Commendations & Recommendations from AUQA Audit Reports AUQA findings may be commendations, affirmations or recommendations. A commendation refers to the achievement of a stated goal, or to some plan or activity that has led to, or appears likely to lead to, the achievement of a stated goal, and which in AUQA's view is particularly significant. A recommendation refers to an unsuitable approach, a faulty deployment, or a lack of success in relation to a stated goal, and which in AUQA's view is particularly significant. They indicate matters in need of attention, possibly with suggestions for action. Where such matters have already been identified by the auditee, with evidence, they are termed 'affirmations'. The full text of all AUQA reports is available from: www.auqa.edu.au NB Affirmations were incorporated into Audit Reports from August 2004 Key: USQ University of Southern Queensland (October 2002) CUT Curtin University of Technology (October 2002) UB University of Ballarat (November 2002) ACU Australian Catholic University (December 2002 UN University of Newcastle (January 2003) AMC Australian Maritime College (February 2003) Adelaide University of Adelaide (March 2003) SUT Swinburne University of Technology (March 2003) Canberra University of Canberra June 2003) Macquarie Macquarie University (July 2003) UQ University of Queensland (September 2003) SCU Southern Cross University (October 2003) UNDA University of Notre Dame, Australia (November 2003) RMIT RMIT University (December 2003) Griffith Griffith University (April 2004) UWA University of Western Australia (April 2004) UNE University of New England (May 2004) UniSA University of South Australia (August 2004) JCU James Cook University (September 2004) ECU Edith Cowan University (October 2004) CSU Charles Sturt University (November 2004) Sydney The University of Sydney (December 2004) Bond Bond University (February 2005) Deakin Deakin University (February 2005) LTU La Trobe University (March 2005) QUT Queensland University of Technology (August 2005) CDU Charles Darwin University (October 2005) MoU The University of Melbourne (January 2006) UTas The University of Tasmania (November 2005) MCD Melbourne College of Divinity (December 2005) 1 Institutional Including mission, governance, leadership, management, planning, budgeting and quality management systems Commendations * ACU is commended for substantially achieving its distinctive Mission goal of engaging “the social, ethical and religious dimensions of the questions it faces in teaching, research and service”. ACU C1 * The Senate of ACU is commended for its strategic vision for the University and its clear definition of its own role in developing that vision. ACU C2 * The Vice-Chancellor is commended for his leadership in engaging the University community and external stakeholders in a thorough process of refining the distinctive character of ACU and on this basis developing the various campuses of the University as a single institution. ACU C3 * ACU is commended for the very thorough external reviews it has conducted in recent years. ACU C4 * ACU is commended for recognising the need for more consistent and systematic collection and use of shared data, and the ‘Culture of Evidence’ project that is intended to address this. ACU C5 * AUQA commends ACU for the high level of commitment by staff exhibited to their students, colleagues and the University. ACU C11 * AUQA commends the extent of permeation of knowledge of the ‘world-class’ aspiration through the University community. CUT C1 * AUQA commends the VC for his high level of visibility and interaction with staff and with the community. CUT C2 * AUQA commends Curtin for systematic monitoring of its performance by means of a Balanced Scorecard. CUT C3 * AUQA commends UB for its development of a policy that provides for the input of relevant interest groups to policy development. UB C3 * AUQA commends USQ for its highly successful engagement with its communities through an extensive array of mechanisms. USQ C * AUQA commends UB for the frank approach it adopted to its self-assessment. UB C1 * AUQA commends the Council for initiating and conducting a self-evaluation of its performance in 2002 and for its use of the results to review the induction process for new Council members. UB C2 * AUQA commends USQ for its Strategic Management Information System (SMIS), noting the value reports from SMIS may add to the University’s strategic decision-making. USQ C1 * AUQA commends the university council for demonstrating its leadership and commitment to quality assurance by itself participating in a process of self-reflection and improvement. UN C1 * AUQA commends the university for establishing an organisational structure that is conducive to embedding quality practices throughout the university by using systems of representation and common leadership positions in each faculty. UN C2 * AUQA commends the University for taking a proactive approach to environmental sustainability in its campus developments. UN C16 * AUQA commends AMC for the openness with which it undertook its recent external Review of Management and for the manner in which it shared and discussed the draft and final reports. AMC C1 * AUQA commends AMC for undertaking a thorough self-review in preparing its Performance Portfolio for audit by AUQA, and also for the wide recognition of a need for improvement strategies. AMC C2 * AUQA commends AMC for the high level of satisfaction employers express with AMC graduates arising from a practical and applied focus to student learning. AMC C3 * AUQA commends AMC for involving external stakeholders, by way of Industrial Liaison Committees, in the curriculum review process. AMC C4 * AUQA commends AMC for its collaborative approach to projects with industry and other educational partners, as evinced in particular by the AMHRC. AMC C5 * AUQA commends AMC for the establishment of a structure that enables it to exercise effective control over its subsidiary company AMC Search Ltd, as appropriate, and for the company’s success to date in generating external revenue. AMC C7 * AUQA commends AMC Search Ltd for its well-developed quality system, including ISO certification, which is relevant to the nature of its business. AMC C8 * AUQA commends AMC for the good relationships it has established with its external stakeholders, and especially for strong industry links in the VET area. AMC C10 * AUQA commends AMC for embarking upon the Student Administration Continuous Improvement Project, with a view to improving not only its student administration but also its organisational learning capabilities. AMC C13 * AUQA commends the University for the thorough and open manner of the self-assessment undertaken prior to the audit and for the development of specific strategies intended to address those areas identified as requiring improvement. Adelaide C1 * AUQA commends the approach being planned by the Foresight, Planning and Review Unit in the process review system that will maximise the benefits that staff obtain from participating in these reviews. SUT C1 * AUQA commends SUT for its obvious commitment to achieving quality and for the efforts underway at more fully integrating its quality, planning and risk management frameworks. SUT C2 * AUQA commends the Leadership and Entrepreneurial Attributes Development Program as an appropriate and valued contribution to SUT’s implementation of its entrepreneurial theme. SUT C5 * AUQA commends the University of Canberra for developing the Quality Assurance Framework and the generally positive impact that this approach is starting to have in helping organisational units to focus more clearly on identifying relevant quality assurance and improvement targets. Canberra C2 * AUQA commends the University of Canberra for setting for itself a mission to deliver ‘professional education professionally’ and for achieving distinctive recognition in its chosen markets for effective performance in the pursuit of this mission. Canberra C3 * AUQA commends Macquarie University for using its top-level slogan: “Australia’s Innovative University”, to effectively articulate and direct overall efforts of the University. Macquarie C1 * AUQA commends Macquarie University for establishing a Divisional structure that is proving to be conducive to multidisciplinary collaborations. Macquarie C2 * AUQA commends Macquarie University for its commitment to improving as an organisation through, inter alia, regularly reviewing its practices. Macquarie C3 * AUQA commends Macquarie University for establishing a robust business proposal dimension within its program approval system. Macquarie C4 * AUQA commends the Macquarie Graduate School of Management for a comprehensive system of quality assurance that has lead to demonstrable quality outcomes and corresponding recognition, both nationally and internationally. Macquarie C7 * AUQA commends UQ for its successful use of top-slicing the budget not only to support strategic priorities and younger staff, but also to ensure the implementation of policies in key areas such as teaching. UQ C1 * AUQA commends UQ for having established a leadership providing clear strategic direction that is well-defined, widely-communicated and broadly embraced. UQ C2 * Noting the positive relationship that exists between the Senate, the Executive and the wider UQ community, AUQA commends the recent reflections on how to better provide more constructive input into the strategic planning process and the formulation of an action plan for self-improvement. UQ C3 * AUQA commends UQ for implementing and successfully sustaining an effective devolution model. UQ C4 * AUQA commends UQ for exhibiting an embedded culture of quality, as shown by an awareness of and commitment to cycles of planning, supporting, measuring and, in particular, improving. UQ C5 * AUQA commends UQ for its long-standing school review process, the central guidelines, the control exercised over the process by the Academic Board Standing Committee, and the continual attention to the ways in which the process may be improved. UQ C6 * AUQA commends Southern Cross University for adopting and successfully implementing an effective divisional and functions-based organisational structure. SCU C1 * AUQA commends the Council of Southern Cross University for its commitment to quality, and for adopting a pro-active approach to the governance of the University and to the maintenance of standards of accountability and responsibility. SCU C2 * AUQA commends SCU for undertaking an authentic process of self-review that resulted in the identification of a range of opportunities for improvement. SCU C3 * AUQA commends SCU for putting in place a comprehensive schedule of course reviews that has been aligned with the review of organisational units. SCU C4 * AUQA commends the University for its commitment to a framework for continual improvement and the positive way it is approaching an increased emphasis on quality management services. UNDA C1 * AUQA commends the efforts of RMIT University’s central support services to find new and more effective modes of management in meeting the needs of academic units and other client groups. RMIT C1 * AUQA commends RMIT University for the attention given to the development of quality assurance systems for its teaching programs such as Educational Quality Assurance and, more recently, Program Quality Assurance. RMIT C3 * AUQA commends RMIT University for the establishment of the Ombuds Office, which is proving an effective means of resolving some staff and students complaints and, more generally, of identifying opportunities for system and policy improvements. RMIT C9 * AUQA commends the senior executive of the University for fostering, within the University and its broader communities, a culture of engagement, confidence and optimism. Griffith C1 * AUQA commends Griffith University for the careful, consultative change management processes used in recent planning and restructuring activities including the development of the Strategic Plan 2003-2007 and associated performance indicators and targets. Griffith C2 * AUQA commends Griffith University Council for the establishment of a performance evaluation framework that is assisting it to evaluate the effectiveness of its own performance and make improvements where necessary. Griffith C3 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for using incentive schemes in the budget model to effectively encourage targeted behavioural change within the organisation. UWA C1 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for underpinning planning and management decision-making with a well-developed online reporting system, both in terms of a general EIS and also in terms of reporting against specific objectives in the OPP. UWA C2 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for the range and frequency of cross-structural for a, which are appreciated by staff and seem to be effective communication mechanisms. UWA C3 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia on its new structure, which is well-aligned with the new Academic Profile, and as such, is well-designed to assist the University in the pursuit of its strategic goals. UWA C4 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for its effective use of change management processes within the University, and in particular, the recent restructuring which was based on sound principles of academic integrity and consultation with the results demonstrating their effective application. UWA C5 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for operating a robust system of reviews which encompass most of the core activities of the University in a periodic fashion. UWA C6 * AUQA commends the University of New England for prudent budgetary management over the past six years, which is helping the University to recover from serious financial difficulties. UNE C1 * AUQA commends University of New England for the introduction of its Teaching Quantum scheme, which has the potential to be an effective incentive mechanism for aligning the activities of Faculties with strategic priorities of the University. UNE C2 * AUQA commends UniSA for its comprehensive annual review and planning cycle that provides a solid framework for quality improvement. UniSA C1 * AUQA commends the regular and productive monitoring and self-review of the University Council. UniSA C2 * AUQA commends UniSA’s strong and effective management systems. UniSA C3 * AUQA commends UniSA’s effectiveness in the management of change. UniSA C4 * AUQA commends UniSA for Blueprint 2005 which was soundly conceptualised and well-managed, and has engendered a positive spirit. UniSA C16 * AUQA commends JCU for demonstrating that it is clearly aware of what is required to effectively manage risk for the preparation and enhancement of the University’s reputation, particularly in relation to its core functions of teaching, learning and research. JCU C1 * AUQA commends JCU for the processes used to develop and implement a clear strategic direction for the University as set out in the Millennium Document, which has been endorsed by the JCU Council and is effectively embedded in the JCU culture as a means to focus on key priorities, monitor risks and resolve internal tensions re distribution of scarce resources. JCU C2 * AUQA commends the JCU Council for developing effective Quality Assurance processes as part of its governance responsibility, including the use of 360 degree feedback processes to monitor the performance of the Vice-Chancellor. JCU C3 * AUQA commends JCU for achieving recovery from the mid 1990s financial difficulties, through adoption of an effective, transparent and University wide budget process that is performance-based. JCU C15 * AUQA commends JCU for the thoroughness of the Campus Development and Management Plan 2003, especially with respect to its linkages to academic planning, and for the University-wide process of consultation in