation 20.

Mid 2013 ongoing

Developed and documented by end 2013

Included in 2, end 2013

HDR Coordinator and all supervisors

HDR Sub-‐committee

HDR Sub-‐committee

20 Staff be encouraged to engage in professional development opportunities that are offered by Research Services.

In addition, the School should put in place arrangements for review of grant applications and other work in progress, for example, a facilitated school workshop to help with review of papers/publications/creative practice in progress.

1. The School will continue to encourage relevant staff to avail themselves of research-‐related professional development opportunities when available and through the Performance, Planning and Review (PPR) process. See also response to recommendation 29.

2. The Research Committee will facilitate workshops as proposed in consultation with Research Services. HDR students will be invited to participate in such workshops.

3. See response to recommendation 10.

2014 PPR sessions

Workshops identified end 2013 for implementation in 2014

2014 ongoing

Head of School

Research Committee, Research Services

Senior researchers


83 of 362

12


21 Future recruitment of academic staff should place emphasis on the ability to lead in online teaching and/or in collaborative research in order to build critical mass in relevant ERA research classifications.

Capacity to contribute to approved research and/or to the School’s profile as a leader in online teaching will be included in either essential or desirable criteria in all academic position descriptions.

June 2013 Head of School

22 Research clusters engage with potential industry and community partners to develop research projects that will address partners’ needs and have impact in wider academic and industry contexts.

1. Identify industry and community partners as part of Research framework– see recommendation 12.

2. Work with specified partners to identify research projects.

3. Access established research incentive funding for external grant applications including ARC Linkage grants.

4. Research Services grant officer will be invited to take part in workshops see action under recommendation 20.

End 2013

2014

March/Funding round 2015

Convenors, Research Committee and School Advisory Committee

Senior researchers

Senior researchers

Community Service

23 The School investigate the opportunities available through Smart Technology and the NBN to reach a wide range of regional communities. There may be opportunities for collaboration around the Smart Farm initiative.

1. The School will (a) continue with the informal project with NBN, NECOM and the SMART House, and (b) explore further options and possibilities with both SMART Farm and SMART House initiatives (SMART = sustainable, manageable and accessible rural technologies).

2. Develop an Outreach Plan consistent with 4.5 of the School’s Strategic Plan, research and community partners.

Ongoing

2014

January 2014

Head of School

Research Committee



84 of 362

13


24 The School should exploit Open Educational Resources to provide opportunities for wide community engagement, for example with language learning.

1. Clarify level of support and/or collaboration available from LIH and UNE Open for Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) offerings and short modules in Languages and other discipline areas. Outcomes to be documented for discussion by School Advisory Committee.

2. Investigate and identify potential offerings.

3. Recommendations of above to inform Outreach Plan.

June 2013

End 2013

2014

Head of School

Teaching and Learning Committee and Convenors School Advisory Committee

School Operations, Management, Administration and Relationships

25 A Deputy Head of School be appointed as a priority.

1. School Advisory Committee to agree on Position Description consistent with University policy.

2. Seek approval for establishment of position including financial viability.

3. Advertise and seek expressions of interest allowing for position to have flexibility of time and duties.

4. Establish selection panel.

5. Appoint and finalise exact range of duties in contract and advise School.

May 2013

June 2013

June/July 2013

July 2013

July 2013

Head of School, School Advisory Committee

PVC/Dean, Head of School, Vice-‐Chancellor’s Committee

Head of School


Selection panel and Head of School


85 of 362

14


26 The operating culture of the School be enhanced through the following:

• Defining leadership roles, such as Discipline Convenors; and

• Undertaking workforce planning, including succession planning.

1. Encourage University wide policy to define terms such as ‘ Discipline’ and ‘Academic organisational unit’ and roles associated with terms.

2. Recognise workload of all leadership roles with appropriate workload allocation through revision of School workload policy.

3. Workforce Plan to be developed and reviewed annually with budget process.

2013

End 2013

September 2013

Head of School, Human Resources

Head of School, School Advisory Committee

Head of School, Convenors, School Manager, School Advisory Committee

27 The School review the various School committees and working groups, with a view to improving their strategic purpose and efficiency.

1. The School Constitution was reviewed in January 2013 and the School’s committees were rationalised from 8 to 6.

2. Review the Constitution and all Committees’ Terms of Reference annually.

3. The School will appoint deputy chairs for its committees in order to ensure better continuity and reporting of committee business.

Achieved

Achieved 2013 (on agenda for first meeting each year)

June 2013

Chairs of Committees, Secretaries

Chairs of Committees, Secretaries


86 of 362

15


28 The existing casual appointment of a staff member to provide technical support for online teaching materials be extended to full time. There is also a pressing need for ongoing educational development support.

1. Increase casual technical support as a priority.

2. Define role for technical support position within School via a position description and seek funding for fulltime position in 2014 budget.

3. Clarify the extent of both technical support and education development support that is to be provided by LIH and the Faculty. Outcomes to be documented for discussion by School Advisory Committee.

4. Advise the School what ongoing educational development support is available and how it can be accessed.

2013 Technical casual support capacity within the School has been increased from 0.3 to 0.75.

October 2013

October 2013

November 2013

Head of School and School Manager

School Manager

School Manager, School Moodle and Web support, Pro Vice-‐Chancellor Educational Innovation and International

School Manager


87 of 362

16


29 An emphasis be placed on continuing professional development for both academic and general staff.

1. Professional development opportunities for academic and general staff should be addressed in annual PPR sessions consistent with the School’s Workforce Plan.

2. Workforce Plan to identify professional capabilities and skills required by the School and that need developing – See recommendation 26.

3. Individuals accepting leadership roles will be provided with support, including undertaking reputable leadership programs if appropriate.

PPR 2014

End 2013

Ongoing


Head of School, Convenors, School Manager

Head of School

30 Languages become one academic organisational unit with one convenor.

1. Single Academic Organisational Unit (AOU) to be introduced in 2014 with one convenor and discipline coordinators.

2. Meet with relevant staff to clarify roles related to the new AOU.

January 2014

May 2013

School Manager, Faculty Resources Manager, Finance

Head of School, School Manager, Languages staff, Human Resources Director or nominee


88 of 362

17


31 The Wright Centre be refurbished as a priority for the purpose of providing appropriate facilities to support the learning and teaching in the Disciplines of Music, Theatre and digital media.

1. The School recognises that this recommendation in part falls outside the parameters of the School Review. The Wright Centre is in fact not School or Faculty space and is adjacent to the new College Renewal project. Nevertheless, the School will request urgent meetings with University management to implement this recommendation, recognising the specific needs of the disciplines concerned, and if necessary establish equivalent outcomes.

2. If the University does not provide a Plan for appropriate facilities to Music by July 2013, the Discipline will investigate shifting the entire BMus curriculum to an external, on-‐line format only, taking advantage of the significant strength in distance education at UNE, as well as shifting resources to the development of on-‐line and e-‐learning materials, consistent with the recommendations of the BMus Review. Those first year units that are required to be offered on campus to meet other program requirements (for example, the Music major in the BA) should be offered on the main campus using innovative formats, such as seminars and workshops, with all students receiving their primary unit materials on-‐line.

May 2013

July 2013 for implementation in 2015

Head of School, PVC/Dean, Chief Operating Officer, Director Facilities Management Services

Chief Operating Officer, Director Facilities Management Services, Convenor of Music


89 of 362

18


The School and Its Future

32 The School of Arts must maintain its position at the forefront of online educational provision by embracing innovative technology.

See recommendations 1, 3, 28 and 29. Ongoing – Next School Review

Head of School

33 The School must continue to encourage staff performance in research and to ensure that research outputs can be captured by ERA and HERDC processes.

See recommendations 10, 18 and 21.

The School will establish a filtering process for capturing and reporting research outputs.

July – December 2013

Research Committee

34 Professorial staff must engage with mentoring, research development and support the career progression of junior staff.

1. Seek through the Workforce Plan to increase the number of high performing Professors across the School.

2. Canvas mentoring possibilities as they arise in PPR discussions with existing Professors.

3. See recommendations 10, 20 and 29. The School will explore issues related to mentoring and leadership in Workforce Plan.

