Hot topics for all staff
AQF 2011 update
How is the University responding to the AQF? Read the updated summary and the papers discussed in the last AQF Steering Committee meeting (18 June 2012).
Updated and new content is highlighted. Work is continuing. For example, the AQF released a paper on Graduate and Vocational Graduate Certificates and Diplomas on 2 July. This will be discussed at the next AQF meetings.
Presentation now available from TEQSA Forum
Dr. Carol Nicoll (25 June) provided a very comprehensive overview of TEQSA, what it offers Australian higher education locally and internationally, and how the organisation will operate.
Do you have an opinion on the programs offered by the University and how they can be improved?
Most members of the University community have opinions on what can and should be improved. Email your comments on the following, by July 24, to firstname.lastname@example.org
Academic Senate discussed five questions on programs at the last meeting:
- What are the characteristics of high quality coursework and research programs? These could include measures of:
- successes in the attraction, retention and graduation of students
- the proportion of internationally successful staff teaching into the programs or providing student supervision
- levels of student, staff and graduate satisfaction; and
- high national and international reputation rankings.
- Should a new program receive a conditional approval subject to demonstrating, within five years, that it has achieved the goals specified in the original business plan? Or, should the External Review process for a new program be held earlier and have additional requirements to enable the initial ‘horizontal’ comparison?
- How can we modify existing Academic Senate processes to facilitate the timely introduction of innovative programs that might have a very different content focus, pedagogical approach or teaching location?
- What processes should Academic Senate use when seeking to discontinue a program for poor performance?
- What are ‘flagship programs’ and how might this concept be applied to best advantage in the University? Are ‘flagship programs’ just very well performing programs selected for their very high student and graduate satisfaction over a period of time and, their ranking among the top 100 programs internationally (on multiple ranking systems)?
Academic Senate committees, Teaching and Learning Committee [T&LC], Research Committee [RC] and Program and Course Approval Committee [PCAC], are being asked for preliminary advice on these questions.
Members of Academic Senate have been asked for input on models used nationally or internationally for reviewing program quality to the Academic Senate Secretariat.
If you wish to comment, please do by 24 July 2012.
Academic Senate meeting moved
Apologies to members of Senate for moving the meeting date from 18 July to 25 July 2012. The reason: with most ex officio members at an IRU meeting on 18 July we would be inquorate.
Outcomes from 23 May 2012 Academic Senate
Academic Senate In Brief provides members and stakeholders with an overview of the discussions and outcomes of the last meeting.
Academic Senate In Brief also provides information
- New programs
- New or amended policies and procedures, including details of the amended clauses; and
- Some of the policies that are currently under review