its development. JCU C16 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University’s leaders for establishing a clear strategic focus, which provides strong guidance for the University’s internal efforts and helps present a distinctive image to the University’s external communities. ECU C1 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for developing a framework for performance indicators that will aid the governance and planning processes. ECU C2 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for developing a funding model which includes a performance-based element that is proving effective in driving desired behaviours. ECU C3 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for undertaking a useful institutional self-review (Guided Self-Assessment) which has proven instrumental in identifying the University’s strengths and areas for improvement. ECU C4 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for its system of Area of Scholarship Reviews, which is comprehensive, useful and clearly leading to improvements. ECU C5 * AUQA commends CSU for the manner in which it has been able to establish the concept of ‘One University’ strongly amongst its staff while operating across physically distributed locations and campuses. CSU C1 * AUQA commends the Vice-Chancellor, Deputy Vice-Chancellors and Pro Vice-Chancellor for their visibility, accessibility and responsiveness towards staff which many staff highly value. CSU C2 * AUQA commends CSU for the establishment of various fora that allow for effective discussion and information sharing across the University and help foster an understanding amongst staff of operating as ‘One University’. CSU C3 * AUQA commends the CSU Council for its responsible approach to corporate governance, especially as demonstrated by its adoption of The Charter of Corporate Governance. CSU C4 * AUQA commends CSU for the development of its Leadership and Management Development Framework, which should strengthen the ability of the University to recruit to leadership positions in the future. CSU C11 * AUQA commends the University of Sydney for attending to the quality improvement of Senate as evinced in numerous examples of good practices it has introduced over the past two years. Sydney C1 * AUQA commends the University of Sydney for operating a strong and effective system for guiding and evaluating the performance of the Vice-Chancellor. Sydney C2 * AUQA commends the University of Sydney for establishing and implementing a robust Project Management Methodology designed to reduce the risks associated with major IT projects and, potentially, other significant projects. Sydney C3 * AUQA commends the University of Sydney for the effectiveness of the Phase One reviews of faculties conducted by the Academic Board in leading to teaching and learning enhancements. Sydney C4 * AUQA commends the University of Sydney for planning a comprehensive review of its administrative services and for committing to act upon the findings. Sydney C5 * AUQA commends the University of Sydney for its use of ‘search conferences’ as a means of involving the University community in discussions about quality issues. Sydney C6 * AUQA commends the University of Sydney for identifying themes of strategic importance in teaching and learning; for establishing working groups to address them; and for using sound data to track progress. Sydney C7 * AUQA commends Bond University’s faculty and operational unit procedures manuals and handbooks. Bond C1 * AUQA commends the Vice-Chancellor of Bond University for encouraging an organisational culture that fosters openness to discussion and high levels of interaction within the Bond community. Bond C2 * AUQA commends Bond University’s use of the Balanced Scorecard as a systematic way of implementing the strategic plan and ensuring that the desired range of activities are included within the scope of the quality management system. Bond C3 * AUQA commends Deakin University for the implementation of an integrated planning and budget model that serves as a comprehensive quality framework and ensures that strategic priorities and operational targets are addressed at every level of the organisation. Deakin C1 * AUQA commends La Trobe University for developing a new strategic planning process that enjoys the support and involvement of the University’s internal community. LTU C1 * AUQA commends La Trobe University for supporting its budget model with appropriate training programs and support for budget centre managers. LTU C2 * AUQA commends La Trobe University for undertaking a thorough and constructive self-review and for demonstrating a commitment to following-up on the findings. LTU C3 * AUQA commends QUT for having organised a thorough review process leading up to the AUQA audit and for assuring a high level of universitywide ownership of the review through consultation and information initiatives. QUT C1 * AUQA commends QUT for the development of a comprehensive strategic and operational planning framework through which the priorities of the Blueprint and the objectives of the top-level plans inform the objectives and the planning processes at faculty and school level. QUT C2 * AUQA commends QUT for its comprehensive program of corporate reviews which supports the strategic and operational planning framework. QUT C3 * AUQA commends the QUT Council for reviewing its role and redefining it to accommodate the new governance and planning structure of QUT thus changing the focus from management to governance functions. QUT C4 * AUQA commends QUT for the development of the new budget framework which supports the financial aspirations of QUT. QUT C13 * AUQA commends CDU for the innovative concept of school-based ‘champions’ across its main identified areas of core business. CDU C1 * AUQA commends CDU’s identification of and commitment to the need for diversification of income sources. CDU C11 * AUQA commends UoM for its Planning and Accountability Cycle, which ensures the alignment of the University’s objectives, strategies and targets throughout the University UoM C1 * AUQA commends UoM for the Operational Performance Reviews which are comprehensive and effective in monitoring and measuring the performance of the faculties and the administrative divisions, and are used to assist in the preparation of University plans and the budget UoM C2 * AUQA commends the Council of UoM for its planning and review processes, such as the Chancellor’s self-evaluation interviews and the Annual Planning Conference, which are the key elements in the Council’s continuous improvement processes . UoM C3 * AUQA commends UoM for the formulation of a transparent set of student entry criteria and selection principles, and their consistent application by the Selection Procedures Committee. UoM C4 * AUQA commends UoM for its highly transparent performance-driven funding model, which provides clear incentives to faculties and departments to achieve University targets in core areas such as teaching and learning and research. UoM C19 * AUQA commends UTAS for the early adoption of quality audit and the comprehensive self-review leading up to the AUQA audit. UTas C3 * AUQA commends UTAS for the positive and well-regarded leadership by the Vice-Chancellor and his senior management group and the effective role played by Council in the governance of UTAS. UTas C2 * AUQA commends UTAS for the inclusive development and wide ownership of the EDGE [Excellence; Distinctiveness; Growth; and Engagement] agenda with evidence of a good planning cascade and the application of strategic funding to advance the agenda. UTas C1 * AUQA commends MCD for its success in nurturing the relationship between the MCD and its Associated Teaching Institutions and their various constituencies. MCD C1 * AUQA commends MCD for the way in which the College is fulfilling its mission and goals of ecumenicity and theological education in a social context. MCD C2 * AUQA commends MCD for setting new directions for the College by exercising the decision to invite amendment of the Melbourne College of Divinity Act, in order to achieve improvements in corporate and academic governance, and for efforts to implement a strategic planning approach. MCD C4 * AUQA commends MCD for the concerted efforts to improve its quality processes as a result of its self-review. MCD C7 * AUQA commends MCD for the high level of collegiality evident among the staff of the Associated Teaching Institutions, and across Associated Teaching Institutions. MCD C11 Affirmations * That as UniSA reviews its budget model, it consider the balance of funding between central services and academic divisions, and between areas with greater and lesser opportunity to generate revenue. UniSA A1 * That UniSA continue to investigate ways to increase the response rate of the on-line Course Evaluation Instrument to ensure its reliability. UniSA A4 * That in line with the University’s stated commitment to introduce systematic course reviews, the JCU Academic Board put in place appropriate mechanisms to ensure that the formal review of all JCU courses is completed within the first five-year cycle. JCU A2 * That JCU consolidate plans to externally benchmark the standards of JCU honours theses against standards at other Australian and international universities, as appropriate. JCU A4 * That JCU implement its decision to more systematically evaluate the first-year undergraduate program as a matter of priority, so that baseline data collected from 2005 can be used to develop strategies to continue to improve student retention. JCU A5 * That JCU continue to consolidate and integrate academic planning considerations into its approach to campus planning and development. JCU A7 * AUQA affirms Edith Cowan University’s improvements to its system of policy management, including the recent Policy on Policies and the Policies Database and encourages the full implementation of these improvements which are likely to enhance the University’s quality assurance framework. ECU A1 * AUQA affirms Edith Cowan University’s identification of the need to develop fully and implement a comprehensive risk management system. ECU A2 * AUQA affirms Edith Cowan University’s finding that greater attention should be paid to providing overall strategic leadership in the area of professional engagement ECU A5 * AUQA affirms Edith Cowan University’s finding that its use of COGNOS requires further development in order to provide users with easy access to information germane to their planning, monitoring and reviewing requirements. ECU A6 * AUQA affirms Edith Cowan University’s commitment to improving its management of records, in accordance with the findings of a commissioned external review. ECU A7 * AUQA affirms CSU’s finding that a more formal approach to the identification, assessment and management of corporate and operational risk is required, as demonstrated by its adoption in March 2004 of the Policy on Risk Management. CSU A1 * AUQA affirms the need for the University of Sydney to improve its systems for determining and collecting useful management information and making it available to targeted users. Sydney A1 * AUQA affirms the need for the University of Sydney to improve coordination of its brand. Sydney A9 * UQA affirms the need for Bond University to introduce and implement systematic and effective cyclic review schedules for faculties and programs. Bond A1 * UQA affirms Deakin University’s recognition of the need to implement a systematic approach to the effective use of external comparisons across its range of activities. Deakin A1 * AUQA affirms Deakin University’s ongoing important work to strengthen its capacity to manage risk effectively. Deakin A2 * AUQA affirms Deakin University’s intention to review outcomes from the review of Academic Board to ensure that it is effectively fulfilling its functions as the principal academic authority within the University. Deakin A3 * AUQA affirms Deakin University’s recognition of the need to reshape organisational structures for the support of teaching and learning so that they can better position the University to respond to the pedagogical implications of its move toward use of online technology. Deakin A4 * AUQA affirms that La Trobe University needs to concentrate on developing an inclusive organisational culture across all its campuses, and especially between the Bundoora and Bendigo campuses, in order to successfully pursue its strategic goals. LTU A1 * AUQA affirms La Trobe University’s efforts to develop an integrated system of planning and reviews that permeates all significant budget centres of the institution, and to provide improved support for managers with planning responsibilities. LTU A2 * AUQA affirms that La Trobe University needs to develop a more systematic approach to identifying and assessing strategic and operational risks and incorporating the findings into the planned management of the University. LTU A3 * AUQA affirms that La Trobe University needs to improve the management information available to managers at various levels to assist with the execution of their planning, decision-making and performance monitoring responsibilities. LTU A4 * AUQA affirms QUT’s intention to integrate implementation plans and progress reports into the strategic planning and reporting to support the achievement of the Blueprint objectives. QUT A1 * AUQA affirms UoM’s decision to strengthen its risk management strategy through the development of a Strategic Risk Assessment and Management Action Plan and an integrated Risk Management Framework, which covers strategic risks in relation to main function areas. UoM A5 * While noting the intention of UTAS to undertake a progressive implementation of the Council policy framework, AUQA urges the University to complete this in a timely manner and in a way that will assist the further development of the University’s ‘PIRI’ Quality System. UTas A1 * AUQA affirms the intention of UTAS to strengthen risk management across the University. UTas A2 * AUQA affirms the MCD strategy of aiming for ‘regulated growth’, but urges the College to be conscious of the potential problems posed by rapid growth in the number of Recognised Teaching Institutions. MCD A1 * AUQA affirms the need for consistent and full use of the Theological Academic Management System by all MCD constituents, and for MCD to fully develop an effective record archiving process. MCD A2 * AUQA affirms the need for MCD to establish an Academic Audit Committee. MCD A7 * AUQA affirms the decision by MCD to adopt a five-year cycle of Quality Assurance and Performance Monitoring. MCD A6 Recommendations * That ACU review the relationship between the Mission, Strategic Plan, and the annual plans of the faculties and units to ensure that each higher level of planning provides a framework for planning at the next level, and that taken together the successful implementation of the faculty and unit plans will also be the successful implementation of ACU’s Strategic Plan. ACU R1 * That ACU give more thought to how the budget mechanisms, for example financial incentives and performance-based elements, may be used to encourage the activities needed to achieve the Mission and goals. ACU R4 * That ACU develop formal mechanisms, such as the adoption of project management tools, to assist in the implementation of all major strategies. ACU R6 * That ACU investigate how it can best provide the technical and analytical support for an evidential approach to planning and review. ACU R8 * That in implementing the new ‘Learning Paradigm’, ACU identify milestones, reporting requirements, resources needed, and appropriate teaching and learning indicators; and ensure that it is widely understood and comprehensively implemented. ACU R9 * That USQ fully utilises its quality assurance process, as described in the first Chapter of Strategy USQ, to ensure that there is common understanding of quality throughout the University. In addition, that