2015

PPR 2014

End 2013

Head of School

Head of School



90 of 362

University of New England

Review of the School of Rural Medicine

5-8 November 2012

1


91 of 362

Contents Terms of Reference ............................................................................................. 3 Membership of the Review Panel ........................................................................ 4 Industry Representatives ..................................................................................... 4 Procedure: .......................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary: ............................................................................................ 6 Commendations and Recommendations .............................................................. 7

1. Strategic Directions ..................................................................................... 7 Preamble ............................................................................................................. 7 Commendations .................................................................................................. 7 Concerns ............................................................................................................. 8 Recommendations ............................................................................................... 9

2. Teaching and Learning............................................................................... 9 Preamble ............................................................................................................. 9 Commendations: ................................................................................................. 9 Concerns: .......................................................................................................... 10 Recommendations ............................................................................................. 11

3. Research ..................................................................................................... 12 Preamble: .......................................................................................................... 12 Concerns: .......................................................................................................... 12 Recommendations: ............................................................................................ 13

4. Community Service ................................................................................... 13 Preamble ........................................................................................................... 13 Commendations: ............................................................................................... 14 Concerns: .......................................................................................................... 14 Recommendations: ............................................................................................ 16

5. School Operations, Management, Administration and Relationships . 16 Preamble ........................................................................................................... 16 Commendations ................................................................................................ 16 Concerns ........................................................................................................... 17

Recommendations: .............................................................................................. 19 Appendix 1 - People interviewed by the Review Panel .................................... 20 Appendix 2 Written Submissions................................................................... 22

The SRM Self Review Document..................................................................... 22 The School of Health and ................................................................................. 22 The Dean of Medicine JMP and JMP Stakeholders ......................................... 22

2


92 of 362

Terms of Reference School reviews are regulated by the University’s Academic Quality Management Policy (SED08/115). School reviews form part of the University’s continuing cycle of planning, development and improvement. The overall aim of school reviews is to achieve improvement in the performance of a school through a process of self-assessment, benchmarking, critical reflection, forward planning and external peer review. Schools are reviewed to ensure their regular renewal, to improve the quality of their teaching and research activities, the allocation of resources, the management of their strategic priorities and their future development. School reviews also provide information to assist the University in evaluating its performance against strategic priorities and targets, in planning future directions and in demonstrating the quality of its activities. The principles which underpin the school review process are:

• School reviews have an external focus, with substantial membership from outside the University.

• The review is to encompass all of the School’s major activity areas – teaching, research, community service, links with particular professions or disciplines.

• In reviewing the School’s teaching and learning progress, a review of the courses which are taught in the School, or which form a major component of the School’s teaching, should form an explicit part of the School review process and terms of reference.

• In reviewing courses which have an external professional accreditation requirement, due regard should be given to the findings and requirements of professional accreditation bodies.

• Centralised oversight of the schedule, execution, and implementation of review processes and outcomes is provided by the University’s senior executive and Academic Board structures, in order to strengthen the conduct of reviews and the implementation of recommendations / outcomes.

• School Reviews occur on a 5-yearly cycle.

3


93 of 362

Membership of the Review Panel

Professor Peter Jones Head of School of Medicine Deputy Dean, Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine Bond University, QLD Professor Phillip Jones Associate Dean (Education, Medical Education and Student Office) Faculty of Medicine University of New South Wales, NSW Professor Ian Symonds Dean of JMP and Head of School School of Medicine and Public Health University of Newcastle, NSW

Industry Representatives

Dr Paul Kennedy Medical Director New England Division of General Practice Armidale, NSW Dr Rosa Canlese Director of Training GP Synergy Sydney, NSW

UNE Representatives

Associate Professor Aaron Murphy Head of School School of Science and Technology UNE, Armidale, NSW

Administrative Support

Judy McDonald Secretary to the Panel Faculty of The Professions (FoTP) UNE, Armidale, NSW

4


94 of 362

Procedure: The Review of the School of Rural Medicine (SRM) was instigated by the Vice Chancellor’s Committee (VCC) in April 2012. Initial meetings were held with the Chair of Academic Board, the Head of School and the Pro Vice Chancellor and Dean to discuss the potential membership, terms of reference, timing of the review and the assistance to be provided to the SRM in its preparation for the review. The School completed a self assessment following a meeting of the School convened to discuss the process and seek staff contributions. All School staff, general and academic, were invited to attend and the meeting was chaired by the Head of School. Individual disciplines also met to conduct their own SWOT analyses, prior to the School meeting, to ensure the self review document reflected a breadth of perspectives. Copies of the self review and associated information were prepared by the School for the Panel. Within the School, staff and students were invited to make submissions to the Review Panel. The Teaching and Learning Centre invited submissions from interested parties in other schools and administrative directorates. A self review report was provided to the Panel by 29 October, 2012. The Panel met and conducted interviews during the period 5 to 8 November 2012 with senior officers of the University; staff from the School, other University staff and industry (see Appendix 1). It considered the written submission (see Appendix 2), visited the School facilities and met informally with staff members over lunch. Following an open invitation from the School, the Review Panel met with a self selected group of undergraduate and postgraduate students. The members of the Review Panel discussed their provisional findings on November 8 with the Pro Vice Chancellor and Dean, Faculty of The Professions, and the Head of School. This report was provided to the Chair of the Academic Board by 21 December 2012.

5


95 of 362

Executive Summary: The SRM has achieved a great deal in a very small period of time. The establishment of the School has added to the reputation and standing of the University of New England (UNE) and is now a vital part of the broader Armidale community. The SRM is going to be an on-going part of the key educational infrastructure that will deliver significant numbers of much needed doctors, who are more likely to choose to practice in relatively underserved rural communities in the future because of their foundation experiences of medical education in Armidale. The SRM, based in a small rural community, has demonstrated the capacity to provide an excellent, high quality medical education that produces the same outcomes as the long established and well respected University of Newcastle’s Bachelor of Medicine program. Symbolically, the SRM moves from its establishment phase, with the graduation of its first cohort of students, to the next phase of its growth. The outcomes from the initial phase have only been achieved through crucial partnerships. The School faces challenges to ensure growth and development into the future. The Panel’s opinion was that the School’s future should be supported by a clear strategic plan. This plan will establish how the School will meet the ongoing challenge of retaining academic and professional staff, building research capacity and reinvesting in the key partnerships that have helped the School become a school of rural medicine rather than a rural school of medicine. The University has much to be proud of in the way that a small staff has met and conquered many challenges in delivering the Bachelor of Medicine program. The Panel is keen to ensure that the primary message is one of congratulations and there are many commendations in this report. There are, however, many opportunities for the School to build on its foundations and grow over the next five years. It is in this context that the review should be read. It is five years since I worked in rural health education in Tamworth and Armidale and I was most impressed with how UNE had taken advantage of the opportunity that the SRM has provided. Professor Peter Jones Head of the School of Medicine, Deputy Dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine Bond University Formerly Foundation Professor of Rural Health University of Newcastle 2002-2007 Chair of the SRM Review Panel

6


96 of 362

Commendations and Recommendations

1. Strategic Directions

Preamble

The SRM is a very small and new medical school that is unique in Australia, if not the world. The School offers it medical degree in partnership with the University of Newcastle (UoN). Students from both universities study a joint curriculum and share the clinical placement sites across the central coast of New South Wales and Hunter New England regions in a successful partnership that has produced the Joint Medical Program (JMP). The School is about to produce its first graduates and this is a stunning achievement in overcoming many obstacles and challenges in a very short period of time. First and foremost the Panel seeks to congratulate UNE, the SRM and each of the partners of the JMP. who will share equally in appropriate commendations at the first graduation of students in early 2013. All new medical schools face challenges across Australia. The simultaneous launching of multiple medical schools across Australia over the last decade has demonstrated how important ongoing partnerships are to sustaining medical education. The SRM has achieved its first cohort of students with a small, but resourceful and enthusiastic staff. The future effectiveness of the School will rely on the successful management of its key relationships within, and external, to the University.

Commendations

1. The clear support from the Vice Chancellor, Pro Vice Chancellor and Dean, FoTP and the University for the SRM during its formative years to ensure that it would be a success. The SRM represented the most significant expansion in on campus teaching at UNE in recent years and the Panel sensed a genuine desire from interviewees for the School to be a success.

2. The School has been very successful at engaging with the local medical community in developing innovative solutions that have seen the School successfully deliver the first three years of the curriculum locally.

3. The School has also gained significant support from the local community. On the trip back to the airport a local taxi driver remarked: “It is just wonderful what the medical school has done for Armidale.”

4. The Head of School has been proactive in seeking to implement a range of innovations and partnerships to demonstrate how the SRM can “value add” to the student experience in Armidale.

5. The students and their society appear to be strongly involved in the JMP and enjoy campus life. The students appear well supported and not socially isolated. They

7


97 of 362

are individually recognisable to the staff of the School and they know all of the students in their own and other years.

