2006 review made adjustments to align with restructure

1
2006 review made adjustments to align with
restructure

• 2008 review aims to align senate structure with
  quality and standards aim

2
Schools

• Quality assurance
• Quality improvement
• Scholarship
• Collegial
• Benchmark QA role

3
School ASQC

• Currently disconnected from structure
• Greater responsibility and autonomy
• Membership related to function to achieve
  greatest quality impact
• Similar profile to other universities
• Is Senate Committee not management in exile

4
?

• Gender balance policy
• Target staff with capacity for roles
• Elected Chair versus Appointed Chair
• Elected members
• Chair workload
• Casual appointment
• Whole of staff discussion where to?

5
College

• School representation
• Size
• Critical QA focus
• Key quality improvement focus
• Only minor change

6
Peak

• Most committees minor change
• Benchmarks well with other unis
• Courses proposal benchmarks better with other
  unis prevents split course control
• Appeals one committee responsible to specialist
  policy

7
Senate

• More elected staff
• More ex-officio
• For size of uni proposal benchmarks OK
• HoS (9) or all?
• Chair SASQC on or stay with direct election to
  Senate?
• (usual benchmark for eligibility is
  professoriate only)
• (if direct election 1 per school? Or X per
  college?)
• Associate Deans off (?back on)
• Elected Chair (some unis have VC/DVC)

8
(No Transcript)
9
Academic Governance Arrangements Review 2008

• UWS Academic Senate

10
Process to date

• 2007 August initial review report to senate --gt
• 2007 November invitation for input and
  consultation --gt
• 2008 February recommendation to delete College
  Boards --gt
• 2008 May delete CBoS carried by Senate ---gt
• Senate resolution to review School Boards and
  effects of CBoS deletion on academic governance
  arrangements
• Requested to Board of Trustees to extend terms to
  permit further review regarding impact of College
  Board deletion and arrangements if School Boards
  deleted ---gt
• Extension permitted to October 2008
• No further extension

11
Consultations conducted 2008

•   - 12 of the 17 heads of school (face to face
  interviews) (3 email consultations) - PVC TL, R,
  Q, E. - DVCAE, DVCCS
• - Chair of Management School Board (face to face)
  - Associate Deans Academic (face to face
  interviews) - Associate Deans Research (email
  comments) - Dean of Research Studies (Phone
  interviews) - Dean of Indigenous Education (face
  to face) - University Librarian (face to face
  and email comments) - UWSCollege Executive
  Principal and CEO (face to face) - Registrar
  (face to face)- Executive Committee of Senate
  (two face to face special meetings)
• Student representation workshop- Participation
  by Chair of Senate in workshop, phone interviews
  with consultants, report feedback, liaison with
  Paul Woloch regarding emerging Senate proposal.
• Full Senate meetings- two in 2008 have
  considered academic governance proposals. All
  meetings have had reports on review issues.

12
Benchmarking

• Comparison with multi-campus large Australian
  universities (web search)
• Monash, ECU, CSU, Griffith, La Trobe, ACU
• AUQA best practice site
• Committee of  Chairs NSW/ACT and National
  Committee of Chairs Academic Boards and Senates.

13
Next steps Board of Trustees October deadline

• 22 August to Senate for discussion --gt
• revisions as required --gt
• general consultation to academic community
  through policy DDS --gt
• Advice of Senate for next step
• Recommend to Board of Trustees ?
• October 8 meeting of Board of Trustees ?
• Positions spill
• No Senate meeting October elections
• November training for elected and new ex-officio
  members
• New Senate meets 21 November

14
Principles

• Senate terms of reference quality improvement
  and standards assurance
• Membership appropriate to discharge functions
• Schools are the field of action
• Delegated responsibility from Board
  accountability to Board
• Meetings are expensive keep small and few
• Academic governance is learnt
• Senate committees mitigate academic risk

15
(No Transcript)
16
How we compare Griffith

• Advisory to Council
• N55
• DVC is Chair
• 10 elected academics
• 7 elected students
• 38 Remainder PVCs, Deans, Directors, Registrar,
  Council appointees, HoS
• Faculty Boards (Chair by Dean no elected
  members)
• School Committees (Advisory to Head of School
  4-7 elected members)
• Provision for School Forum

17
How we compare Monash

• Under review
• New targets either N100 or N86
• Status and authority visible in composition
• Elected President/2xVP
• There should be significant cohort with high
  level responsibilities accountability for
  overseeing or implementing Uni directions VC,
  DVC, PVC, Deans, Directors
• Retain an element of elected membership either
  22 or 37 that maintains Professorial Board link
• Introduce alternates
• Delete campus reps
• 3 students

18
How we compare ECU

• Advisory to Council
• Elected Chair
• N38
• 9 elected members
• 11 ex-officio incl VC, DVCs, PVCs, Deans,
  Indigenous, Staff Asociation
• 15 appointed/nominated incl HoS, Faculty Profs
• 3 students
• Faculty Boards advisory
• Boards of Examiners determine grades

19
How we compare La Trobe

• Delegated functions from Council (same as UWS)
• N99
• Equal male/female
• Unspecified in Act

20
How we compare CSU

• Delegated authority from Council
• Elected Chair
• N25
• 2 Profs elected by Profs
• 4 elected academic staff (1 each faculty)
• 2 students
• 17 ex-officio
• Faculty Board chaired by Dean QA
• School Board Chaired by HoS QA

21
How we compare ACU

• Advisory to Council
• Approve Teaching and Learning Plan
• N30
• PVC Chair
• 12 ex-officio
• 4 Deans plus 2 Rectors
• 6 Profs (2 from each faculty elected by Profs)
• 3 academic staff (1 from each faculty elected by
  non-professorial staff)
• 1 student
• Co-opted others (unlimited) determined by Council

22
Traditions at UWS

• Elected Chair of Senate
• Balance between elected and ex-officio/appointed
• Lean committee structure
• Broad participation not just Profs
• College representation not Schools
• HoS and E-Deans not on committees
• Relatively small senate given size
• Usually quorate
• Accountable to Board

23
Challenges UWS

• Multi-campus
• Comprehensive
• Lean committee program support
• Rapid structural change
• Excellent research progress
• Poor/patchy program/student experience progress
• Senate key QI QA academic standards and quality
  mechanism reputation, rigour, consistency and
  equivalence
• Magic bullet? Policies School involvement

24
UWS Options

• Option 1 more of the same - delete school
  boards replace college board chairs on senate
  with the same number of directly elected academic
  staff (?professoriate) replace chairs of college
  boards in policy roles with associate deans. 
  Outcome Only have Assessment Committee at School
  level.
•  
• Option 2 add school committee keep senate the
  same- replace school boards and assessment
  committee with School Academic Standards and
  Quality Committee (SASQC). Chair SASQC by HoS or
  nominee or elected by SASQC. Retain existing
  Senate directly elected membership and replace
  CBoS chairs with additional direct election
  position from college
•  
• Option 3 add school committee add Heads of
  School to senate (some or all) - otherwise the
  same - replace school boards and assessment
  committee with SASQC. Chair SASQC by HoS or
  nominee or elected by SASQC. Retain existing
  Senate directly elected membership from colleges
  and replace CBoS chairs with additional direct
  election positions from each college.
•  
• Option 4 Preferred proposal - add school
  committee, school committee representation on
  college committee and on senate, heads of school
  on senate (?retention of associate deans)
• FOR DISCUSSION