the University effect “uniform excellent application” of quality assurance leadership responsibility for the implementation and monitoring of quality processes. USQ R1 * That USQ continue to develop its suite of performance measures to provide indicators of progress against a broad spectrum of activity, and that the University seek external points of reference, including internationally, in order to gain a more comprehensive interpretation of them. USQ R3 * That USQ seek to develop and provide support for a range of cross-organisational networking opportunities and fora as a means for promoting the reality of USQ as a learning organisation. USQ R21 * That Curtin establish a Finance Committee of Council to strengthen the links between planning, budgeting and accountability. CUT R1 * That Council ensure it is well-informed about Curtin and its characteristics and operations, perhaps by holding a one- or two-day ‘retreat’ or other structured activities in which it studies aspects of the University in some detail. CUT R2 * That every effort be made to decrease bureaucratic requirements and avoid excessive detail in policies and processes. CUT R3 * That Curtin assure itself that its budgeting processes are aligned to strategic directions and performance, and that a sufficient proportion of funds flow to the operational areas. CUT R4 * That Curtin continue its oversight of the ‘cascading down’ of the performance monitoring system to ensure complete and appropriate implementation at the division and school levels. CUT R5 * That, in using the revised planning and review process, schools and other units include reviewers external to Curtin, to provide an independent perspective; and preferably some from overseas, to lend credibility to the ‘world-class’ aspiration; and that the external input address outcomes as well as processes. CUT R6 * That Curtin ensure, with appropriate monitoring, that policies are implemented by divisions, schools etc. CUT R7 * That Curtin clarify the parameters for deciding which activities should be located at university, division or school level. CUT R8 * That, in the light of Curtin’s desire to be ‘world-class’, and its intent to use comparisons as a prime mechanism for achieving this, Curtin undertake a greater amount of structured benchmarking, both nationally and internationally. CUT R9 * That UB develop systematic processes for reporting to Council on achievements against the major directions for the University, and that Council annually consider and review as necessary the University’s strategic directions. UB R1 * That the University’s SSI be reconsidered and reshaped into a Statement with a clearer, realistic hierarchy of priorities, with timelines and milestones over the period of the Statement, and with identification of how the University’s budget will be distributed across the various priorities. UB can then require schools and other sections of the University to operationalise this Statement through their own planning processes. UB R2 * That schools and sections establish SSI that are clearly consistent with the overarching UB SSI, and identify clear priorities and timelines. UB R3 * That, in continuing its refinement of institutional-level key performance indicators, UB place emphasis on ensuring that the indicators are well defined and measurable. UB R4 * That UB develop a strategy for establishing benchmarking relationships with appropriate Australian and international universities. UB R5 * That, in light of the Council policy on policy development, a framework for the different ways in which staff, students and the community may be formally consulted in the policy development process be developed. This would build upon the consultative mechanisms already in place. UB R6 * That UB develop a targeted plan for increasing the number of Level E appointments over the next three years. The relative lack of staff at this level, and the implications this has for professional leadership in some disciplines, have been noted by UB. UB R7 * That UB consider ways in which the Academic Board could play a role in improving the intra-University communication and discussion of broad educational issues (both internal and external). UB R8 * That the Academic Handbook be revised and updated as soon as possible, and that a mechanism be put in place to ensure its contents are reviewed and revised annually. UB R9 * That, as part of its quality assurance process, USQ develop its review system to require all aspects of the university (including offshore programs) to be regularly reviewed, perhaps on a five year cycle, and progress on implementing agreed recommendations reported back to the VCC. USQ R2 * That ACU consider how to enhance students’ understanding of the nature and value of the national character of ACU, and formally engage the student body in the life of the University as a whole. ACU R2 * That ACU, as stated in its Performance Portfolio, further develop the channels of communication throughout the University. ACU R3 * That the requirements of faculty, school and unit strategic implementation plans in relation to quality assurance and improvement be more clearly specified by the Quality Management Committee, to ensure that all parts of ACU identify areas for improvement and good practices to achieve improvement, and that a process be established for communicating these practices between faculties, schools and units. ACU R7 * That ACU work with the ACU National Students Association to develop a strong and effective role for the Association in decision-making and communication within ACU. ACU R18 * That the Senior Executive Group provide clarity to the University about the respective roles of the Academic Senate and the Portfolio Committees. UN R1 * That the university further develop and implement a planning, monitoring and reviewing system that ensures effective coverage, alignment of all parts of the new university structure and appropriate support to faculty and school leaders. UN R2 * That the University address as a matter of urgency the need to strengthen both the capabilities of the Central Coast Campuses in particular, and the University’s multi-campus interactions in general. UN R3 * That the University consider means by which University-wide leadership and co-ordination can be provided in respect of indigenous education. UN R11 * That the University identify clear leadership responsibilities in the area of Community Relations UN R14 * That Council regularly seek externally benchmarked information about the status of AMC’s operational and HR systems with a view to better understanding the organisation’s current capability and capacity for achieving strategic goals. AMC R1 * That, as it continues to pursue the issues arising from the recent management review, AMC clarify the role of the Task Force in monitoring implementation and follow-up, and continue to note any issues being raised by staff representatives, whether or not these issues were part of the original management review process. AMC R2 * That in the interests of achieving a settled organisational climate, conducive to the pursuit of its more aspirational goals, the AMC take steps to finalise the senior management structure as expeditiously as possible. AMC R3 * That AMC develop a comprehensive system for planning that ensures all work units of the College, and the manner in which they deploy resources, are guided by directional statements that align with the Corporate Plan. AMC R4 * That, in its efforts to attain university status, AMC seek to consolidate its leadership, planning and quality assurance efforts into a streamlined quality management system, and that, in so doing, it benchmarks against the leadership, planning and quality systems of successful dual-sector universities. AMC R5 * That AMC undertake a benchmarking exercise to compare its own suite of policies with those typically found in Australian universities, and use the gaps identified to help establish a policy development program. AMC R6 * That AMC (re)consider how the College’s strong industry relevance aligns with its strategy to substantially shift the emphasis away from VET toward Higher Education. AMC R10 * That AMC benchmark its accreditation process against that of several Australian universities with a view to bringing it into line with commonly accepted good practice. AMC R11 * That the Scholarships program be reviewed, particularly with a view to determining whether the College is receiving value for its own investment in the program. AMC R13 * That, with respect to staff working for both AMC and AMC Search Ltd, management establish a more transparent process for addressing potential conflicts of interests for staff and for allocating revenue-raising opportunities to suitable staff in an equitable fashion. AMC R19 * That AMC review its policies in respect of Intellectual Property and commercialisation. AMC R20 * That, as part of the planned development of a new strategic plan, agreement be reached on the form of reporting and performance indicators that will be regularly submitted to Council for monitoring purposes. Adelaide R1 * That the Academic Board strengthen its ability to maintain an oversight of the academic activities of the University and, in particular, assure the quality of teaching and learning activities. Particular attention to relationships between Academic Board and its sub-committees and the Faculty Boards is required. Adelaide R2 * That the recently constituted Faculty Boards develop, as a priority, effective mechanisms for monitoring the implementation of University policy within faculties and for assuring, in conjunction with the Academic Board, academic quality standards. Adelaide R3 * That current planning initiatives be given high priority with a view to an early adoption of a more systematic approach that seeks to integrate strategic and operational planning at University, faculty, school and divisional levels and that provides for a rigorous process of reporting on and monitoring performance against plans. Adelaide R6 * That, as part of the University’s current budget reform process, mechanisms be established to ensure increased levels of communication of budget outcomes and their rationale; and that the development and implementation of a staged devolution strategy that affords greater budgetary responsibility and accountability to Executive Deans and Heads of school be considered. Adelaide R7 * That further prioritisation of the planned improvements identified in the University’s self-assessment take place based on an assessment of the relative priorities of these within the context of the total quality framework and after consultation with faculties and divisions; and that, once priorities are agreed, the achievement of the planned improvements is actively monitored. Adelaide R8 * That priority be given to the development of a formal benchmarking framework, through which the University will be able to assess more accurately the achievement of its core objectives. Such a framework was under consideration by the University at the time of the audit. Adelaide R9 * That the University’s proposed post-implementation business planning being undertaken to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the new management information systems be given the highest priority by senior management and that, in undertaking that planning, the wider issues of governance, project management and change management associated with implementing the new administrative systems are taken into account. Adelaide R10 * That work proceed without delay on the development of a University-wide communication strategy that provides staff with substantive opportunities to provide feedback; and that, if it is to have a continuing role, the operations of the Communications Committee, particularly its contribution to supporting achievement of the strategy, be confirmed and progressed without further delay. Adelaide R14 * That the Council and University review the role and functions of the Joint Planning and Resources Committee in the context of the considerable additional time commitment required of the Council members serving on that Committee. SUT R1 * That, in developing a more systematic approach to external benchmarking, attention be paid to outcome, as well as input, measures. SUT R2 * That SUT encourage further discussion across the University of what is meant by entrepreneurship and assist staff to identify the ways in which this high-level strategic theme may be made more explicit in its learning and teaching activities and in research. There is considerable scope for the expertise of the Australian Graduate School of Entrepreneurship to be further harnessed in this regard. SUT R11 * That the roll-out of all Tactical Plans across all organisational units at the University of Canberra be closely monitored, to ensure that the objectives of the full range of Tactical Plans are being addressed in the Annual Operational Plan of each unit, especially those with university-wide or Divisional functional responsibilities. Canberra R1 * That the University of Canberra review the role, membership and the terms of reference of the Academic Board, and in the light of the increased devolution of responsibility for academic quality assurance to other bodies described in the Portfolio, consider strategies for involving the Board earlier, and more formally, in the Prospective Evaluation process. Canberra R2 * That the University of Canberra consider the implications of all the recommendations made in this report, as they apply to the University of Canberra Brisbane campus. Canberra R3 * That Council systematically examine its decision-making so as to ensure superior outcomes for the University. Macquarie R1 * That the University review its approach to the exercise of leadership, including such aspects as delegations of authority and business continuity planning. Macquarie R2 * That the University’s quality assurance model be further developed to provide a comprehensive model staff can use to improve the organisation, and that appropriate training in the application of the model be provided. Macquarie R3 * That the University rationalise its range of strategic statements to provide greater simplicity and clarity, and thereby increasing its usefulness. Macquarie R4 * That the planning framework be further developed to incorporate outcome-focused Divisional and Departmental plans based upon good practice planning guidelines, aligned with the University’s overall plan, and with regular reporting (e.g. annually), and that support be provided to persons responsible for preparing these plans to help ensure dissemination of good practice. Macquarie R5 * That the University develop a meta-system for operating and coordinating the various forms of reviews to ensure consistent and effective application. Macquarie R6 * That a policy management framework be developed to embed good practice in the development, approval, dissemination, implementation, monitoring and review of all policies. Macquarie R7 * That the University develop and implement a system for coordinating and controlling important documents. Macquarie R8 * That the University ensures that good practice guidelines for the governance and quality assurance of major projects are further developed and consistently applied, as appropriate throughout the University. Macquarie R9 * That UQ provide induction material and explicit student-oriented introductions for students who are appointed or elected to committees, boards and panels. UQ R1 * That UQ consider the best balance of membership of school review panels; and how to ensure that the recommendations of these panels are acted on. UQ R2 * That UQ undertake further structured benchmarking with peer institutions, in particular comparing processes and identifying examples of good practice as a stimulus to continual improvement. UQ R3 * That UQ address the need, revealed in its own self-review, to monitor the