6. The reports that the Panel received indicate that there is no discernible difference in the competence, ability or academic performance between the two cohorts of students and this result is a credit to the enthusiastic and hardworking staff of the SRM

Concerns

The small number of staff in the school presents a risk of staff burnout. If senior positions are vacated, staff would be required to work in roles they were not recruited to, for extended periods. This has been a challenge for the Tablelands Clinical School (TCS) where the resignation of the Clinical Dean has meant the Deputy Head of School has had to act in this role in 2012 and for at least in the immediate future. The language used in the self review report was in places equivocal, particularly in the areas of perceived threats, about the nature of the relationship of the SRM with the UoN, the Rural Clinical School (RCS) and University Department of Rural Health (UDRH) in Tamworth. A perception given by the report was that the most important external relationship, moving forward, was with University of California Irvine. There are a large number of small projects occurring in both teaching and research within the SRM. Many staff felt that the purpose and nature of these different projects and how they related to the School’s overall mission was not clear. Although the School should rightly be applauded for its energy and innovation, if too many projects are attempted at once by the very small number of staff, there is a significant risk of ‘burnout’. This also takes the staff away from the core business of the School. There were other key relationships that did not appear to be as clear and effective as they might be. Internally within the Faculty, there does not appear to be much common activity between the SRM and the School of Health aside from the research activity of the Deputy Head of the SRM (Research). Also, despite being a key stakeholder and responsible for many of the units delivered in the foundation years of the BMed program, there did not appear to be a close working relationship between the SRM and School of Science and Technology. The relationship between the SRM and the Armidale Rural Referral Hospital (ARRH) provides a challenge for the University to ensure that the joint clinical academic appointments are able to provide the University with the agreed fraction of their time. It appeared in some cases that the clinical service requirements for these positions were more than a full time load and did not allow the staff in these roles to contribute academically in the manner those staff would have rightly expected when they accepted the position. While these issues concerning jointly funded positions with the local health

8


98 of 362

service were not unique to Armidale and the SRM they present a key area of risk to the functioning of the TCS and sustainability of quality clinical rotations.

Recommendations

The School should consider a formal strategic planning exercise in order to achieve the following outcomes:

1. A clearly articulated vision and mission to carry the School forward for the next five years. The primary purpose will be to ensure that all members of the School including academic and general staff and key stakeholders have a clear idea of what are the key priorities and agreed projects for the school. This should also include consideration of where the international relationship with UCI fits with the rest of the School’s priorities.

2. Involvement of the key partners so the School can better define its own expectations from these relationships. This should involve the staff from within the University including senior management, the School of Health and the School of Science and Technology. In addition this would include Hunter New England Health staff from ARRH and key representatives from the UoN based in both Newcastle at the UDRH/RCS in Tamworth.

2. Teaching and Learning

Preamble

The School now has five cohorts of medical students with 320 enrolled in the BMed. The School is fully responsible for the implementation of the first three years of the course, with the TCS providing 1 year of clinical training for 16 students across Year 4 and Year 5 of the JMP cohort. Of the 16 students currently based at the TCS 11 are from UNE and 5 are from UoN. There are two post-graduate programs in anatomy with an approximate student load of 14 and 40 EFTSL in 2011 and 2012 respectively.

Commendations:

1. The willingness to innovate and value add to the teaching of the BMed: a. Ultra-sound teaching to enhance understanding of cross-sectional

anatomy b. IT support and testing if a tablet computer might aid and enhance the PBL

process c. Developing a platform for eAssessment in the Objective Structured

Clinical Examination (OSCE) and attempting to develop an in-lecture evaluation and formative assessment process

d. A variety of workshops that senior students participated in such as ‘bootcamp’.

9


99 of 362

2. The anatomy discipline appears strong and there is an excellent anatomy facility and body donor program in operation. The anatomy elective provides students with the opportunity to gain a strong grounding in anatomy. The suite of short post graduate courses has generated another valuable revenue stream for the school in a short period of time.

3. The SRM prepares the students for their final two years of clinical placements as

well as the long established UoN School of Medicine and Public Health. This has been achieved by effective partnerships with the local medical community and a willingness to make creative use of GP facilities for students to learn their basic clinical skills in a community GP setting.

4. Associate Professor Michelle Guppy has lead curriculum reform for Year 3 of the

BMed and has been most successful in finding sufficient high quality substantive half-semester long general practice placements for 60 students.

5. UNE’s access to the NBN has provided it with an opportunity to test the potential

of this resource for educational innovation and opened up the opportunity for ongoing collaborations with the University of California Irvine.

6. The decision to house medical students across the university colleges enabled

links not only with medical student colleagues but the broader UNE community. 7. The college campus system allows for enthusiastic teaching staff to offer out of

hours and non-timetabled tutorials. The campus is small enough that students can attend tutorials at other colleges. It was impressive to see how engaged these teachers were with this voluntary part of their workload that would not be achievable in other universities in Australia.

8. The UNE Medical Students Association (UNEMSA) appears enthusiastic and a

resource for the School. The SRM has been successful in using the senior students to teach and mentor the junior students in an effective way at several points during the program.

9. The building of the TCS which will house a university-run outpatient’s service will

help improve the clinical training capacity.

Concerns:

There is often very low attendance at lectures. Some UNE lecturers appear to simply read from the power point slides provided by the UoN. Other basic science disciplines do not appear to be as well resourced as anatomy.

Pathology teaching is a challenge.

10


100 of 362

There is a concern that the Anatomy Year 1 elective (ANAT100) is where students are taught their anatomy at the expense of the anatomy teaching that is part of the core JMP program.

The delivery of the final two years of the clinical program in the same format as the larger clinical schools in Newcastle, Gosford and Tamworth is challenge for a hospital of the size and staffing of ARRH. The ever present challenge is that the turnover of a small number of clinicians (sometimes just one) can lead to some rotations being unable to be delivered in their current format. The challenge of maintaining a small and often isolated and overworked specialist workforce in Armidale has been an ongoing challenge for many years.

In the School’s self assessment and during the meeting with the Head of School much was made of the need to establish a “tertiary” type of facility and build a new $300 million facility in Armidale. The Panel thought that this project would require significantly more resources than were currently available in the School.

Recommendations

1. The SRM should take ownership and effectively lead the development of the new JMP curriculum in areas where the School has displayed strength. This might include:

a. Close collaboration between UoN and SRM anatomy staff to determine which components of the anatomy elective and other teacher opportunities should be integrated with the early PBL curriculum.

b. Exploring with UoN some of the innovations in the delivery of the early clinical skills program and seeing if they might be deliverable in the community in other settings of the JMP.

c. Exploring further with UoN opportunities to share administrative and/or academic functions across the JMP. There may be an opportunity at both ends of the partnership to further reduce duplication of resources which might be able to be invested in other sectors of the program.

2. The SRM should consider the implementation of a more creative clinical program.

This could involve the development of a parallel and integrated final year of the JMP program embedded in the community, both in Armidale and the surrounding townships, and linked to the hospital. There is an opportunity for the TCS to be the “creative” arm, with respect to the implementation of an innovative undergraduate clinical curriculum.

11


101 of 362

3. In the longer term, when resources allow, the School should consider the development of more postgraduate courses to increase the income stream and reduce reliance on the anatomy discipline.

3. Research

Preamble:

The SRM was established in an unbelievably short period of time with a very small budget. The small number of research active and PhD qualified staff have managed to continue to publish a number of peer reviewed papers in spite of the pressing demands that establishing a new medical school brings. The Deputy Head of School (Research) has been at UNE for a long time, and had established a successful research profile with the School of Health prior to the establishment of the SRM. The recently recruited Deputy Head of School (Academic) also has a successful history as a medical education researcher and publisher. Despite the challenges, the school has already graduated several successful PhD students and with the award of the CRN in mental health there has been a substantial expansion of post-doctoral and doctoral students providing a great increase in research activity within the School.

Concerns:

All medical schools are required to have adequate research activity as part of AMC accreditation requirements. Amongst the core staff, there are only three academic staff with PhD qualifications and another three post-doctoral staff linked to the CRN. In isolation, the SRM is at risk of having inadequate research capacity. Currently the research quantum the school expects to earn over the next three years to 2015 is approximately 0.5% of income. The staff are enthusiastic but for some, expanding their academic portfolio to include research appears to be almost a bridge too far at present. The School has the opportunity to grow its research enterprise as a mechanism to try and grow the resources available to the school. There are a number of projects that are currently occurring within the School but there does not appear to be a clear research capacity building strategy apart from that provided by the CRN. The JMP is strategically moving to an AQF Level 9 MD program commencing in 2015. This requires students to have opportunities to participate in a substantial research-based project, capstone experience and/or piece of scholarship. It is important the UNE based students are able to have access to sufficient research projects.

12


102 of 362

Since the inception of the SRM the research and teaching node that was linked to the UDRH/RCS in Armidale has disappeared. The Chair of the Panel established this link with Newcastle and UDRH in 2003 and it is of concern that this entity now appears to have minimal interaction with the SRM. Aside from collaborating on the delivery of the JMP, the two major university partners have not maximised the potential benefit of having full collaborations between the research centres that are part of the Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI), the UDRH/RCS and the Mothers and Babies research that is occurring in Tamworth.

Recommendations:

1. The SRM needs to develop a focused research plan as a key component of the overall strategic plan for the School. The aim is to work out how the SRM plans to evaluate and disseminate its educational innovations and decide where it should make investments that have the potential to be externally funded activities moving forward.

2. The School needs to be better engaged with more established research groups

that currently exist in the School of Science and Technology and the School of Health to see if there is an opportunity for academic staff from outside the School to mentor and develop those academic staff in the SRM who are not yet research trained and research capable.