timely review of faculty and school centres. UQ R9 * That SCU continue work on developing its Quality System to ensure that feedback loops are closed post reviews in a timely manner; that there is greater clarity on performance indicators at both the institutional and operational levels; that more work is done in relation to performance benchmarking; and that the Management Information System is developed to manage quality information and data more effectively. SCU R1 * That SCU act to simplify and streamline the Planning and Quality System and take action to ensure there is not undue variation in compliance with quality policies and procedures across the University. SCU R2 * That SCU implement planned risk management strategies, within the context of the development of a more comprehensive and coherent approach to the assessment and management of risk across the University. SCU R3 * That the SCU Executive move forward with the stated intention to involve the Chair of Academic Board in meetings of the University Executive dealing with academic matters, and that the Chair of Academic Board be more broadly involved in academic strategic planning with the University Executive. SCU R4 * That, in conjunction with the tri-sector partners, SCU should undertake a high-level strategic review of the best means to provide higher education activity at the Coffs Harbour shared campus as a matter of urgency; and factor the review findings into the strategic planning process. SCU R9 * That the University actively seek ways that staff may be more involved in the development of the institution through participation in committees and advisory groups. UNDA R1 * That the University re-evaluate the nature of its relationship with NDUS in order to identify the benefits that accrue to it currently and are expected to do so in future years. UNDA R2 * That the Board of Governors consider the establishment of an internal function as a means of strengthening its capacity to meet its statutory obligations as the University develops. UNDA R3 * That the University review the respective roles and functions of the Board of Trustees, Board of Governors and Executive Committee with a view to developing a model of corporate governance and management that will sustain the University’s ongoing development in the Australian higher education sector. UNDA R4 * That, as part of the recommended review of the committees structure, the University give strong consideration to introducing systematic mechanisms by which the general body of staff and students can actively participate in decision-making within the institution. UNDA R5 * That the University consider working to a Strategic Plan that is based upon a three to five year planning cycle and that the revised Plan more clearly prioritise the University’s objectives across its range of activities and identify accompanying performance indicators. Each college should develop a plan consistent with the aims and objectives of the University’s Strategic Plan. UNDA R7 * That the University consider some further refining of the functions of the Office of Quality management so that the Office is able to support an effective performance management system based on the University’s existing PIER quality management framework. UNDA R8 * That the University formalises its performance monitoring system, a framework for external benchmarking across all areas of activity be instituted. UNDA R9 * That the draft Teaching and Learning Plan be finalised as quickly as possible and that attention then be focused on ensuring that it is effectively implemented and that progress against appropriate targets is monitored. UNDA R10 * That the University reconsider the roles and functions of the various committees related to teaching and learning with a view to clarifying their roles and functions, especially in relation to quality management of the University as a whole. UNDA R11 * That the Office of Quality Management give high priority to further activities that will assist staff to consider the pedagogical aspects of their teaching. This is a particular priority for those staff without prior teaching experience or training. UNDA R12 * That the terms of reference of the college Advisory Board be reviewed to enable Boards to play a role beyond the provision of course advice in policy and planning issues of the colleges and to have a sustained role in the academic activities of the colleges and to maintain links with professional associations. UNDA R13 * That the University, and particularly the Academic Council, give greater attention to establishing mechanisms that allow it to ensure that appropriate academic standards are maintained. UNDA R14 * That the University consider the means by which it plans to measure the effectiveness of the Institute of Natural Resources in meeting its objectives and the University’s high-level research development goals as part of the policy paper under preparation. UNDA R20 * That RMIT University communicate more effectively the reporting relationships and lines of accountability, responsibility, authority and delegation within each of the Pro Vice-Chancellor portfolios and ensure that line management is used effectively to implement policy and monitor progress towards institutional objectives. RMIT R1 * That in reaching a decision on the future role of faculties and their functions, RMIT University ensure that a comprehensive change and risk management framework is developed, including adequate and appropriate consultation with staff, so that the change can be undertaken in a considered way, without undue confusion, delay or disruption. RMIT R2 * That RMIT University reconsider the manner in which its TAFE sector is represented in the senior executive to ensure that its position is in accord with the aim of close integration between the two sectors. RMIT R3 * That, as identified through internal review reports, senior management take action to simplify and consolidate the quality management system and related performance monitoring processes to ensure that only those demonstrated to add value to RMIT University’s activities are retained. RMIT R4 * That RMIT University adopt a standard process and approach for assessing and managing major risks associated with key change initiatives such as further expansion, restructuring and technological change. RMIT R5 * That, as also identified by RMIT University’s self-review, attention be directed at improving communication with staff. Important areas for improvement include providing increased opportunities for all staff to input into strategic developments and policy making and to be kept informed as change is implemented. RMIT R6 * That as RMIT University considers proposals for restructuring, the academic linking and co-ordinating functions currently played by the faculty Associate Deans (Academic) be maintained in an appropriate form. RMIT R8 * That RMIT University continue its work to simplify the Program Quality Assurance system to facilitate its acceptance by staff as a useful tool and ensure that it assists them in ongoing improvement of their teaching and learning. RMIT R9 * That RMIT University increase the opportunities for students to interact meaningfully with policy development and decision-making at all levels. RMIT R18 * That, in keeping with the objective to measure its performance against the ‘Top 10’ universities in Australia, Griffith University ensure that it undertakes sufficient and appropriate external comparisons. The University has itself identified the need for more, and more formalised, external comparisons. Griffith R1 * That Griffith University give further attention to embedding its quality management system in a systematic way throughout the University. Griffith R2 * That Griffith University clarify the roles and responsibilities of senior staff in the faculty and support service division review processes and ensure that there is a common understanding of how the review systems will contribute to the University’s commitments to continuous quality improvement and accountability. Griffith R3 * That, having regard for ensuring high quality academic governance, The University of Western Australia consider clarifying the relationship between the Academic Board and the Academic Council in terms of their respective responsibilities and purpose. UWA R1 * That The University of Western Australia strengthen implementation of the Cycle of Accountability in terms of its planning processes at the Faculty and School levels, and the alignment of these plans with the University-level plans, as it has foreshadowed in its plans for completing the organisational restructure. UWA R2 * That The University of Western Australia’s policy framework identify more clearly the scope for flexibility in the interpretation of, and compliance with, each policy, and ensure the efficacy of this enhanced framework through more effective accountability systems. UWA R3 * That The University of Western Australia clarify assignment of the responsibilities and accountabilities of its Risk Management Plan, as it completes the development of the Plan. UWA R4 * That The University of Western Australia improve its document control systems to ensure the status, origin and currency of all key documents is clear, thereby enhancing the reliance that may be placed on their contents. UWA R5 * That the University of New England finalise its policy framework ensuring that it, inter alia, clearly defines the loci for setting various policies, the degree of flexibility in policy interpretation and implementation, and corresponding accountabilities. UNE R1 * That the University of New England improve its planning and monitoring system through greater alignment of clear and concise local and central plans and increased use of targets and accountabilities to help provide greater focus and to enable robust monitoring against stated goals and objectives. UNE R2 * That the University of New England further develop its system of management information reporting for Deans, Heads of Schools and other managers of organisational units, to assist them in more effectively managing progress toward strategic objectives. UNE R3 * That the University of New England implement effective quality control procedures for the branding and marketing of all activities with which the University is associated, directly and via partners. UNE R4 * That UniSA provide a clear definition of benchmarking, and provide assistance to divisions and units in identifying, collecting and interpreting benchmarking data. UniSA R1 * That UniSA investigate, develop and use a greater range of relevant outcomes indicators to track progress towards its desired outcomes. UniSA R2 * That in order to achieve its aims in internationalisation in teaching, research and service, UniSA identify more specific performance indicators and targets, and strategies for achieving them. UniSA R5 * That UniSA clarify the relationship between schools and research institutes, centres and groups, and resolve a number of related organisational issues. UniSAR6 * That all actions identified in the Consolidated Action Plans resulting from the University’s self-review and trial audit be integrated into the JCU Operational Plan 2004-2006, with specific performance targets identified in future operational plans. JCU R1 * That JCU introduce a systematic cyclical program to review the performance of schools, faculties and divisions; and introduce a system for the regular review of important University-wide functions and processes. JCU R3 * That JCU and JCU Singapore liaise closely to ensure that the quality management systems being developed at each location are harmonised in order to work effectively, both separately and together. JCU R4 * That JCU assign responsibility at a senior level for the review of all existing and proposed mechanisms for student feedback and that these be streamlined, made comprehensive across campuses and locations, and be timed so as to regularly seek information from students on their levels of satisfaction with all aspects of their experience at JCU, including academic matters. JCU R11 * That JCU, in line with its ‘Integration’ Priority Objective, regularly undertake and review results from staff surveys, including a focus on the quality of services provided within the University, and on organisational climate, as part of the University’s Quality Assurance System. JCU R16 * That Edith Cowan University augment its line management accountabilities and periodic reviews with cross-institutional methods of ongoing monitoring. ECU R1 * That Edith Cowan University establish procedures to ensure that its academic quality assurance processes apply consistently across all its campuses. ECU R2 * That Edith Cowan University ensure its Course and Unit Review system is implemented consistently throughout the University. ECU R3 * AUQA recommends that in responding to cross-portfolio issues the University has identified as fundamentally important to the institution, CSU management assign responsibility for formulating and implementing a co-ordinated strategy to address each issue including guiding the various elements of the University in the roles they are expected to play in the solution. CSU R1 * AUQA recommends that CSU further develop its planning and review cycle to include an explicit link to the organisationally recognised driver of quality; namely, improvement. CSU R2 * AUQA recommends that CSU formalise its expectations around use of the term ‘review’ including how it is distinguished from ‘monitoring’ and develop guidelines on initiation, frequency, process, use of external input and follow-up of reviews for both academic and service areas of the University. Clarification is also required of the definition and intent of ‘benchmarking’. CSU R3 * AUQA recommends that CSU clarify for all staff the intended role to be played by Academic Senate in fostering collegial discussion and debate and in leading academic policy development and monitoring. Senate’s formal relationship to Council with respect to governing and assuring the quality of the University’s academic activities also needs to be clarified. CSU R4 * AUQA recommends that Academic Senate reconsider the various mechanisms it has in place for assuring the quality of teaching and learning within CSU to ensure that they are able to effectively and efficiently support continuous improvement of the University’s academic activities. CSU R5 * AUQA recommends that the Learning and Teaching Committee give priority to implementing the University’s Learning and Teaching Plan and ensuring that faculty operational plans align more closely to this Plan. CSU R6 * AUQA recommends that CSU maintain a central schedule of five-yearly course and other reviews that takes account of external requirements such as professional accreditation and that can be used to ensure that all required reviews are completed. CSU R8 * AUQA recommends that CSU establish a more rigorous process for ensuring that subject outlines comply with University policy both in the nature of their content and their currency. CSU R9 * AUQA recommends that CSU Academic Senate develop, as a priority, more effective mechanisms for ensuring the consistent implementation within faculties of University policy for assuring academic quality and standards across all delivery modes and locations. CSU R10 * AUQA recommends that CSU recognise and support more appropriately the work being undertaken by the various groups within the Faculty of Commerce and the Faculty of Science and Agriculture to develop and strengthen the entirety of the University’s activities with third party providers. CSU R16 * AUQA recommends that CSU adopt a risk-oriented approach in the scheduling of its evaluation of current third party providers and that it develop more effective tools for the evaluation of prospective third-party teaching partners and agents and devise appropriate formal approval protocols. CSU R17 * AUQA recommends that the University of Sydney establish a comprehensive planning framework that sets out clear expectations for plans at different levels, including how they interrelate, and that appropriate assistance be provided to the managers responsible for developing, implementing and reporting against the plans. Sydney R1 * AUQA recommends that the University of Sydney improve coordination of student representation on University boards and committees, in order to improve the effectiveness of student input into University deliberations. Sydney R2 * AUQA recommends that the University of Sydney develop a systematic approach to risk management that includes, inter alia, periodic executive-level reporting of all major strategic and operational risks and risk mitigation strategies. Sydney R3 * AUQA recommends that the University of Sydney develop and embed systems for ensuring effective business continuity across all major areas of activity. Sydney R4 * UQA recommends that the specification of membership of the Bond University Council be amended to require that there be at least one councillor, in addition to the Vice-Chancellor, who has substantial experience as a senior academic in Australia or a comparable higher education system. Bond R1 * AUQA recommends that Bond University ensure that its governance and management processes enable academic representatives to play a substantive role in the academic affairs of the University, and in recommending to Council on significant academic initiatives. Bond R2 * AUQA recommends that Bond University’s faculty processes be made more consistent across the University, following identification of where the best practices lie, and that the remaining differences be explicitly justified by reference to academic or organisational advantage. Bond R3 * AUQA recommends that Bond University ensure the continuation and effectiveness of the quality system structures, including the Quality Task Force, the position of Pro Vice-Chancellor (Quality) and the quality representatives. Bond R4 * AUQA recommends that Bond University reflect on what it wishes to achieve from the Balanced Scorecard in the longer term, with a view to setting realistic aspirations and cascading it down only to areas that are large or complex enough for it to be cost-effective. Bond R5 * AUQA recommends that Bond University specify with more precision and a consistent level of detail the actions that result from the outworking of the Balanced Scorecard, so that performance over time can be monitored more readily. Bond R6 * AUQA recommends that Bond University revisit the large number of proposed actions that arose from the Self-Review, in order to ensure that they are prioritised and that the high priority ones have the best possible chance of achievement. Bond R7 * AUQA recommends that the Council and the Vice-Chancellor of Bond University give priority to establishing a peer group of institutions for the purposes of strategic and performance benchmarking at institutional and program levels. Bond R8 * AUQA recommends that if Bond University makes public statements about its student/staff ratio (SSR), it do so by reference to standard definitions of SSR or explicitly say on each occasion that it calculates SSRs in a different way from public universities. Bond R9 * AUQA recommends that the Deakin University Academic Board ensure that the Chairs and members of its committees are assisted in developing an improved understanding of their important quality assurance roles. Deakin R2 * AUQA recommends that Deakin University consider unification of rules or guidelines for implementation of University policies that acknowledges and allows for contextual differences. Deakin R3 * A UQA recommends that La Trobe University establish formal mechanisms for regularly reviewing the performance of the Vice-Chancellor and the Council. LTU R1 * AUQA recommends that La Trobe University develop a comprehensive framework for the development, approval, dissemination, monitoring and review of policies that takes into account appropriate delegations to faculties and campuses. LTU R2 * AUQA recommends that in the further development of the Policy on Corporate Reviews QUT set appropriate timelines for the implementation of review recommendations and increase transparency of the planned actions. QUT R1 * AUQA recommends that QUT reinforce University Academic Board’s strategic role in relation to the Blueprint objectives and the strategic and operational planning framework with the purpose of ensuring that University Academic Board provides strategic leadership on academic issues. QUT R2 * AUQA recommends that QUT strengthen the induction and training program for members of Council and University Academic Board and that QUT works with the Student Guild to ensure that the induction process has a major focus on the students’ needs. QUT R3 * AUQA recommends that CDU develop its approach to communications, to ensure that decisions and information about changes are communicated to staff and that their views are heard by the leadership group. CDU R2 * AUQA recommends that CDU consider the introduction of a Council Finance Committee distinct from a separate Audit Committee. CDU R3 * AUQA notes CDU’s recognition of tensions between the faculties and the IAS and recommends that these tensions be addressed by senior management, before they become embedded. CDU R8 * AUQA recommends that CDU clarify the concepts of business development for staff, and provide suitable training, incentives and reward for their attempts to carry it out. CDU R12 * AUQA recommends that CDU review the finance area, providing training as necessary, with a view to providing more effective support to the schools and faculties. CDU R15 * AUQA recommends that the responsibilities and membership of the University Academic Board be reviewed against the Board’s Terms of Reference to ensure that the Board can effectively comply with these. UoM R1 * AUQA recommends that UoM develop a strategy for increasing the demand for courses at its regional campuses, and for enhancing the recruitment of students to these campuses. UoM R2 * AUQA recommends that UoM ensure that the meaning of the presence of the UoM crest on Universitas 21 Global degree parchment (and within Universitas 21 Global promotional materials) is unambiguously and clearly communicated to current and prospective Universitas 21 Global students. UoM R8 * AUQA recommends that UoM clarify the responsibilities and the division of labour between the Quality Assurance Accountability Committee and the Teaching and Learning Quality Assurance Committee in order to ensure consistency between the understading of the roles of the committees and their Terms of Reference. UoM R10 * AUQA recommends that UoM review the design (ie questions and rating scales), delivery schedules, response rates and follow-up of its survey instruments, in order to ensure that the results of the surveys more actively contribute to the establishment of a culture of continuous improvement. UoM R11 * AUQA recommends that UoM add to the present rolling cycle of departmental audits routinely scheduled assessments carried out by panels which comprise external discipline academic expertise, to provide an independent appraisal of the quality of each department’s teaching and research activities. UoM R13 * AUQA recommends that UoM take steps to promote a university-wide understanding of the ways in which benchmarking can be used effectively as a quality assurance tool, and encourage the broader use of process benchmarking to identify best practice, rather than a focus on the statistical comparison of numerical outcome measures. UoM R14 * AUQA recommends that, to ensure the momentum gathered from the self-review activities leading up to the AUQA Audit is not lost, UTAS consider whether to now adopt a more fully-articulated ‘Quality System’, one that extends beyond the current description of the ‘PIRI’ quality improvement loop. UTas R1 * In affirming MCD’s decision to establish a single Academic Board, AUQA recommends that the new Academic Board be responsible for determining the structure and terms of reference for its subcommittees; and that MCD clarify the relationship of these subcommittees to the new Recognised Teaching Institutions and other MCD decision-making bodies, including the relationship between the MCD Academic Board and academic boards (or equivalent) located in the new Recognised Teaching Institutions. MCD R1 * AUQA recommends that MCD explore opportunities to leverage existing relationships with universities (viz. Australian Catholic University, University of Melbourne, and Monash University) to access regular and high-level training for research supervisors; professional development for staff; and opportunities for joint research. MCD R2 * AUQA recommends that MCD seek to establish external benchmarking processes in order that objective judgements can be made about the quality of the College’s research, teaching and learning. MCD R3 * AUQA recommends that MCD adopt a strategic-planning framework which inter alia harmonises the development of the MCD Strategic Plan with the development of the MCD Teaching and Learning Management Plan, and a new research and research training plan. MCD R4 2 Teaching and Learning Including programmes, courses, teaching, learning assessment, teaching staff Commendations * AUQA commends USQ for operating a system of reaccreditation to ensure that its programs remain valid and viable. USQ C2 * AUQA commends USQ for its achievements and successes in the area of flexible learning, and particularly in its robust processing systems for DE materials. USQ C3 * ACU is commended for including input from a wide range of internal and external sources in unit design and in course development and review. ACU C6 * AUQA commends ACU for the introduction by one faculty of sample cross-marking by other universities, as a means of ensuring comparability of standards, and the recent extension of this scheme. ACU C7 * AUQA commends Curtin for the explicit attention it has given to generic attributes of graduates, in line with objectives in its Mission and Goals. CUT C5 * AUQA commends the Learning Effectiveness Alliance Program (LEAP) as an excellent initiative, not only in the actual learning processes and improvements from its 13 projects, but also in the collaborative team approach to the projects, and the dissemination of the learning from the projects across the University. CUT C6 * AUQA commends the development of the Teaching Quality Index by the Division of Engineering and Science as a means of rewarding teaching performance in an analogous way to that in which research performance is rewarded, thereby achieving a balance in performance-based funding of the two core activities of teaching and research. CUT C7 * AUQA commends UB for its initiative in establishing the Ballarat Technology Park, and thereby creating opportunities for students to gain industry experience. UB C6 * AUQA commends the University for adopting a transparent and responsive approach to its composite student questionnaire. UN C6 * AUQA commends the University for being at the forefront of problem-based learning (PBL). UN C7 * AUQA commends the University for developing an innovative University Industry Scholarship Scheme that provides benefits to the University, local industries and students. UN C 13 * AUQA commends the University for providing strong backing for its exchange agreements, thereby supporting its teaching and learning goals. UN C15 * AUQA commends AMC for the establishment of Academic Liaison Committees in the programs at Beauty Point. AMC C12 * AUQA commends the University for initiating and responding rapidly to the external review of its central learning and teaching support services. Adelaide C6 * AUQA commends SUT for its Industry-Based Learning program, which is assisting it in achieving the objective of providing programs with an applied orientation. SUT C3 * AUQA commends the University of Canberra for the overall level of care that it displays in providing a supportive, inclusive, and nurturing learning and teaching environment for its students, both local and residential, and domestic & international. Canberra C4 * AUQA commends the University of Canberra’s centre for the Enhancement of Learning Teaching and Scholarship and its support of academic development, research supervision, innovative teaching & learning, using flexible learning, the use of WebCT for online development, and, for its induction programs for newly appointed academic staff. Canberra C8 * AUQA commends the University of Canberra’s Academic Skills Program, for the consistently high regard in which its services are held by students. Canberra C9 * AUQA commends Macquarie University for the strong support it receives from staff and students about the flexibility of the structure of its programs, for its ongoing commitment to developing approaches to flexible learning, and for the progress it has made in using innovative technologies to enhance student learning. Macquarie C5 * AUQA commends Macquarie University for the range of initiatives, both formal and informal, that it has in place for promoting good teaching practice. Macquarie C6 * AUQA commends the systematic process undertaken by UQ to map and embed graduate attributes in all curricula, and the associated support provided by the Teaching and Educational Development Institute. UQ C7 * AUQA commends UQ for the effective Teaching Quality Appraisal funding scheme that has been in place for a number of years, and the intent to revise the parameters to achieve further improvement. UQ C8 * AUQA commends UQ for the extensive attention to continuous quality improvement in many aspects of teaching and learning. UQ C9 * AUQA commends the contributions of the Teaching and Educational Development Institute (TEDI) and the University Staff Development Committee (USDC) for their roles in the support for teaching and learning and in staff development. UQ C15 * AUQA commends SCU for the development and purposeful deployment of the MySCU system for online and flexible learning. SCU C5 * AUQA commends SCU for the use made of single unit assessors in the unit coordination process, including the moderation of assessment, to ensure consistency in the quality of programs, both on-shore and off-shore. SCU C6 * AUQA commends SCU, and in particular the Teaching & Learning Centre in providing leadership and effective support, for the development of a coherent and team-based, integrated approach to the design, production and distribution of courseware, and associated support and training for academic staff. SCU C7 * AUQA commends the University for the system of college Advisory Boards that are particularly effective in the early stages of curriculum design in ensuring that professional, industry and employer groups have input into course and unit development. UNDA C4 * AUQA commends those colleges operating on both Fremantle and Broome campuses for specifically attending to the means by which the equivalence of the courses might be assured. UNDA C5 * AUQA commends the commitment and dedication of RMIT University’s teaching staff and the evident care that most staff show in supporting, as effectively as they are able, the learning of their students. RMIT C2 * AUQA commends Griffith University for the improvements in a number of teaching-related outcome indicators. Griffith C6 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for the effectiveness of its strategies and processes for both recruiting and retaining outstanding students. UWA C7 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for the Teaching Internship Program for postgraduate students. UWA C8 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for its CATLyst network, which continues to grow in importance and impact in relation to the University’s flexible teaching and learning and developments. UWA C9 * AUQA commends