3. The SRM needs to Investigate the possibility of increased engagement with and potential research collaboration with the RCS/UDRH

4. The SRM should investigate opportunities for medical education research to be

conducted, with the cohort of Newcastle based students providing a unique control group for any such studies. A key to making sure this educational activity is able to achieve research scholarship with publications and HDR opportunities is planning and coordinated implementation and evaluation.

5. An outcome of the research plan should be that at least one or two areas of

collaboration are identified as a mechanism for further developing the academic relationship between UNE and UoN.

4. Community Service

Preamble

The SRM has been very important to UNE and the Armidale community. It has brought additional funding and academic positions to UNE and an additional 200 students to live on campus who contribute significantly to the local community.

13


103 of 362

The School should be congratulated on securing funding to build the TCS facility. In regional communities significant building projects, such as developing the teaching facilities on the UNE campus and the building that is to occur on the hospital campus, bring much needed employment and sustainability to the broader Armidale community. The School could not survive without incredibly strong engagement with the local medical community. The next challenge for the School will be to maximise the opportunity of the new TCS. The broader issue for the SRM will be to better manage the partnerships that have helped establish it and will continue to shape its effectiveness into the future.

Commendations:

1. The staff of UNE and UoN are to be commended for working together to establish the SRM in a collaborative fashion.

2. The local medical community of Armidale is to be commended for its level of

commitment and support which has enabled a relatively small country town to deliver effective medical education to 200 medical students in a town with a population of just over 20,000. If the Newcastle medical community was to have the same proportion of students in its first three years of the program it would be required to teach 5000 medical students or a class size of 1600+. This is a stunning achievement.

3. The level of support from the senior management at UNE for the SRM is

commendable as is the level of engagement from local politicians, which has ensured that having initially started the SRM with insufficient resources, recent allocations of funding to be invested in both the Armidale and Tamworth campuses will help secure the future of the SRM.

Concerns:

Partnership between UNE and UoN Both UNE and UoN need to build on this key relationship in a two-way fashion. There is concern from the Panel that one interpretation of the self assessment review is that UNE might need to reconsider its relationship with Newcastle. This would be to the detriment of the SRM if that were to occur.

The other side of this relationship is how UoN staff consider the partnership. It does appear that there are some champions for the JMP concept amongst the UoN staff but after five years, aside from sharing of the BMed program, there has not been a great deal of evidence that demonstrates the partnership has been of real benefit to both parties. The divide between Tamworth and Armidale appears to have grown since the inception of the SRM. The self review document indicated that there was not yet a real sense of trust between the partners involved in the JMP to allow the outputs from the relationship to increase.

14


104 of 362

The other area of note was the apparent disconnect between the SRM and the clinical rotation program as it occurs in the other clinical schools of the JMP. The relationship appears to consist of an allocation of $600,000 to the TCS to support 16 JMP students that require a full year rural clinical placement to assist the RCS with meeting its target of full year clinical placements. The second component of the relationship was the SRM “subsidising” the UoN School of Medicine and Public Health to the tune of $1.4 million (the CSP funding for one cohort of JMP students) for their clinical training. At face value, the SRM appears to receive very good value as nearly 90% of the 4th and 5th year clinical placements occur in UoN managed clinical schools.

It may be that the current relationship between the two schools is balanced. One year of CSP funding plus a modest allocation of the RCS funds may be appropriate if the main target is for the SRM to deliver 16 full year clinical places for the JMP.

This is a complex issue which needs transparency to be resolved. The Chair of the Panel noted that there had been a name change from UDRH-Northern NSW to Newcastle University UDRH. The former name was chosen to ensure that the collaborating partners, of whom UNE was one, felt included.

Local Medical Community The risk of burnout in the local medical community needs to be managed so that the School can continue to provide for the medical students of the SRM. This means the School must proactively manage the threat that the GP workforce may not be able to maintain their current very high level of contribution to the SRM. The use of GPs to deliver this teaching is now ‘maxed out’ and there is very little spare capacity. It is important that the GP teacher needs are identified and addressed to ensure ongoing engagement with the School. From an industry perspective there is increasing demand on GPs to deliver teaching to a larger number of groups eg JMO, allied health etc. The School relies heavily on its GP teaching workforce and needs to be aware of these issues to ensure the GP teachers do not become disillusioned.

There has been an acknowledged crisis in being able to deliver the final year clinical program in Armidale in 2012 to a very modest number of students. There have been ongoing problems of recruitment and retention of clinical staff in key specialty disciplines and this has meant that the implementation of the final year of the BMed program has struggled. The clinical staff who were jointly recruited by the SRM and the Health Service have had a full (at times more than full) clinical load and the SRM is not receiving a fair portion of the expected time and is in effect subsiding clinical services with funds that should be delivering teaching and research activity for the SRM and the JMP.

The lack of staff in the TCS has placed a significant burden on the Deputy Head of School (Academic). The reality of managing the clinical rotations in the context of a problematic relationship between the Health Service and School has meant that the Deputy Head of School has been unable to take a lead role in research and planned innovation.

15


105 of 362

Recommendations:

1. The SRM needs to build and further deepen its relationship with UoN. This needs to be a two way strengthening of the relationship as the opportunities and benefits are mutual. It is still very early days for the JMP and the next 5 years provides an opportunity to see if there are more targeted opportunities to make this relationship work and have achievements in terms of collaboration that go beyond simply delivering the medical program.

2. The SRM needs to continue to work as closely as possible with Hunter New

England Health to improve the relationship with the ARRH and its management. 3. The SRM needs to affirm its relationship with the GP community and put into

place a forum for formally acknowledge its importance to the success of the JMP. 4. A key relationship that needs to be better defined and utilised is the relationship

between Tamworth/Taree UDRH & RCS and the SRM.

5. School Operations, Management, Administration and Relationships

Preamble

The School has a fairly fixed budget at present. In 2013:

CSP Funds = 84% Student Fees = 10.6% RCS Funds = 5 % Research = 0.4%

Building other lines of revenue is important, but making sure the investments in staff and people are operationally effective is even more critical where a small and restricted budget has to deliver the highly complex program of the BMed as its main raison d’être. The core staff of the School are only able to deliver what they do because of crucial partnerships with the School of Science and Technology, the clinical community, the ARRH and the UoN.

Commendations

1. The Senior Executive of the University for allowing the School to be established without requiring the standard contribution to the general university overheads.

2. Having staff with well defined roles that are able to deliver the necessary teaching

sessions that ensure the BMed is delivered.

16


106 of 362

3. The commitment of the PBL tutors and senior academic staff in the School of Science & Technology.

4. Using the opportunity that the TCS provides to recruit doctors to work in a clinical

practice who will have teaching and participation in the SRM as a core responsibility of their job.

5. There are very able administrative staff who appear to work well beyond

minimum expectations.

Concerns

Staff and Organisational Concerns: Interviews with staff suggested that both academic and general staff have high workloads that make it difficult for them to move away from the day to day needs of program delivery to think more strategically about curriculum development and research. At the same time, some staff at lower levels felt that their skills were somewhat underutilised. Whilst acknowledging they were ‘busy’, they felt much of what they did was not challenging them professionally and they would need to look outside the school for career progression. Several articulated that they would very much like to be more involved in a co-ordinated way with some of the projects and did not seem to understand how these tasks were allocated and the overall direction of these innovations. There is also the impression that ,even within the small number of staff of the SRM, there are “silos” of activity. The reporting lines of the administrative staff were confusing and did not facilitate effective communication. The panel thought that the organisational structure and mechanisms for decision making in the SRM should be reviewed. There was a concern that there was not representation from the School of Science and Technology on the School’s Executive Committee. There was also concern that it appeared that all staff were reporting to the Head of School and several staff had joint reporting lines which had led to some staff reporting challenges around workload allocation and mechanisms for decision making. The Panel formed the view that aiming for some stability of the general staff was essential. This needs careful career planning for each staff member so that they can see a satisfying future in the School for periods such as three to four years. There is a concern that the School is facing another round of staff departures. Implementation of Innovation; There was a concern expressed that there have been multiple innovative projects and some of these have been implemented without adequate time to plan and assign workloads and assess the impact of these developments.

17


107 of 362

Some strategic decisions, for instance the decision to provide iPADs to all students, have significant resource implications. This includes the necessary IT support staff that may be required when there are 300 plus student and staff tablet computers to manage. The forward estimate of the investment required to maintain this initiative is not accurately reflected or shown in the forward budgets provided to the Panel. There was concern expressed in several of the interviews that the decision to go ahead with a variety of innovations and plans had not been supported by a clearly articulated business case and had been made without consideration by staff in the school. Each new program or significant innovation requires planning and a sound business case. This is essential as any investment will impact on the remaining and limited core resources available to the SRM to achieve its primary raison d’être of successfully implementing the BMed program. The SRM has shown that it can deliver an equivalent learning experience with equivalent outcomes and this provides the JMP with a unique controlled trial situation to see if innovations are educationally successful and make a difference. Management of Strategic Relationships important to the School within UNE The language used by the Head of School with respect to the budget allocations to partners of the SRM was open to misinterpretation and appeared to denigrate the role of these partners. It would appear that the School of Science & Technology contributes strongly to the JMP through the provision of PBL tutors and the involvement of staff in course coordination roles. There was concern expressed to the Panel that this relationship needed to be developed and the two relatively recently appointed HoSs needed to work together. The School of Health is co-located in the same building as the SRM but does not seem to share much in common. While the panel recognised that the two programs of Medicine and Nursing were very different in delivery, there seemed to exist an opportunity to have the two schools work more closely together. Risk Assessment of becoming a Health Service Provider: It was noted that the HOS plans to develop a new model of funding for clinicians employed by the University at the TCS. It would use an employment model common in USA medical schools where the University is the owner and operator of a hospital. The planned UNE PPMco would be unique in Australia. The specific details of the entity were not available to the Panel to judge the business case for this adventure. Although the self review document asserts that this is an essential direction for the School, medical schools in Australia are not typically health service providers. The challenges regarding sustaining recruitment through this vehicle are significant. It is important that there are realistic expectations about what type of return on investment is achievable via this entity and how much subsidy and for how long this subsidy will be

18


108 of 362

needed to make this profitable for the School and provide the additional staff with the available clinical time to teach and contribute to the SRM. This plan, with its potential to utilise existing limited resources of the school for clinical service delivery, needs to be critically evaluated to consider the risks and benefits of this type of proposal in an environment where workforce challenges have proved very difficult to solve.

Recommendations: 1. The Faculty of the Professions should consider if there could be more overt

sharing of administrative responsibilities between the School of Health and the SRM.

2. The SRM should ensure that there are opportunities for general staff to have

career development within the context of their current position. 3. The SRM should review the reporting lines of the professional and academic staff.

The HOS is potentially line managing many staff within the school giving the appearance that these staff have multiple reporting lines.

4. The HoS needs to ensure that all important School matters are discussed and

considered at the School Executive. The School should consider having the Head of the School of Science and Technology on the executive.

5. Innovations need to be seen as part of the School’s research and scholarship

strategy and require careful planning to maximise their effectiveness. They also need to be costed in both financial and human resource terms so that they are sustainable.

6. The School needs to affirm and define the relationship with its partners both

within UNE (School of Health and the School of Science & Technology) and external to UNE including the JMP partners and the local partnerships with the medical community and health service.

7. The SRM needs to urgently recruit academic staff to the TCS. 8. The business plan to move into health service provision needs to be carefully

considered. It has the potential to provide additional learning opportunities for the students on placement, but there is considerable risk associated with the plan.

19


109 of 362

Appendix 1 - People interviewed by the Review Panel

Executive Officers Vice Chancellor – Professor Jim Barber PVC (Students and Student Inclusion) – Ms Eve Woodbury PVC and Dean of the Faculty of The Professions – Professor Victor Minichiello DVC Research – Professor Annabel Duncan Chair of the Academic Board – Professor Eilis Magner Faculty of The Professions A/Professor Stephen Winn Academic Director Steve Hanlan Faculty Business Manager SRM Academic Staff Professor Peter McKeown Head of School A/Professor Rafat Hussein Deputy Head of School (Research) Professor Nicky Hudson Deputy Head of School (Academic) A/Professor Michelle Guppy A/Professor (General Practice) Year 3 Coordinator A/Professor Amanda Nagle Year 1 Clinical Academic Coordinator A/Professor Nihad Abu-Sab A/Professor O&G Selena Chan PBL tutor General Staff Patricia Battin Office Manager Maree Walsh Academic Manager Lisa Rose Academic Support Officer Kim Battin Casual Admin Assistant Kim Prater Admin Assistant Kristy Chmieluk Executive Assistant Adam Landow IT Support Kelsey Morgan Year 3 Manager Yumiko Hickson Year 2 Manager Clair Baker Year 1 Manager Vicki Weaver Administrative Officer, Anatomy School of Science and Technology A/Professor Jim McFarlane Coordinator of Biomedical Science A/Professor Graham Lloyd-Jones Convenor of Human Biology and Physiology School of Health Ms Anthea Fagan Lecturer

20


110 of 362

Postgraduate students Internal Gina Dillon PhD student-CRN Mental Health Undergraduate students Maddie Gramlick Year 2 Sally Ryan Year 2 Chi Kit So Year 5

21


111 of 362

Appendix 2 Written Submissions The following written submissions were reviewed by the panel:

The SRM Self Review Document

The School of Health and

The Dean of Medicine JMP and JMP Stakeholders

22


112 of 362

REVIEW OF THE SCHOOL OF RURAL MEDICINE – 6 – 8 November 2012

REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS, SCHOOL RESPONSE AND ACTION PLANS

As endorsed by the School of Rural Medicine (SRM) and the Pro Vice Chancellor of The Professions

Acronyms ARRH Armidale Rural Referral Hospital SoH School of Health HNELHD Hunter New England Local Health

District SRM School of Rural Medicine

JMP Joint Medical Program TCS Tablelands Clinical School MEU Medical Education Unit within the

JMP UCI University of California (Irvine)

PPMCo Physician Practice Management Co UoN University of Newcastle RCS Rural Clinical School UDRH University Department of Rural Health (UoN) S&T School of Science and Technology SMPH School of Medicine and Public Health

RECOMMENDATIONS OF SCHOOL OF RURAL MEDICINE COMMITTEE (AS PER REPORT OF 17 DEC 2012)

RESPONSE OF THE SCHOOL OF RURAL MEDICINE

ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN

(RESPONSIBILITIES AND DATES)

ACTIONS TAKEN

STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS

1. The School should consider a formal strategic planning exercise in order to achieve the following outcomes:

a) A clearly articulated vision and mission to carry the School forward for the next five years. The primary purpose will be to

Agreed: A strategic plan which aligns with the University’s strategic plan will be developed. The School is aware of its need to better define its relationship with its partners and also the

1. A consultant will be employed to facilitate a planning activity which will take place in June 2013. Timeline: 30 March 2013 Responsibility: HoS

2. The consultant will interview key

partners including the UoN, ARRH, HNELHD, SoH and S&T prior to the

The process was delayed due to the need for competitive bidding. Nous group has been chosen. Consultant Harris Van Beek completed a basic round of interviews as of May 7 2013. There are concerns about the cost of the consultant.

1


113 of 362

ensure that all members of the School including academic and general staff and key stakeholders have a clear idea of what are the key priorities and agreed projects for the school. This should also include consideration of where the international relationship with UCI fits with the rest of the School’s priorities.

b) Involvement of the key partners so the School can better define its own expectations from these relationships. This should involve the staff from within the University including senior management, the School of Health (SoH) and the School of Science and Technology (S&T). In addition this would include Hunter New England Local Health District (HNELHD) staff from Armidale Rural Referral Hospital (ARRH) and key representatives from the University of Newcastle (UoN) based in both Newcastle at the University Division of Rural Health (UDRH) /Rural Clinical School (RCS) in Tamworth

expectations from these relationships.

retreat. Timeline: 30 April 2013 Responsibility: HoS

3. Using feedback from the consultant

including input from key partners the Head of School will draft a strategic plan for discussion at the retreat. Timeline: 31 May 2013 Responsibility: HoS

Requests for input from all academic and professional staff went out by email May 8 2013. The strategic plan has been developed and input was sought from the stakeholders and the draft revised accordingly. It will now go to the School Executive for approval and then to the school for final comments and approval.

2


114 of 362

TEACHING AND LEARNING

1. The SRM should take ownership and effectively lead the development of the new JMP curriculum in areas where the School has displayed strength. This might include:

a. Close collaboration between UoN

and SRM anatomy staff to determine which components of the anatomy elective and other teacher opportunities should be integrated with the early PBL curriculum.

b. Exploring with UoN some of the innovations in the delivery of the early clinical skills program and seeing if they might be deliverable in the community in

It is important that the School recruits a full time, on campus DHoS (Academic) so that there is oversight of teaching and learning issues including the new curriculum. 1(a) Agreed: There has already been some recognition of the importance of anatomy by dissection by UoN. Dr Claire Aland has been appointed as a senior lecturer in anatomy, teaching into the JMP. Dr Aland will collaborate with UoN in the teaching of anatomy. UNE has also developed an ‘eOSCE’ where ipads are used by examiners in clinical assessment. This was trialled at UNE in 2012 and will be implemented across Years 1 and 2 of the JMP in 2013. There are also plans for a staged introduction of the eOSCE to other years of the JMP. 1 (b) Agreed: This has already happened. In 2011 the JMP established a working party comprising coordinators of the medical consultation skills

1. The School will advertise for a DHoS (Academic). Timeline: 31 July 2013 Responsibility: HoS

2. Dr Aland will link with her

counterparts at UoN to review anatomy teaching in the JMP. Timeline: 31 March 2013 Responsibility: HoS

3. The decisions of the working party

concerned with the early clinical skills program to be formally advised to the JMP Committee. Timeline: 30 April 2013

Paperwork was submitted to HR on June 5 2013. Dr Aland has contacted UoN and a visit is planned in May to discuss Anatomy teaching. Advice from the Year One Chair was that as this did not change the learning outcomes and therefore did not need to be reported to the JMP Executive.