the University of New England for its approach to the incorporation of graduate attributes in its teaching and programs in a manner specifically designed to benefit all NUE students. UNE C5 * AUQA commends the University of New England for ensuring that knowledge of plagiarism policies is well embedded within the academic community. UNE C6 * AUQA commends the University of New England’s Teaching and Learning Centre for its series of publications that provide academic staff with valuable guidance for teaching in accordance with the strategic direction of the University. UNE C7 * AUQA commends the University of New England for its Technology Passport and eSKILLS UNE systems, which provide valuable learning support for students. UNE C8 * AUQA commends the University of New England for the positive teaching and learning relationship between staff and students, demonstrated informally through interactions and formally through such mechanisms as the CEQ. UNE C10 * AUQA commends UniSA for the successful achievement of its goal of providing flexible delivery models. UniSA C5 * AUQA commends UniSA for its thorough system of course and program evaluation and review. UniSA C6 * AUQA commends the highly-valued services provided to both students and staff by the Flexible Learning Centre. UniSA C13 * AUQA Commends the Academic Board of JCU for sustaining an appropriate balance between consistency and flexibility in the processes used to accredit and review course proposals which enables staff to customise courses and course materials to meet regional, international and Indigenous needs. JCU C4 * AUQA commends JCU for nurturing a student-centred teaching and learning culture and environment. JCU C5 * AUQA commends the JCU Mentoring Program for first-year students and the Induction to Teaching and Learning program offered to new academic staff by the Teaching and Learning Development group. JCU C6 * AUQA commends JCU for having put an appropriate Quality Assurance framework in place in the form of the management of Off-Campus Academic Programs Policy. JCU C7 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for the effectiveness of its newly delegated course approval processes. ECU C6 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for its effective use of Unit Plans, which supplement Unit Outlines with information valued by students. ECU C7 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for the extent to which it has thoroughly embedded information from the Unit and Teaching Evaluation Instrument into its quality assurance processes such as Unit Reviews, Management for Performance, Promotion and Performance Funding. ECU C8 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for developing and providing tangible support for its Work-Based Learning programs, which are aligned with the University’s strategic themes and Key Graduate Attributes. ECU C10 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for demonstrating improvements to its quality assurance processes in relation to bilingual activities in light of its experiences in this area. ECU C13 * AUQA commends the University of Sydney for seeking to raise the standard of teaching by requiring all new academic staff to participate in appropriate professional development. Sydney C8 * AUQA commends the University of Sydney’s Faculty of Science for its Talented Students Program, which is an innovative means of ensuring that the most academically able students are able to study at a pace commensurate with their potential. Sydney C9 * AUQA commends the University of Sydney for its Assessment and Examination of Coursework resolution, which provides clear, detailed and sound advice to academic staff and appears to be an effective step in guiding assessment and examination practices. Sydney C10 * AUQA commends Bond University for achieving its goal of maintaining a low student/staff ratio and small tutorial class sizes. Bond C4 * AUQA commends Bond University for the high level of satisfaction expressed by students in the staff and the teaching. Bond C5 * AUQA commends Bond University for addressing its goal of being client-focused by offering students the standard option of a three-semester year. Bond C6 * AUQA commends Bond University for the effective implementation of a Core Curriculum of courses for all undergraduate students, which assists in the development of graduate attributes. Bond C7 * AUQA commends Deakin University for its support of the Online Teaching and Learning Fellowship Program which is an innovative and successful strategy for supporting those staff with an interest in further extending the use of online technologies in their teaching. Deakin C2 * AUQA commends La Trobe University for the manner in which those involved with nursing education are collaborating across campuses to achieve full integration and consistency in their academic offerings, providing an exemplar for other disciplines to follow. LTU C4 * AUQA commends La Trobe University for its ‘subject packs’, which provide a comprehensive set of subject and teaching resources to promote good practice and help ensure consistency across subject instances. LTU C5 * AUQA commends La Trobe University for examples of course advisory committees being used very effectively in enhancing the appropriateness of courses to the needs of relevant external communities while maintaining academic standards. LTU C6 * AUQA commends QUT for having been successful in increasing its cross-disciplinary and cross-faculty teaching activities. QUT C5 * AUQA commends QUT for the successful implementation of the rigorous process of reports on courses and review of courses. QUT C6 * AUQA commends CDU for the emerging co-ordinated attention to academic and resource considerations within the course accreditation process. CDU C3 * AUQA commends CDU for the introduction of Alternative Exit Awards. CDU C4 * AUQA commends CDU’s commitment to learning and teaching as signalled by, inter alia, the senior appointment of a leader in this area. CDU C5 * AUQA commends the development of CDU’s Learning Precinct, which is gaining positive feedback from students. CDU C13 * AUQA commends UoM for having developed a variety of complementary approaches to recognise and reward high quality teaching. UoM C14 * AUQA commends UTAS for the processes of planning and review related to T&L provision, through mechanisms such as comprehensive and well integrated school and course review processes, and through an increase in the performance based funding of the teaching component of the University’s budget. UTas C4 * AUQA commends UTAS for the mechanisms in place for supporting, enhancing, and rewarding teaching practice as evidenced from the implementation of the Teaching Development Fund and introduction of the teaching excellence and merit awards. UTas C6 * AUQA commends UTAS for the evident commitment to assuring quality teaching and learning and active consideration of student feedback through the use of the Student Evaluation of Teaching and Learning ‘agreed norm’ in delineating, implementing and reporting improvement strategies in unit teaching and learning. UTas C5 * AUQA commends the initiative at Trinity College to offer courses in Divinity and Theology online, and acknowledges it as an exemplar for the further spread of online learning through MCD. MCD C5 * AUQA commends MCD for the embedded nature of and widespread commitment to the objective of encouraging ecumenical values in the MCD curriculum. MCD C6 * AUQA commends MCD for achieving a high level of student satisfaction which reflects the very strong commitment of the Associated Teaching Institutions and their Faculty to the teaching and learning process and a commitment to the improvement of the student experience. MCD C8 Affirmations * That UniSA continue to develop its conceptualisation of graduate qualities by investigating strategies to measure their level of achievement, both during the program and after graduation. UniSA A2 * That UniSA make more systematic use of stakeholder input in program evaluation. Enhancing the effectiveness of divisional advisory boards may assist with both this and other aspects of external advice and input. UniSA A3 * That UniSA address issues relating to the equivalence of assessment between transnational and domestic versions of the same program. UniSA A5 * That JCU implement the Consolidated Action Plan in relation to SFS/SFT and CEQ/GDS; to increase student participation, use data systematically and to be able to properly monitor and improve outcomes in relation to Teaching and Learning. JCU A1 * AUQA affirms CSU’s intention to require systematic external input for both course approval and course review and that this input be documented. CSU A2 * AUQA affirms CSU’s recognition of the need to formalise and systematise the manner in which student evaluation information of subjects, courses and teaching is collected and, more importantly, acted upon, so as to achieve the University’s objective of continuous improvement. CSU A3 * AUQA affirms that the University of Sydney’s development and use of graduate attributes, for both undergraduate and postgraduate courses, is still in early stages and requires further attention. Sydney A2 * AUQA affirms the need for the University of Sydney to ensure that changes in a unit’s mode of delivery are subject to an approval process that addresses all resourcing and pedagogic implications. Sydney A3 * AUQA affirms the University’s decision to establish a curriculum committee for the Centre for Continuing Education to ensure that the standard of courses offered through the Centre is commensurate with the University’s good standing. Sydney A4 * AUQA affirms the need for Bond University to enhance its processes for the approval and monitoring of academic programs. Bond A2 * AUQA affirms the need for Bond University to review its processes for assessment, including moderation and benchmarking, so that it is better able to make unequivocal statements about graduate standards. Bond A4 * AUQA affirms that La Trobe University needs to ensure that uptake of its Graduate Attributes scheme is systematic throughout the University. LTU A5 * AUQA affirms that La Trobe University needs to ensure that the Quality Assurance of Subjects system is implemented consistently throughout the University, including for its online and offshore courses. LTU A6 * AUQA affirms La Trobe University’s plans to promote greater use of its Student Evaluation of Teaching survey, but particularly so that more staff will seek and act upon student feedback on their teaching through a system that may provide for benchmarking and professional support. LTU A8 * AUQA affirms QUT’s efforts to further integrate the virtual and physical teaching environments and focus on developing OLT into a system aimed at enhancing the teaching and learning environment. QUT A2 * AUQA affirms CDU’s recognition that there is a need for a wider understanding of the Teaching and Learning Operational Priorities Plan, the way it addresses institutional objectives for teaching and learning, and how strategies and actions are aligned to the objectives. CDU A1 * AUQA affirms CDU’s recognition of the need for the Teaching and Learning Development Group to have a greater focus on professional development for academic staff. CDU A2 * AUQA affirms CDU’s intent to restate graduate attributes and review the curriculum in terms of their achievement. CDU A3 * AUQA affirms CDU’s work on VET/HE articulation and the need to ensure that staff and students are made aware of the mechanisms for, possibilities of and benefits of articulation between HE and VET courses. CDU A4 * AUQA affirms CDU’s intent to make greater use of student evaluations in achieving improvement. CDU A5 * AUQA affirms the UTAS initiatives designed to improve the use of videoconferencing in teaching and learning. UTas A5 * While noting the work being done to embed and evaluate graduate attributes in certain sections of the University, AUQA observes that progress is variable across the UTAS curriculum and affirms the need for further attention to implementation. UTas A4 * AUQA affirms UTAS plans to develop a more strategic relationship between the Flexible Education Unit, heads of school and deans. UTas A3 * AUQA affirms the use of a standard student evaluation form for coursework study across all Recognised Teaching Institutions and all fields of study. MCD A3 * AUQA affirms the decision by MCD to commit to undertake a systematic, cyclic review of units to consolidate the present review processes. MCD A4 * AUQA affirms the MCD decision to review the BTheol with an emphasis on: greater consistency of content; assessment and learning outcomes; and the potential for rationalisation in delivery, especially in the third year of the program. MCD A5 * AUQA affirms the need for MCD to undertake yearly course completion reports, and to monitor student retention/drop out rates. MCD A10 Recommendations * That ACU review its current approach to evaluation, and systematically implement procedures for obtaining student feedback on teaching and learning, with data relating separately to unit design and teaching quality, and in such a way that data is comparable between different units and different occasions and campuses on which a unit is offered, and is available to heads of school for consistency and other quality assurance purposes. ACU R10 * That ACU regularly review ACUcom to ensure that the courses it conducts are of appropriate academic standard, and are consistent with ACU’s Mission. ACU R13 * That the teaching/research nexus be addressed explicitly, and possibly as part of a formal approach taken to the implementation of the learning paradigm. ACU R15 * That USQ undertake evaluative studies of student performance and responds to this information in its strategic decision-making. USQ R4 * That USQ consider using the Faculty of Engineering and Surveying project as a blueprint for inculcating “Attributes of a USQ Graduate” into its other programs. USQ R5 * That USQ consider the possibility of assigning multidisciplinary course teams to all courses, and that these teams have an ongoing responsibility for the courses, whether they are currently being reaccredited or not. USQ R6 * That, with respect to its reaccreditation process, USQ consider: (a) whether seven years is an appropriate time frame given the fast pace of change in some disciplines and markets; and (b) incorporating a formal requirement for external review to inform the reaccreditation process. USQ R7 * That USQ establish a systematic plan to ensure consistency and ongoing communication among all Distance Education tutors (both onshore and offshore) prior to and throughout the delivery of a course. USQ R9 * That USQ review whether the role and methods of moderators, as developed in respect of courses where the examiners are usq staff members, are appropriate when applied in respect of courses where the examiners are not USQ staff members. USQ R11 * That USQ take steps to ensure students are receiving accurate, consistent and sufficient information concerning the accreditation status of the programs in which they are intending to enrol, having regards to their local context and reasonable suppositions. USQ R14 * That in view of the Teaching & Learning Plan target of ‘Curtin-endorsed graduate attributes incorporated into all courses/units’, full implementation of the relevant aspects of the course proposal process be ensured. CUT R12 * That ways be considered of accelerating the approval process for new courses. CUT R13 * That Curtin satisfy itself in a systematic way that it has adequate and comprehensive mechanisms for ensuring standards, and that these mechanisms are effectively applied. CUT R14 * That Curtin develop efficient mechanisms for tapping student opinion, translating the feedback into action, and informing students of outcomes and changes made. CUT R15 * That since the teaching / research nexus is an