3


115 of 362

other settings of the JMP.

c. Exploring further with UoN opportunities to share administrative and/or academic functions across the JMP. There may be an opportunity at both ends of the partnership to further reduce duplication of resources which might be able to be invested in other sectors of the program.

across 1st year. This Committee agreed that: • there needed to be a change in

the way that medical consultation skills were developed in a rural setting and

• the SRM could deliver these skills differently to UoN who would continue to rely heavily on the hospital system.

1(c) Agreed: There has been increased collaboration across the JMP during 2012/13 and the School feels that it is important to consider future opportunities. The School would like to investigate how joint JMP positions could have stronger links with the SRM.

Responsibility: Year 1 Clinical Academic Coordinator

4. To continue to investigate

opportunities for increased collaboration and shared resources across the JMP. Timeline: Ongoing Responsibility: DHoS (JMP)

5. An agenda item to be placed on the JMP Executive regarding joint JMP positions and the link with the SRM. Timeline: 30 April 2013 Responsibility: DHoS (JMP)

DHoS (JMP) is working closely with colleagues at UoN and visiting almost weekly to address increased collaboration. His visits and calls have made a significant improvement to the relationship with UoN DHOS Academic has worked with senior leadership UON School of Medicine

2. The SRM should consider the implementation of a more creative clinical program. This could involve the development of a parallel and integrated final year of the JMP program embedded in the community, both in Armidale and the surrounding townships, and

Agreed: There are opportunities to meet some of the learning outcomes and skill sets outside a hospital environment. However it is felt that these are limited.

6. Explore with JMP executive/JMP Curriculum Development/Clinical Dean Group opportunities for curriculum delivery in Years 4 and 5 to suit rural practice. Timeline: 31 Dec 2013 Responsibility: DHoS (JMP)

4


116 of 362

linked to the hospital. There is an opportunity for the TCS to be the “creative” arm, with respect to the implementation of an innovative undergraduate clinical curriculum.

3. In the longer term, when resources allow, the School should consider the development of more postgraduate courses to increase the income stream and reduce reliance on the anatomy discipline.

Agreed The School has embarked on several successful short courses/seminars to assess demand and provide alternative income streams. There have been discussions with University of California Irvine (UCI) about a joint offering of a postgraduate course in ultrasound.

7. The School to explore the possibility of a joint offering with UC Irvine of a postgraduate course in ultrasound. Timeline: 31 Dec 2013 Responsibility: HoS

8. The School to also investigate the feasibility of postgraduate degrees in cardiovascular medicine, and sports medicine. Timeline: 31 March 2014 Responsibility: HoS

Preliminary discussions between UCI and UNE SRM have started. (June 13 2013)

RESEARCH 1. The SRM needs to develop a

focused research plan as a key component of the overall strategic plan for the School. The aim is to work out how the SRM plans to evaluate and disseminate its educational innovations and decide where it should make investments that have the potential to be externally funded activities moving forward.

Agreed: The accreditation standards for medical schools require “that the medical education provider is active in research and scholarship, which informs learning and teaching in the medical program”. The School will develop a research plan and commit resources to developing a research active staff profile. The research plan will identify strategies to increase the number of research active staff in

1. A research plan will be developed in conjunction with the strategic plan. It will refer to four themes, not only educational innovation, which will guide a significant amount of the School’s research activity.

• Health and Wellbeing • Health Workforce and

Management • Medical Education

including innovation. • Disability

Timeline: mid June 2013

A preliminary research plan is being drafted in line with both the School’s strategic plan which is yet to be finalized and UNE’s strategic research plan.

5


117 of 362

the school.

Responsibility: DHoS (Research)

2. The following workforce strategies to increase the research profile of the School will be implemented:

a) The appointment of at least two postdoctoral fellows into the School’s academic profile to increase capacity and make research productivity sustainable. Such appointments will be able to teach and provide research supervision in the new curriculum, provide teaching in short courses and be involved in grant applications.

Timeline: July/August 2013 Responsibility: DHoS (Research)

b) The recruitment of at least one FT staff member at Level D/E with an established internationally recognized research profile and doctoral qualifications

c) Identification and appointment of at least three research active Level D/E adjunct staff. Resources may need to be allocated for mentoring/travel support.

d) Plans for the development of large grant applications and an increase in research

The School has in principle endorsement from the PVC and the DVCR, so these are not ‘if we get approval’ positions. The positions need to be advertised in late August/Sept, selection in November and a start date between January/February 2014. This is imperative from teaching, grants and publications perspective in terms of appointment dates.

6


118 of 362

publications. e) An increase of 25% in HDR

students including the encouragement and support of current staff who wish to complete a doctoral degree.

f) The provision of designated admin support for research and HDR activities, including statutory reports and support to research adjuncts. This will constitute 50% of the designated admin staff workload.

Timeline: 31 Dec 2013 Responsibility: DHoS (Research)

2. The School needs to be better

engaged with more established research groups that currently exist in the School of Science and Technology and the School of Health to see if there is an opportunity for academic staff from outside the School to mentor and develop those academic staff in the SRM who are not yet research trained and research capable.

Agreed: This is already happening through the current CRN collaboration with SoH and S&T. It is important to maximize this opportunity and investigate further potential partnerships. Staff workloads need to be re-assessed to enable dedicated time for research projects.

3. During the PPR process a research plan to be developed by each academic staff member employed at 0.4 and above.

Timeline: 31 Dec 2013 Responsibility: HoS

3. The SRM needs to Investigate the possibility of increased

Agreed: The School has very successfully

4. Additional collaboration with the UDRH/RCS is planned.

7


119 of 362

engagement with and potential research collaboration with the RCS/UDRH

utilized the expertise of Dr Karin Fisher, Research Fellow, UDRH, in research publications and PhD supervision. Prof Nicky Hudson is Director of UDRH and this will further help build this relationship.

. a. One project will use the MSOD database to investigate factors important in the decision to work in a rural and regional area.

. b. Another project will investigate models of interprofessional teaching and learning for medical and allied health students.

Timeline: 31 March 2014 Responsibility: DHoS (Research)

4. The SRM should investigate opportunities for medical education research to be conducted, with the cohort of Newcastle based students providing a unique control group for any such studies. A key to making sure this educational activity is able to achieve research scholarship with publications and HDR opportunities is planning and coordinated implementation and evaluation.

Agreed: Priority to be given to appointment of the Medical Educational Coordinator and Deputy Director of Medical Education Unit (MEU) (based at UNE, vacant since Feb 2012) to facilitate research & scholarship within the Medical Education Research framework of the JMP.

5. Medical Educational Coordinator and Deputy Director of the MEU to be appointed by SRM. Timeline: 31 August 2013 Responsibility: HoS

6. The Deputy Director and relevant UNE staff will develop a plan for medical education research in collaboration with colleagues at UoN. Timeline: 31 Dec 2013 Responsibility: Deputy Director MEU

Position is being advertised. Limited funding – uncertainty beyond 6 months may prevent appointment.

5. An outcome of the research plan should be that at least one or two areas of collaboration are identified as a mechanism for further developing the academic relationship between UNE and UoN.

Agreed. Research activities and HDR supervision is occurring with UoN. Additional activities are planned. Joint research projects and scholarship and research opportunities are underway through the CRN with several

7. To develop strategies within existing research activities to further cement the academic relationship with UoN a) A NHMRC grant application is proposed with Brian Kelly (UoN) in the areas of ageing and mental health. b) Joint publications with UoN

Collaboration with SMPH on the analysis of Hunter Community Cohort (HCS) Study. Two manuscripts are currently under review in international journals. Two additional manuscripts are under development, one based on additional analysis of HCS data; and

8


120 of 362

research centres affiliated with SMPH (UoN). These include Centre for Gender, Health & Aging (Byles & Loxton); Centre for Epidemiology & Biostats (Attia & McEvoy); Centre for Rural & Remote Mental Health – Orange (Reddy) and through potential collaboration on the xTEND study (Kelly)

academic staff to enhance collaborative research profile of both schools in order to apply for joint grants.

Timeline: Ongoing from 2013 to 2014. Responsibility: DHoS (Research)

the other on analysis of the Australian Longitudinal Study of Women’s Health (collaboration with Centre for Gender, Health and Ageing).

COMMUNITY SERVICE

1. The SRM needs to build and further deepen its relationship with UoN. This needs to be a two way strengthening of the relationship as the opportunities and benefits are mutual. It is still very early days for the JMP and the next 5 years provides an opportunity to see if there are more targeted opportunities to make this relationship work and have achievements in terms of collaboration that go beyond simply delivering the medical program.

Agreed: There are many opportunities apart from delivering the JMP where collaboration can be of benefit to both institutions. The consultant will be asked to investigate ways to build a stronger relationship with UoN.