important part of Curtin’s goals, its implications and implementation be more clearly articulated. CUT R19 * That Academic Board and the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Research) ensure that schools comply with the policy requiring the annual preparation and presentation of course reports. UB R10 * That once the proposed changes to the five-yearly course review process have been further considered by Academic Board, and agreement has been reached, the Board ensures that they are implemented. UB R11 * That UB proceed without delay with its planned review of the methods of assessment of teaching quality. UB R12 * That UB ensure that it has full control of the entry of students to its on-shore offcampus programs. UB R14 * That UB implement an effective mechanism for systematically assessing the teaching being carried out in its courses by staff of local partner organizations. UB R15 * That UB, through its Academic Board, develop moderation protocols for use in arrangements where UB courses are being delivered off-campus by external partners and ensure these protocols are appropriately applied. UB R17 * That the promotional material for UB degrees clearly state the different course structures in the different locations. UB R19 * That the comparative progress of students in different cohorts (whether on-campus, off-campus or off-shore) be routinely monitored so as to ensure the equivalence of UB’s teaching with that of its partners. UB R18 * That the university, having identified disparities in degree rules across its campuses at the time of the audit visit, attend to these as a matter of urgency should they still be outstanding. UN R4 * That the university develop a clear policy to guide teaching in different pedagogic frameworks, specifically tafe and higher education. UN R5 * That, owing to the potentially significant resource and pedagogic implications, the university consider enforcing formal approval for changing a course’s mode and location of delivery. UN R7 * That the academic senate review the university’s articulation arrangements, especially regarding community colleges, with a view to establishing a comprehensive approval and monitoring system and schedule. UN R8 * That the university establish a source of leadership for providing overall co-ordination of the development of the university’s courses and programs online. UN R9 * That the university review its strategic intentions regarding maintaining a leadership role in the theory and praxis of problem-based learning, and consider whether the new arrangements for problarc are conducive to achieving these intentions. UN R10 * That AMC proceed with establishing its Teaching and Learning Committee, and that its mission be accorded the highest priority and resourced appropriately, particularly in terms of pedagogic expertise. AMC R7 * That, in line with good practice for Australian universities, the deployment of the Student Evaluation of Teaching and Learning program should be carefully monitored, with a view to ensuring that the described procedures are consistently implemented across all academic areas. AMC R8 * That AMC seek to align the academic and service providers associated with distance education and online delivery, such as the relevant academic staff, Library, ICTS, Distance Education staff and the (proposed) Centre for Flexible Learning, and systemically evaluate outcomes from distance education and online provision. AMC R12 * That work proceed without delay on the planned review of the criteria and accountabilities for the review of academic programs and that a revised schedule be developed to include those programs approved prior to 2000. Adelaide R20 * That the Academic Board, as a matter of urgency, establish at the institutional level a comprehensive process by which it may assure itself that the University’s undergraduate pass and honours degrees are of comparable standard in terms of content, scope and evaluation criteria with those of other Australian and overseas universities. Adelaide R21 * That the University further develop its range of other mechanisms to complement the ‘LEAP’ initiative in order to promote the sharing of good practice in approaches to learning, teaching and curriculum development. Adelaide R22 * That, as signalled in the Performance Portfolio, the University develop a system for systematic monitoring and reporting of the results of student evaluations of teaching and for providing feedback to students on the actions taken in response to those evaluations. Adelaide R23 * That, as signalled in the Performance Portfolio, the University develop processes for the University-wide annual review of the international student academic performance. Most benefit from this would be obtained if it were part of a broader, systematic review of teaching and learning outcomes undertaken by the Academic Board. Adelaide R26 * That, as part of the foreshadowed review of course accreditation and reaccreditation procedures, an explicit review of the current operation and terms of reference of Course Advisory Committees be undertaken. As part of this review, consideration needs to be given to whether the current operation of the Course Advisory Committees in accreditation mode allows sufficiently for academic and pedagogic issues to be taken into account in (re) accreditation decisions. SUT R3 * That a review of the Subject Evaluation System be conducted, including a review of the effectiveness of the various mechanisms that exist within academic units for monitoring and acting on the results of subject evaluations, of the University’s ability to maintain sufficient oversight of the system and of the mechanisms that are in place to provide feedback to students. A review of the Subject Evaluation System was under consideration by SUT at the time of the audit. SUT R4 * That, in the development of the Flexible Learning and Teaching Master Plan, further consideration be given to more specifically linking graduate attributes to the University’s overarching objectives for learning and teaching and research training, and that the revised attributes statement then be considered by all higher education schools in the development and review of courses. SUT R5 * That the Intersectoral Advisory Committee sponsor research to investigate in more detail the pedagogical and student support implications of the fully nested degree courses. SUT R12 * That SUT’s Academic Board resolve, with urgency, the accreditation status of the courses being offered through SSIT and that the current academic and professional accreditation status of these courses be made clear to students. More generally, the Academic Board should assure itself that its decision-making processes with regard to all SUT’s courses offered offshore are sufficiently robust. SUT R14 * That the University of Canberra ensure there is adequate external input into the monitoring of all courses, perhaps by establishing course advisory committees covering all areas of the curriculum. Canberra R4 * That a formal approval be required before any program or unit is offered in a mode other than that for which it was originally approved. Macquarie R10 * That UQ conduct systematic assessments of recently introduced academic programs to ensure that they are successful and achieving their objectives. UQ R4 * That UQ clarify precisely what is meant by “the distinctiveness of a research-based culture for teaching and learning” and design strategies to express this aspiration and to achieve the specific implied educational goals. UQ R5 * That in the Student Experience Survey UQ consider the use of open ended questions relating specifically to how teaching can be improved; and report responses as the percentage of students recording the two top categories of approval as a more effective stimulus to continual improvement. UQ R6 * That UQ review the TEVAL/CEVAL system of teaching and course evaluations to enhance its effectiveness, having regard in particular to how deficiencies revealed by the surveys can be addressed and improvements can be communicated to the students in order to give them more confidence in the process. UQ R7 * That SCU implement all the recommendations of the Cross-University Curriculum Review approved by the University Executive and Academic Board, and in particular, give timely consideration to the recommended actions on small units and courses, and above average attrition rates. SCU R5 * That SCU Academic Board accelerates the approval of plans for the embedding of graduate attributes across the curriculum. SCU R6 * That the three Divisions at SCU monitor the implementation of QA policies on student assessment at the School level, to ensure that there is consistency in the application of procedures to guard against plagiarism and cheating, both within and among the Divisions. SCU R7 * That SCU urgently review the current policy, procedures, and organisational arrangements for the evaluation by students of the quality of teaching, units of study, and whole courses, with a view to moving away from the current reliance on voluntary take-up by staff and students and relatively low use and return rates. SCU R8 * That the University undertake a review of its assessment policy to ensure that assessment practices in the institution are able to fulfill their multiple roles of enhancing effective student learning, contributing to the continuous improvement of teaching and certifying students’ academic attainments. UNDA R15 * That, in finalizing the new Teaching and Learning Strategy, RMIT University give priority to those elements that are regarded as core to the support of effective student learning and that, in the Strategy’s implementation, the University ensure that resourcing decisions are aligned closely with agreed priorities. RMIT R7 * That, after some appropriate time, Griffith University’s Academic Committee commission a review of the recently established Programs committee to ensure that it is operating effectively and that its delegated responsibilities for overseeing the quality assurance of teaching activities are being appropriately fulfilled. Griffith R4 * That the Principles for the Griffith Framework for Evaluating Programs, Courses and Teaching be amended to give effect to the University’s intent for a consistent, simple and systematic approach to program, course and teaching evaluation that allows comparability of data over time and that is applicable to both undergraduate and postgraduate programs. Griffith R5 * That Griffith University continue its efforts to ensure cross-campus equivalence of academic programs by providing opportunities for staff discussion and clarification of what this entails in practice. Consideration could be given to developing a set of principles to guide the University’s cross-campus offerings. Griffith R6 * That, as Griffith University has itself identified, improved procedures for approving proposals for transnational teaching programs and for their review be implemented. Contextual features of intended manner of program delivery, such as its language of instruction, must be taken into account in both approval and review. Griffith R7 * That Griffith University give continued attention to embedding its agreed graduate attributes effectively within its teaching programs. Griffith R8 * That Griffith University, through the Griffith Institute of Higher Education or otherwise, ensure that academic staff are supported in its objective of internationalising not only course content but also their approach to teaching. Griffith R15 * That, when it undertakes its planned review of the Ensuring Teaching Quality program, The University of Western Australia pay particular attention to the mechanisms to ensure involvement/commitment by academic staff, and the scope for using the information generated to make demonstrable improvements. UWA R6 * That The University of Western Australia require unit outlines for all units be developed in accordance with good practice template and made available to students in a timely fashion. UWA R7 * That, in accordance with the teaching and learning priorities set out in the Operational Priorities Plan, The University of Western Australia improve the co-ordination of its various efforts to develop and support an effective and robust flexible learning pedagogy. UWA R8 * That The University of Western Australia continue to review the extent to which its assessment policies are being implemented consistently and comprehensively throughout the University, and review its postgraduate grievance and appeals policies and processes, with a view to consolidating them in the interest of students. UWA R9 * That, in parallel with its existing focus on excellence in teaching and research, and in order to fulfill its stated intention of maintaining its international competitiveness through research-informed teaching, The University of Western Australia develop explicit policies, practices and performance measures focusing on the nexus between teaching and research. UWA R10 * That, in making the transition from voluntary to mandatory student evaluations of teaching, The University of Western Australia ensure that the academic community be supported in making the most effective use of the evaluative instruments in both monitoring and improving their teaching and that the importance of the system be conveyed to students. UWA R11 * That, in achieving its objective of being responsive to ‘community and professional needs and demands’, The University of Western Australia consider a systematic means for obtaining employer feedback across all its programs and using it for ongoing course enhancements. UWA R12 * That the University of New England undertake a review of the assessment practices throughout the University and use the findings to consider the effectiveness of the current Assessment Policy and the manner in which it is consistently implemented and monitored. UNE R5 * That UniSA ensure that incoming students are rapidly appraised of the meaning and obligations of student-centred learning, and assisted to benefit from it. UniSA R3 * That UniSA ensure that sufficient market research is carried out and systematic stakeholder input obtained when new programs are proposed. UniSA R4 * That JCU ensure in areas not covered by external course accreditation or approval processes that ‘School Liaison’ advisory or review committees are established so there is external input across all areas of the curriculum. JCU R5 * That JCU use the set of key Teaching and Learning quality indicators, which together constitute the minimum standards for Teaching and Learning at JCU, to internally benchmark the nature of the student learning experience across the University, and in particular between the Cairns and Townsville campuses and in respect of all off-shore locations. JCU R2 * That Edith Cowan University urgently develop and implement a system for evaluating the quality of its distance education activities. ECU R5 * That Edith Cowan University regularly conduct comparative analyses of onshore and offshore student performance in equivalent programs, with a view to ensuring equivalent student learning outcomes. ECU R8 * That Edith Cowan University ensure that its validation of courses of other institutions is unambiguously represented in all marketing materials as meaning only that those courses qualify for credit transfer for equivalent ECU units upon enrolling with ECU. ECU R9 * That Edith Cowan University develop a clearer focus on integrating research and teaching, including specific strategies to assist academic staff with the achievement of research-informed teaching. ECU R10 * AUQA recommends that in progressing towards its goal of developing a ‘leading edge learning environment’, CSU clarify how effective leadership of its online learning and teaching initiatives will be secured. This will need to take place in conjunction with the recommended reconsideration of the future role and function