1. The consultant will interview key people at UoN regarding opportunities for collaboration inside and outside the delivery of the JMP. Timeline: 30 April 2013 Responsibility: HoS

2. UoN will be asked to develop a physical presence onsite at Newcastle for UNE staff. Timeline: 30 April 2013 Responsibility: DHoS (JMP)

3. The DHoS (JMP) will discuss with the Dean of the JMP the need for an increased representation by UNE staff on JMP committees. Timeline: 30 April 2013 Responsibility: HoS

The Dean of the JMP had a successful visit to UNE in early June 2013. The DHS (JMP) frequently attends the JMP executive meeting from Newcastle and is building relationships there. DHoS (JMP) has allocated space at UoN. Additional SRM representation for curriculum committees has been achieved following discussion by DHoS (JMP).

2. The SRM needs to continue to Agreed: 4. To continue to meet regularly with DHoS (JMP) meets routinely with

9


121 of 362

work as closely as possible with HNELHD to improve the relationship with the Armidale Hospital and its management.

HNELHD and AARH play a key role in the clinical rotations for SRM medical students. There have been regular meetings in the last 6 months and there has been an improvement in the relationship. Some of the tensions will be eased when the TCS is finished and space is not an issue. The Institute for Health Services Leadership at the UoN has been running established professional development activities for local practitioners.

hospital senior management. Timeline: Ongoing Responsibility: DHoS (JMP)

5. To continue to run the AMCON

conference annually. Timeline: 31 December 2013 Responsibility: HoS

6. To actively engage with Division of

General Practice and Medicare Local regarding professional development opportunities for local GPs. Timeline: Ongoing Responsibility: HoS

7. The School to link with The

Institute for Health Services Leadership at UoN and investigate possible collaboration. Timeline: 30 June 2013 Responsibility: HoS

senior management of ARRH and has been appointed to the hospital’s advisory board. AMCON scheduled for Sept 14. Dr Cottrell is Chair of the committee. Ongoing communication. SRM staff well represented at the Health Alliance Meeting Monday 17th June. Health Management program in the SoH currently under review. HoS and DHos have offered support for the program.

3. The SRM needs to affirm its relationship with the GP community and put into place a forum for formally acknowledge its importance to the success of the JMP.

Agreed:

8. The School will undertake a number of activities to acknowledge and engage the GP Community including: • Sending a regular newsletter to

each GP practice in the New England region.

• Providing a plaque/certificate to participating GP practices which can be displayed.

• Setting up an ‘honour’ board in

Newsletter in final edit.

10


122 of 362

the School acknowledging GP contributions to teaching in the SRM.

• Continuing to build relationships with the New England Division of General Practice and Medicare Local through regular communication.

Timeline: 31 July 2013 Responsibility: HoS

9. The membership of the Advisory

Board will be amended to reflect the importance of the local New England practitioners including GPs.

Timeline: 30 June 2013 Responsibility: HoS

Several meetings with Medicare Local attended by HoS and DHoS (JMP) A preliminary list of potential candidates for the advisory board has been identified and will be presented to the SRM Exec in July.

4. A key relationship that needs to be better defined and utilised is the relationship between Tamworth/Taree UDRH & RCS and the SRM.

Agreed: Turnover of staff at both UDRH and TCS has created some ongoing challenges. With the appointment of Graham Stewart as the Interim Clinical Dean, Edwina Croft as the Year 4/5 Manager and Julie Mills as the Clinical Placement Coordinator there is an increased opportunity to build a relationship with other clinical schools. Strategies to build the relationship with UDRH, TCS Tamworth and Taree will be part of the

10. Develop a joint activity such as a combined simulation with UCI involving students from TCS, UDRH and Tamworth/Taree. Timeline: 31 Dec 2013 Responsibility: DHoS (JMP)

11. Put in place further activities that

engage both clinical schools such as shared OSCE examinations in both locations. Timeline: 31 December 2013 Responsibility: DHoS (JMP)

12. Discuss with UoN the possibility of

A combined rural clinical schools Year 5 ultrasound course planned for July/August. Dr Alan Pederson is the lead. UCI students will participate as peer tutors. A/Prof Nagle is working with Year 1 and Year 2 to undertake a joint JMP eOSCE. A major challenge given the

11


123 of 362

consultant‘s brief. The appointment of the former Head of UDRH to the SRM will help facilitate communication.

an operational structure where UNE manages both the Peel Clinical School and the Tablelands Clinical School. Timeline:31 July 2013 Responsibility: DHoS (JMP)

current political situation and Federal funding.

SCHOOL OPERATIONS, MANAGEMENT, ADMINISTRATION AND RELATIONSHIPS

1. The Faculty of the Professions should consider if there could be more overt sharing of administrative responsibilities between the School of Health and the SRM.

This recommendation appears to be outside the purview of the School. However the SRM supports the concept and there have been several projects where the administrative responsibilities have been shared between the schools.

2. The SRM should ensure that there are opportunities for general staff to have career development within the context of their current position.

Agreed:

1. The School will ensure that the opportunities for career development are aligned with Clause 37.1 of the Enterprise Agreement.

37.10 Career development opportunities that may be appropriate through the Performance Management System may include, on-the-job coaching, internal temporary transfers, attendance at training and professional development courses, networking and mentor relationships, job

Regular meetings of administrative staff and Wednesday morning teas have been successfully instituted and positively received. Two staff members are undertaking higher duties which provides a professional development opportunity.

12


124 of 362

rotation or project work, researching, secondments, higher duties, additional leave, including professional development leave and career break leave, involvement in internal or external committees, and work or study fellowships. 2. The School will provide at least three sessions of professional development during general staff meetings. Timeline: 31 Dec 2013 Responsibility: HoS

Three sessions have been completed but the strategy is ongoing.

3. The SRM should review the reporting lines of the professional and academic staff. The HOS is potentially line managing many staff within the school giving the appearance that these staff have multiple reporting lines.

Agreed: Judy McDonald, Faculty Project Manager, is on secondment to the School to review the staff roles and responsibilities and to establish clarity around communication, decision making processes and delegated responsibilities.

3. Development of a plan for communication and decision making which will include clear values and procedures to be approved by the School executive. Timeline: 31 July 2013 Responsibility: Faculty Project Manager

4. The HoS needs to ensure that all important School matters are discussed and considered at the School Executive. The School should consider having the Head of the School of Science and Technology on the executive.

Agreed: The Head of School felt that most important matters had been discussed at the School executive and documented in the minutes. However the terms of reference and membership of the committee should be reviewed and there needs to be better communication

4. The terms of reference of the School Executive to be reviewed and approved by the committee. Timeline: 31 March 2013 Responsibility: Head of School

5. Implementation of strategies to

better communicate decisions of the committee. Timeline: 31 July 2013

Still being refined under guidance and advice of consultant.

13


125 of 362

of decisions to the rest of the school. While the need to establish a better working relationship with the School of S&T was acknowledged it was felt that it was more appropriate for the School of S&T to be represented on the T&L and Research Committees.

Responsibility: Head of School

5. Innovations need to be seen as part of the School’s research and scholarship strategy and require careful planning to maximise their effectiveness. They also need to be costed in both financial and human resource terms so that they are sustainable.

Agreed: Decisions regarding innovation will be consistent with the strategic plan.

6. Prior to implementation any innovation will be costed both financially and in human resource terms.

7. The School will undertake a

comparative assessment of at least one of the recent initiatives both in relation to financial and human resources. Timeline: 31 Dec 2013 Responsibility: DHoS (Research)

6. The School needs to affirm and define the relationship with its partners both within UNE (School of Health and the School of Science & Technology) and external to UNE including the JMP partners and the local partnerships with the medical community and health service.

Agreed: This recommendation has been covered by actions under community service.

14


126 of 362

7. The SRM needs to urgently recruit

academic staff to the TCS.

Agreed:

8. Appointment of the Clinical Dean is a high priority and is with a recruitment agency to appoint prior to the official opening of the TCS. Timeline: 31 July 2013 Responsibility: HoS

The position was readvertised as Level D/E to broaden the pool of candidates. It is expected that a decision will be made by the end of July.

8. The business plan to move into health service provision needs to be carefully considered. It has the potential to provide additional learning opportunities for the students on placement, but there is considerable risk associated with the plan

Agreed: The business plan for a faculty practice (UNEPPMCo) has been extensively assessed by multiple consultants and senior leadership of the University. It was approved at University Council level in December 2012. A senior leadership team is involved in the ongoing supervision of the plan. A Board has been appointed to supervise and monitor the plan.

UNE PPMCo successfully initiated. There have been two meetings of the Board of Directors as of June 20 2013. A practice manager has been appointed and will commence July 1 2013.

15


127 of 362

Abstract

The teaching and learning of grammatics (‘knowledge about grammar’) with young

school children is the focus of this study.