of the Centre for Enhancing Learning and Teaching. CSU R11 * AUQA recommends that CSU ensure Heads of School attend more closely to the end of session Online Forum Manager summary reports to ensure that staff assigned responsibility for this role are undertaking it satisfactorily, thereby ensuring greater consistency in the student experience across subjects. CSU R12 * AUQA recommends that CSU, utilising external expertise as necessary, reconsider the future role and function of the Centre for Enhancing Learning and Teaching with regard to leadership of pedagogical development, especially in the online environment, in order to meet the University’s goal of developing a leading edge learning environment. CSU R13 * AUQA recommends that CSU find more effective mechanisms to ensure that staff employed by third party providers to teach the University’s courses have a clear understanding of the philosophy of CSU’s approach to learning and teaching, and particularly, its standards of student assessment. CSU R18 * AUQA recommends that the University of Sydney review whether its course rules and associated administrative processes are sufficiently flexible to accommodate the needs of students. Sydney R6 * AUQA recommends that Bond University review its student profile, including the balance between full-time and study abroad students, in the light of its academic and corporate goals; and the nature of the programs offered to study abroad students, in relation to content and academic standards. Bond R10 * AUQA recommends that Bond University specify the requirements for masters by coursework programs in such a way that the distinction between those and any overlapping undergraduate programs is clear and academically justified. Bond R11 * AUQA recommends that Deakin University communicate to students more effectively the nature and aims of the Deakin Advantage and assist them to document the discipline-specific and generic skills they are developing throughout their course. Deakin R4 * AUQA recommends that Deakin University harmonise its approach to the comparability of assessment such that one set of agreed principles can be applied consistently across the University. Deakin R5 * AUQA recommends that Deakin University extend the scope of its foreshadowed review of the system of student evaluation of teaching and units to include all aspects of its implementation and follow-up. Deakin R6 * AUQA recommends that in reviewing the Student Portal and Learning Toolkit, Deakin University ensure that it consults extensively with students to ensure that their patterns of need and usage, as well as the limitations on personal computing equipment are fully recognised and accommodated. Deakin R7 * AUQA recommends that La Trobe University review the level of delegation to the coordinators of different ‘subject instances’, with a view to establishing systems that will ensure greater consistency across subject instances. LTU R3 * AUQA recommends that La Trobe University review its credit point policy with a view to establishing a standard annual full-time credit point load applicable to all programs, including combined degree programs. LTU R4 * AUQA recommends that La Trobe University adopt an alternative acronym to DBA for the Diploma in Business Administration in order to avoid confusion with the Doctor of Business Administration. LTU R5 * AUQA recommends that La Trobe University enhance its assessment policy in light of best practice within the Australian higher education sector. LTU R6 * AUQA recommends that La Trobe University develop a comprehensive framework for explicitly linking research with teaching and curricula, and establish means for monitoring the effectiveness of this framework. LTU R8 * AUQA recommends that La Trobe University establishes a mechanism for ensuring that moderation is appropriately and consistently implemented for all applicable offshore courses, and that results for comparable onshore and offshore courses are considered as one means for determining equivalence. LTU R12 * AUQA recommends that La Trobe University reconsider the application of its English language entrance standards in light of the overall demands of the teaching, reading materials and assessment methods. LTU R14 * AUQA recommends that QUT strengthen the mechanisms to ensure that feedback is given to students on the results of and follow-up to the evaluations of teaching and units. QUT R6 * AUQA recommends that CDU ensure that recommendations relating to course accreditation and reaccreditation be made formally to Council; or alternatively that Council formally delegate specific responsibility. CDU R4 * AUQA recommends that UoM refine the Quality of Teaching questionnaire so that this instrument can provide separate evaluations of different teachers who teach on the same subject. UoM R7 * Noting the intention to update ‘Handbook Part II: Bachelor of Theology, Advanced Diploma and Diploma in Ministry’, AUQA recommends that MCD adopt a single handbook, accessible via the Web and which is regularly updated in consultation with the Associated Teaching Institutions / Recognised Teaching Institutions. MCD R5 * AUQA recommends that MCD seek external guidance on the development of learning outcome statements and their assessment in the context of specific awards, fields of study and units. MCD R6 * AUQA recommends that Academic Board design a mechanism for the five-yearly review of all awards offered by MCD that preserves the balance between central oversight and local operation. MCD R9 * In affirming the importance of MCD developing a Teaching and Learning Management Plan, AUQA recommends that the Plan identify a set of negotiated teaching and learning outcomes for the College as a whole, which have been developed through a process of consultation with the new Recognised Teaching Institutions; and a related policy on assessment, which makes an explicit statement about assessment requirements across Recognised Teaching Institutions. MCD R8 3 Research and Research Training Including approval, support, supervision, research centres, research staff Commendations * AUQA commends USQ for successfully fostering research excellence through its research centres. USQ C 5 * AUQA commends USQ for its suite of comprehensive, robust and timely policies and procedures for ethics, biosafety and research conduct. USQ C6 * While acknowledging that ACU started from a low base, AUQA commends the embedding of a culture of research in the University over a short period of time, including ACU’s success in supporting staff to complete higher degrees. ACU C9 * AUQA commends Curtin for its research planning and policies which have led to enhanced research outcomes. CUT C3 * AUQA commends the ‘Early Career Researcher’ Development Program as a means of increasing the University’s research capacity. UB C4 * AUQA commends the University for attaining a position of strong leadership in a number of research areas (particularly Engineering). UN C9 * AUQA commends the University for its development of a research database that will support strategic and policy decision-making. UN C10 * AUQA commends the University for a robust system of ethics approvals. UN C11 * AUQA commends the University for its investment in the Centre for the Study of Research Training and its Impact (SORTI), which has the potential to provide invaluable advice on research training, the quality of the research experience and the quality of research supervision. UN C12 * AUQA commends the University for the establishment of a number of research centres which are greatly assisting in the achievement of its objectives of building critical mass and alliances with national and international institutions, industry groups and companies. Adelaide C2 * AUQA commends the University for good outcomes I research across a number of research indicators and for a demonstrated trend of improved performance in most measures. Adelaide C3 * AUQA commends the manner in which the Board of Education and Development has responded actively to the outcomes of the review of the higher degree by research program. Adelaide C4 * AUQA commends the University for its Structured Program for higher degrees by research students. Adelaide C5 * AUQA commends SUT for undertaking a review of its research training program and for the manner in which it has begun to respond to the review’s findings. SUT C4 * AUQA commends the University of Canberra for the importance it gives to activities designed to support and to encourage early researchers. Canberra C5 * AUQA commends the University of Canberra for being sensitive to the needs of its higher degree students and for responding to concerns expressed by students about the need to improve research training, and in particular for developing Research Learning Plans. Canberra C6 * AUQA commends Macquarie University for developing a suite of research support grants that are aligned to the strategic intentions of the University. Macquarie C8 * AUQA commends Macquarie University for the high level of awareness of, and commitment to, strong ethical practices in the Univerity’s research activities. Macquarie C9 * AUQA commends Macquarie University for making good progress against its innovative vision of establishing a Research Park. Macquarie C10 * AUQA commends Macquarie University for developing an organisational culture that strongly commits to the integration of research skills, practices and outputs into its teaching programs. Macquarie C11 * AUQA commends UQ’s extensive and effective support of early-career researchers. UQ C10 * AUQA commends UQ for its successful introduction of a Graduate School to oversee policy and administrative processes for higher degree students. UQ C11 * AUQA commends SCU for its success with Collaborative Research Centres across the designated Areas of Research Strength through a strategy of concentrating on comparative advantage in Linkage grants and a focus on opportunities that are regionally valued. SCU C8 * AUQA commends the leadership provided by the SCU Graduate Research College, for the pivotal role it plays in developing the University’s research profile, and maintaining appropriate levels of research training and support opportunities. SCU C9 * AUQA commends the University for the active steps it has taken to support and develop its emerging research culture. UNDA C9 * AUQA commends the University for the establishment of the Centre for Research and Graduate Studies which is an effective support mechanism for higher degree by research students on the Fremantle campus. UNDA C10 * AUQA commends RMIT University for the implementation of the Quality assurance for research Training (QART) process that provides a comprehensive framework for continuous improvement of its higher degree by research programs. Also commended are the University’s efforts, through the QART process and otherwise, to increase its capacity for effective supervision of students. RMIT C5 * AUQA commends RMIT University for the positive steps it has taken to improve graduate student supervision and completion rates. RMIT C6 * AUQA commends RMIT University for the improvements in several research output measures listed in its Strategic Plan. RMIT C7 * AUQA commends RMIT University’s strategic investment in research infrastructure and capacity through schemes such as the Research Investment Fund and the Innovation professors Program. RMIT C8 * AUQA commends Griffith University for its strategies in identifying and resourcing areas of research concentration and for its management of the ongoing implementation strategies of the Research Centres policy. Griffith C8 * AUQA commends Griffith University for the improved trend in many of its indicators of research and research training performance. Griffith C9 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for the OII and the Pathfinder scheme, which provide helpful support in the commercialisation of UWA research. UWA C11 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for the new strategy of developing themes and fledgling centres as a means towards more effectively positioning the University to compete more effectively for larger collaborative research grants. UWA C12 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for the successful outcomes of its postgraduate research students and the extent to which these are facilitated by committed supervisory staff. UWA C13 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for developing a culture highly conducive to individual excellence. UWA C14 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for the Research assessment exercise which, although yet to be rolled out, is an initiative well suited to the ongoing research management of the University. UWA C15 * AUQA commends The University of Western Australia for examples of good practice in relation to offshore teaching at the postgraduate level, including those involving supervision of research components. UWA C 16 * AUQA commends the University of New England for examples of leveraging strong research leadership to create loci of research activity and opportunity for staff. UNE C11 * AUQA commends the University of New England for creating a climate conducive to postgraduate research and for the positive feedback received from postgraduate research students. UNE C12 * AUQA commends UniSA’s introduction of a number of systems and processes to manage and support research education, while noting that some are too recent for their effectiveness to be assessed. UniSA C9 * AUQA commends JCU for establishing a research profile that meets the needs of the northern Queensland region and for making substantial progress towards achieving its vision as a world-class tropical research university. JCU C8 * AUQA commends JCU for the process it has developed to establish Areas of Research Strength and specialization, and which are managed well. JCU C9 * AUQA commends JCU for the establishment of the innovative and inter-disciplinary Area of research Strength – ‘People, Identity and Place’, which is in line with the strategic goals of the University. JCU C10 * AUQA commends JCU for its engagement with CRCs and for having a focus on collaborative research which also positively contributes to community engagement in northern Queensland. JCU C11 * AUQA commends JCU for success in providing effective research training opportunities for Indigenous HDR students. JCU C12 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for establishing pervasive and effective research linkages with communities, government, professions and industry, and for examples of research excellence fostered through a strategy of supporting concentrations that are linked to the needs of these groups. ECU C14 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for establishing pervasive and effective research linkages with communities, government, professions and industry, and for examples of research excellence fostered through a strategy of supporting concentrations that are linked to the needs of these groups. ECU C15 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for developing the Creative and Performing Arts Index which helps to ensure parity across disciplines when reporting research outputs. ECU C16 * AUQA commends Edith Cowan University for establishing and implementing an effective system for monitoring and supporting the progress of Higher Degree by Research students, and particularly for introducing the ‘marginal’ classification which ensures that potential problems are identified and addressed early. ECU C17 * AUQA commends CSU for the manner in which it has targeted research funding to areas in which it will produce the maximum effect and at the same time generally encouraged broadening of a research culture. The ‘community of scholars’ concept, in particular, is supporting the research interests of early career and emerging researchers in a most positive way. CSU C6 * AUQA commends CSU for the improving trend in mos