Historical literature on the teaching of grammar is widely believed to show

that a knowledge of grammar is not effective for improving students’ literacy

outcomes, usually specified in terms of writing. Under-scrutinised in this research

are two issues which bear strongly on questions of effectiveness: the affordances of

the kind of grammatical description taught, and the quality of pedagogy deployed in

the teaching of grammatics. The thesis explores both these issues. Specifically, it

investigates the teaching and learning of aspects of systemic functional grammar

(developed by M.A.K. Halliday) within a pedagogic framework based on socio-

cultural constructivist theory (L.S. Vygotsky).

The data for the project are drawn from two case studies conducted in Year 2

classrooms. ‘Slices’ of the case study data are used to analyse and interpret: ways in

which to begin the study of a functional grammatics with young novices; benefits

from knowledge about verbal Processes for children’s improvement in expressive

oral reading and punctuation of direct speech; the application of grammatical and

genre knowledge in developing a critical reading of a narrative; and early moves in

using the grammatics of Theme in one specific aspect of writing. A significant

contribution is the project’s incorporation of transcribed classroom talk, which is

used to illuminate situated practices in teaching and learning grammatics, including

the ways in which teacher talk and class discussion mediate the learning of

grammatical concepts. Evidence is provided for the accessibility and utility of a

grammatics drawn from systemic functional grammar, with the grammar’s

orientation to meaning in language being central to its potential.

v

#13282 Attachment 5

128 of 362

vi

Attention to pedagogic design is also argued to be integral to the

development of a productive grammatics for schools. The thesis recommends the

principled design of forms of semiotic mediation used to teach grammatical concepts

(including teacher talk), and the thoughtful and meaningful integration of

grammatics with other dimensions of the English/literacy curriculum so that

grammatics is taught ‘in context’ but also with a view to longer term development of

a flexible, systematic understanding.

#13282 Attachment 5

129 of 362

Academic Quality Management Program

UNIT MONITORING ANNUAL REPORT 2012

Policy, Planning and External Relations

July 2013

#13282 Attachment 6

130 of 362

http://www.une.edu.au/

Contacts:

Peter May

Senior Policy Advisor

Jeannet van der Lee Senior Policy Advisor

Policy, Planning and External Relations

University of New England Armidale NSW 2351 Australia

[email protected]

#13282 Attachment 6

131 of 362

2012 Unit Monitoring Annual Report | 1

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report describes the Unit Monitoring management process, provides information about how to read unit monitoring reports and, most importantly, interprets the annual unit monitoring results for 2012 at the University, Faculty and School level. This report represents the completion of the fourth cycle of reporting since a new approach to the academic quality management of units was introduced in 2009.

The Unit Monitoring management process was introduced to the University of New England as part of a package of academic quality management measures in late 2008. School level Unit Monitoring data are now delivered to unit coordinators and Heads of Schools through the University’s data warehouse in a concise set of consolidated reports on a biannual basis. This has facilitated the collation of data and provided the opportunity for academic staff and executive leadership alike to reflect on the same authoritative set of data, in order to come to evidence-based decisions about units that require improvement and those that merit a commendation. The Unit Monitoring process is now an integrated part of the normal business process of the University with a regular cycle of reporting, evaluation and improvement.

The outcomes of the 2012 annual cycle of Unit Monitoring are presented here at UNE, Faculty and School levels. Many units have earned commendations for good performance (assessed on high overall satisfaction and low attrition) and some units have been identified as requiring an action plan (assessed by low overall satisfaction and high attrition). A further category of units are also discussed – those for which one or more of the measures (e.g. overall satisfaction, attrition, or enrolments) were significantly below average values and may warrant further investigation, as deemed necessary by the Faculty and/or School.

In 2012, a total of 195 commendations were awarded across the University to individual modes of units, with internal and external modes of a particular unit being considered as two separate unit modes. This compares with a total of 233 commendations that were awarded in 2011. Only 12 unit modes in 2012 required the preparation of action plans for improvement which matches the number of action plans that were required in 2011.

It is noteworthy that there was a significant decline in the number of commendations awarded in Reporting Period 2, 2012 compared with the same period in 2011. Of similar concern is the increase in the observed unit attrition rate in 2012. Further work is being undertaken to improve our understanding of attrition within and between trimesters.

In summary, total unit EFTSL has increased by 14.2% in 2012 over 2011, the unit pass rate has increased by 0.66%, the mean unit GPA has increased by 1.44% and, at the University level, extremely positive results have continued to be reported across most student unit evaluation items. For instance, the student rating for Overall Satisfaction at the University level has been maintained in 2012 at 3.99 (2011=3.98) on the 5 point Likert scale.

#13282 Attachment 6

132 of 362


#13282 Attachment 6

133 of 362


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Unit Monitoring in Context

Unit Monitoring is a key component of the Academic Quality Management Policy which came into effect in 2007 to “...define and establish the University’s approach to management of the quality of its academic activities, to ensure systematic monitoring and improvement of its teaching and learning policies, procedures and activities. This policy applies to all academic activities of the University of New England and any associated teaching partnerships.” Unit Monitoring therefore sits within a broader context of quality assurance across the institution which extends to the monitoring and review of courses and formal School reviews.

The Academic Quality Management system is based on a culture of continuous improvement and the four-stage Quality Cycle of Plan, Act, Evaluate, Improve.

PLAN: denotes formal planning at all levels including university level strategic planning and planning by organisational units. At the team and individual level it reflects the planning undertaken by project and over time, including yearly or daily planning.

ACT: includes all the intentional activities that are undertaken to meet objectives, implement plans and produce outcomes.

EVALUATE: incorporates two aspects: monitoring and review. Monitoring is a short and medium term activity mainly for management, formative and developmental purposes. It may use formal or informal methods and make use of existing data, or generate new data. Action and monitoring usually develop together, informing each other, hand‐in‐hand. Review is a longer term and more formal process that has both formative and summative purposes.

IMPROVE: identifies the process by which the results of evaluation both monitoring and review are fed back in order to generate improvement. This may cause modification to an existing plan or development of a new plan, and thus the cycle commences once more.

Unit Monitoring is the collection, reporting and evaluation of data about units taught at the University of New England using agreed performance indicators. Unit Monitoring provides the opportunity to address the identified deficiencies of a unit through the development and implementation of improvement action plans, and to also celebrate success by awarding commendations to units with high levels of student satisfaction and retention.

Regular reflection on unit data facilitates one of the key aims of monitoring, which is the identification of priorities for enhancement of the University’s academic activities. Through the Unit Monitoring process, a range of measures (or metrics) have been assembled to assist unit coordinators, Heads of School and the senior executive to better understand the performance of the University’s units. These data provide decision-makers with information about the performance of each unit and provide a set of contextual information about each unit’s performance in a teaching period which is intended to assist with understanding and interpreting the reported measures.

#13282 Attachment 6

134 of 362

http://www.une.edu.au/policies/pdf/academicqualitymanagementpolicyandguidelines.pdf


2 THE UNIT MONITORING PROCESS

2.1 Frequency of reporting

Unit monitoring occurs each time a unit is offered. Some units at UNE are offered twice a year, while others are offered once a year or in alternate years. The University also has a range of teaching periods, both on campus in Armidale and at partner sites, and these are both semester and trimester-based. There are currently three reporting periods per year, which roughly equate to Trimester 1, 2 and 3. Table 1 (below) indicates the allocation of the 2012 teaching periods into the three distinct reporting periods. It should be noted that the range of teaching periods could vary from year to year with the introduction or cessation of partnership teaching arrangements.

Table 1: 2012 Reporting Periods indicating the allocation of teaching periods

Reporting Period 1 Reporting Period 2 Reporting Period 3 ISBT Semester 1 ISBT Semester 2 ISBT Summer Joint Medical Program Semester 1

Joint Medical Program Semester 2

Trimester 3

Summer Semester Trimester 2 Trimester 1 Year Long Tri-1 / Tri-2

2.2 The Metrics

2.2.1 Student Participation and Outcomes Metrics

In determining the metrics for unit monitoring, considerations included: • the availability of data; • the potential for the data to provide meaningful and useful feedback to unit coordinators

and Heads of Schools; • the potential for comparing data with like-institutions.

An environmental scan of the performance indicators used at other Australian universities to support academic quality activities (such as annual unit and course monitoring and periodic course and unit review) assisted with the decision-making process. For the most part, the indicators are unremarkable in the sector and the data are, in most cases, required for government reporting. As outlined in Table 2, the metrics chosen to be applied to Unit Monitoring relate to student participation (enrolment / EFTSL number), student retention (attrition), student academic outcomes (GPA / Grade Distribution), and student experience (student evaluation of the unit). These measures are used by many other universities and the adoption of such measures by UNE will allow for benchmarking with other universities.

This set of metrics does not exclude other measures that could potentially be included in the Unit Monitoring process. However, a ground rule, that no new data be created, was established at the outset of the discussions on possible unit monitoring metrics. Furthermore, a focus was also placed on bringing together existing data into a single repository and making this data more accessible to the University community.

#13282 Attachment 6

135 of 362